msds headers from nautilus

[AndrewM6097]

does anyone know if they keep any in stock or are they made to order? Also should i just go ahead and place an order with them or contact them first

[BigBalledOX]

Ummm . . . don't you think maybe, oh I dunno, CONTACTING THE VENDOR would be a better way to get your questions answered? :banghead:

[AndrewM6097]

Just thought someone may have ordered from them before and would be able to answer my question. But hey if i asked that stupid of a question feel free to delete this :rolleyes:

[matemorh]

E-mail them!! That's what I did a year ago. I chat once on the phone just for credit card #. They are located in Cal. so they were not on same time frame as I. Good people to talk/e-mail to, try It!!!;)


Edit: They do not coat headers themself so it take some time to have yours (if you want them coat!!)

[Blackcoog]

Usually they do have some in stock. On the times I've ordered sets for our 3L builds they've either had some in stock or some on order.

[tour96se]

or you can go right to msds and order them

[AndrewM6097]

Ordered! They shipped out today i believe, the 3L is coming together slowly but surely

[aircougar1]

Let me know when you need that port-matching done!!! an contact me before you get your motor! :evil:

[SpookSVT]

Leave the exhaust port smaller than the primary if that is the case...

[AndrewM6097]

He's actually talking about port matching the 2.5 intake to the 3.0 :biggrin:

[SpookSVT]

He's actually talking about port matching the 2.5 intake to the 3.0 :biggrin:

Why would you want to do that? I guess I just don't get it... :rolleyes:

[AndrewM6097]

cuz thats the way, uh huh uh huh, i like it

[SpookSVT]

Have fun with it. I know I didn't...

[AndrewM6097]

theres tons of peopler here that use 2.5 intakes on their 3.0s. Since when has this been a problem??

[SpookSVT]

So if everyone jumped off a bridge you would too? :rolleyes:

Sorry, it just gets under my skin when I hear that...

Sure it works. I had the SVT manifolds on an oval port before I knew about gas dynamics within the engine. It ran... :shrug:

I ripped the motor out and pulled the junk heads off and put a new set of 'special' oval port heads on with oval manifolds. Too much damn fun now! :biggrin:

Split port intakes with split port heads. Vice versa with oval...

The idea of the hybrid (2.5 heads on a 3L block) doesn't make much sense either when it comes to the resulting combustion space (a lot of squish area which can be bad at high engine speeds). It does make good power though within it's specifications, probably best swap for high peak power with factory parts. The 2.5L UIM needs to be max honed to get the power though if using that (low volume).

Using the IMRC (when still on true split port heads) provides excellent low speed and high speed TQ. It lacks mid range though which is why I went for the straight oval since I do alot of driving in that area. There are a couple of tricks (really not trick at all) that provide a much more broadened TQ curve. HP stays near flat over a 2000RPM window from peak to redline. Peak numbers arn't like the hybrid (although because of the countless variances in dynos, it may be above average for what it is).

The 'hybrid' (bastardized) port losses characteristics of the IMRC for building lowspeed TQ. The charge does not stay segregated to one valve like some have thought. Big surprise...:rolleyes:

Despite all this, the ability to get the gas velocity up quickly and up period tells alot about how usable that power may be. What I mean is that the rate of acceleration is what ultimately makes the car fast, not huge power (just ask ProStock, Nascar, and F1). Again, a few tricks (not trick at all)...

[tour96se]

bam!!! nough said!!!
so spooks,what year engine are you using?

[AndrewM6097]

I really wasnt trying to argue whats better. This is just the way i've wanted to go and the way i will go. But thank you very much for your input, very useful information. I apologize if i came off as a dick

[tour96se]

also,its the only 3l that aircougar will install 8-)

[AndrewM6097]

I'll actually be doing the install myself, but he will be prepping the motor for me :cool:

[SpookSVT]

A 2001 Taurus with 'low lift' cams...

Still have to make a cold air inlet with high flow element and mod the y-pipe. Still running fat though so there is a bit to be gained just with that. But I'm done with the beater after this so I can get back to my other project. Just needed to fix the 'issues' with it...

