• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

Banks sidewinder exhaust manifold group buy.

Here is a cut & paste of Tanners link. Sounds like Turbonator is having fun. Its cool someone has done it. My plan is to skin this cat slightly different.
I actually made good progress on the QSV for mine today.

"well, heres an update after roughly 1000hrs. of service with the banks turbo manifold/custom front crossover in the rattlepuss (gmt400)

first i will list the drawbacks of the system, and the steps being taken to perfect it....

first thing (and the biggest)thats kind of a pain is the air inlet for the turbo, as most know the rad in the gmt400 uses a low coolant sensor located on the pass. side of the rad about half way up. this causes issues with the air inlet hose, it touches the sensor, and after a while it rubs through the rubber scrapping hoses, silicone couplers...

i made another inlet pipe with a tight 4" mandrel bent steel elbow which i cut a part of the side out indexing it, this worked for a bit, but sag of the silicone couplers caused it to rub against the sensor slightly tweaking the side of the rad and bending the sencor port down somewhat, it did not leak, but if left surely would, so yesterday i started another inlet pipe, this one i put in the vice and crushed the 4" down to make it more of an oval, after which i drilled a 4" hole in the furthest section where it is crushed and welded in a another 11/2" piece of 4" where it will attach to the compressor inlet with a short 2"section of silicone 4" coupler.... this set-up is going to save us 2" of space between the rad and turbo..... if anyone else is going to attempt this, i would suggest just investing in a rubber 4" cobra head adapter...

the second downfall of the set-up is the turbo oil-drain... the first one we built was the plate on the fuel-pump mounting spot, it works fine, but is a PIA to get it all attached.... since, we have drilled the front timing cover and put the return in there... this is by far the best spot for accessibility, but means that the cover should be removed and drilled/threaded to NPT 1/2" threads...

the third thing is the front cross-over, it all works great, saves 18" of pipe over the gm style, and does not leak, but if/when we build another one, instead of the 3 bolt flanges to bolt it together( to remove the crossover it takes someone with small hands, or the easiest we have found is engine removal...) we will invest in the 2 1/4" v-band flanges and clamps to save headaches,scrapes and cursing, and to facilitate ease of removal/installation....

now on to the bonuses of this system.......

first is the super quick spool time, it spools our current variation(WH1C,12cm2WG,56/83) by 1500rpm with minimal back pressure...

second, the ease of swapping injectors/glowplugs, the same job as a N/A engine, even with the intercooler tube on the driverside, swapping out 8 injectors/glowplugs is a 1.5hr job...

third, the ease of running a down pipe, super easy job, takes 2 45 degree mandrel bends, a turbo flange, and a section of pipe..... its 3" now, but could be 4" without hassle...

fourth, tranny inspection cover/starter/oil filter access, all made easier by moving the cross-over to the front....

fifth, ease of compound turbos, super easy with the banks mani, leaves all sorts of space for the downpipe, and primary turbo, we just weld a piece of tube to the valve cover for the oil return....

so off the top of my head thats all we can think of right now, will update the inlet tube progress with some pics of all the variations used so far, leading up to the current one..... thanks....J&J "
 
Interested in seeing how this one turns out. Subscribed. :)

The whole silly ATT thing is the biggest reason why I left that place. I love mine and I cannot understand the abject hatred for it... or maybe its jealousy because it works and it works very well.:D

I am skeptical of the NA mileage hope you have. The best I have done on mine ( Gary ) is 22.4. It normally gets 20.5-21.5. I was kinda disappointed as I was expected 24-25 since that seems to be common on the 6.2s in a lot less friendlier, aerodynamically wise, envelope. After thinking about it I came to believe it was the pre-cups. The NA 1/2 ton 6.2s were rated at 130 or so hp and 245 or so torque I believe. The 1/2 ton 6.5s NA were rated at 160 or so and 275 or so torque. I figure the extra cubes are worth 5 maybe and the DS4 maybe ten. Were did the other 15 or so ponies and torque come from? I think they swapped out or used larger pre cups to gain power since the market focus was transitioning away from economy toward power. Little D pre ladder rack and tool box would get 19.5-20 on a regular basis. I once got almost 21. I figure that is why GM only made the NA 6.5 for a couple of years. They was almost no difference mileage wise in the 1/2 ton world between a turbo motor and a NA motor. I have to come to believe pre cups are the key for mileage and based on War Wagons experience and others small pre cups and big turbos do not work.

It will be interesting to see if the efficiency gains from the new manifolds and DP as well the motor mods counter act this somewhat. You are in uncharted territory with switching from turbo to NA and it will cool no matter how the chips fall.
 
When I used to DD my 95 (Green Beast) it saw 19-20 on a +200mile round trip, the app I used on my black berry back then wouldn't work on my droid phone. I saw 22mpg once through Kansas to pick up 2 tractor tires so I was loaded on the return trip. For some reason after I went Vin F, tune, K47, and new injectors my MPG stuck in the 18-19 range and now since it is a work truck its mpg is down further.
 
dixiepc said:
Can't read that green print.
Click to expand...
I have my TTS page set to white color background. That might be why its easy on my eyes and not yours? I forget what color is default, but I thought green would be good for all.
Chevypoor said:
Interested in seeing how this one turns out. Subscribed. :)

The whole silly ATT thing is the biggest reason why I left that place. I love mine and I cannot understand the abject hatred for it... or maybe its jealousy because it works and it works very well.:D

I am skeptical of the NA mileage hope you have. The best I have done on mine ( Gary ) is 22.4. It normally gets 20.5-21.5. I was kinda disappointed as I was expected 24-25 since that seems to be common on the 6.2s in a lot less friendlier, aerodynamically wise, envelope. After thinking about it I came to believe it was the pre-cups. The NA 1/2 ton 6.2s were rated at 130 or so hp and 245 or so torque I believe. The 1/2 ton 6.5s NA were rated at 160 or so and 275 or so torque. I figure the extra cubes are worth 5 maybe and the DS4 maybe ten. Were did the other 15 or so ponies and torque come from? I think they swapped out or used larger pre cups to gain power since the market focus was transitioning away from economy toward power. Little D pre ladder rack and tool box would get 19.5-20 on a regular basis. I once got almost 21. I figure that is why GM only made the NA 6.5 for a couple of years. They was almost no difference mileage wise in the 1/2 ton world between a turbo motor and a NA motor. I have to come to believe pre cups are the key for mileage and based on War Wagons experience and others small pre cups and big turbos do not work.

It will be interesting to see if the efficiency gains from the new manifolds and DP as well the motor mods counter act this somewhat. You are in uncharted territory with switching from turbo to NA and it will cool no matter how the chips fall.
Click to expand...

My old 93 turbo ECLB got 25 MPG on long hwy trips back when limit was 55mph.
I'll be sending my NA cups out to be machined and opened up. Apparently the NA cup has a better shape to it and is a good choice if you want to machine them.
DSCF1254.jpgDSCF1253.jpgDSCF1256.jpg
 
The old 55mph days... that could alot of the reason the ol 6.2s did so well, we just need to slow down. :D Maybe the fuel too as I think I remember the "new and improved" low sulpher diesel does not burn as well or has less btus available.

Good info on the NA precups. Planned to keep the ones from the Vin J 93 anyway... maybe next time I need a set of Diamonds I will get these ported instead.
 
Chevypoor said:
The old 55mph days... that could alot of the reason the ol 6.2s did so well, we just need to slow down. :D Maybe the fuel too as I think I remember the "new and improved" low sulpher diesel does not burn as well or has less btus available.

.
Click to expand...

Has alot to do with it. 55MPH and better $.97/gal fuel. Now we drive 75 with a bio blend at $3.50ish
 
QSV / Diverter valve Built.

Got the basic prototype QSV done today. Its taken awhile just to get all the raw material for it. All of it needs to stand up to very high temps (as we all know).
Its not as pretty as it will be when/if I make a few. The bracket needs to be refined and the arm on the shaft pivot need some dressing up, but it works like it should on the bench. It starts to open at 2ish pounds and is open by 10 PSI. I built it on a T4 size stainless flange.



More diesel porn

DSCF1288.jpgDSCF1289.jpgDSCF1290.jpgDSCF1260.jpg
 
Vacuum operated would be nice an smooth plus could be held open at cruise.

Of course sent to slim for tuning adjustments to get the most bang for the buck once again.

Source Unknown
 
So is this going to be controlled by the vac pump?

Will it require the Sidewinder manifold?

You have two years until my next smog test to work this out and give me a useful, functional hook-up for my dangling vac line.
 
This one is boost actuated. One like it but in a T3 or (T3 to T4 for ATT) size can be used on our 6.5's Banks or not.
It would be an excellent use for dangling vac hoses :rolleyes5:
 
This is very interesting! Do you have a projected price point? It may have already been stated, I just don't remember.

Don
 
Ever since I first learned about the quick spool valve, and did some reading about it, I've been very interested in them. That price point is much better than the others I've looked up. Enough so that it will make it easier for me to eventually afford one. Thank you.

Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top