[tour96se]

so stock 01 cams? i havent heard that term before. unless your referring to the 04's as high lift?

[SpookSVT]

so stock 01 cams? i havent heard that term before. unless your referring to the 04's as high lift?

Well supposedly you need more valve lift to make more power and the newer cams are supposed to have that. :rolleyes: But yes, stock 01' cams.

The oval cams merely lack a bit of duration (or tuned timing points) and overlap. They arn't open long enough at high engine speeds to significantly fill for a lot of power. Not to mention more overlap improves scavennging and filling at high speeds. Of note is that the 2.5L SE and SVT cams don't differ much as far as duration, a few more degrees of overlap goes a long way to improve scavenging. SVT's don't make as much TQ as SE's as has been noted. While good for high speeds, lots of overlap hurts low speed TQ through overscavenging and reversion.

The earlier plastic manifolds arn't that great for high speed power. The newer ones have improved though with more plenum and better runner design (more consistant shape and more initial runner area. But that is just looking at a far, so don't take it as gospel).

SVT cams (or any split port cam) also don't work well with oval manifolds because they are out of tune (no brainer). So it's no surprise that mix matching components that were never designed to work together to begin with don't work.

I don't know why people want to use oval port engines with split port manifolds. Just buy an F'n split port 3L or use 2.5L heads and save all the wasted money on porting and the other nonsense. Makes sense to me! Oil starvation isn't the problem so don't go getting all paranoid about it. Just make sure you have a manifold with some volume as the 2.5L manifold is too small to begin with. What makes you think it will work on a 3L? No 3L with 2.5L manifold made signifcant power unless it was thoroughly extruded honed.

[tour96se]

makes sense to me. only thing you've got me on is the comment about the 2.5L manifold. are you saying that the svt manifold is too small for even the 2.5L svt engine?

[aircougar1]

also,its the only 3l that aircougar will install 8-)

You know, I personally prefer the way I do things, and everyone that comes to me for work has agreed with the way I do it... if they don't agree, they don't come here. Seting up the motor one way or the other, is a personal preference, not a right way or wrong way. Sometimes numbers don't ALWAYS matter, considering some of the guys I have done work for have been swapped over from the very slow ATX 2.5 straight up to MTX 3L in one weekend...

Most of the people who live in the New England area who are on this forum and CEG, as a collective, would rather have their secondaries and SVT manifolds retained, then go for the complete 3L swap...

And most of us in this area, also would like to be boosted at some point in the future, so 2.5L heads on the 3L block is not an option...

LIKE I said, personal preference, and that's it... We do things different out here, and I give AndrewM6097 a lot of credit for doing his swap himself. He asked me to port-match his motor, because that's the way HE wants it done.

Good for you SpookSVT for getting the most out of your car. The is commendable and I'm sure a lot of people will agree with you. But please don't attack what other people are doing to their 3Ls, its not necessary. You do what you want, we'll do what we want... whether its right or wrong in anyone's eyes.

I hate writing stuff like this, but Im getting tired of all this debate stuff between the 3 forums about how to set-up a 3L...:rolleyes:

[SpookSVT]

That's the problem, there is a right and a wrong way. Sure it's easy to just slap stuff on, doesn't make it right though. Not that that will ever stop people but I try since I know better. I know I come off as an ass but so be it. I and others have found better way to do things. Take it from someone that has seen both sides...

[Blackcoog]

I've swapped quite a few oval 3L's and ported 3L's (more than 50) and the ported 3L's put out more power. That is what people want so that's what they go with. Just because things weren't put together that way from the factory doesn't mean it's wrong.

The first setup I had in my Cougar was a hybrid motor and I later swapped it out for a ported 3L (planning for FI) which put out more power anyway. If anything I'd call a hybrid swap the "wrong way". Why carry the heads with oiling issues over to a new engine? The 3L heads have more oil drain backs to keep the oil in the pan from drying up.

[aircougar1]

I've swapped quite a few oval 3L's and ported 3L's (more than 50) and the ported 3L's put out more power. That is what people want so that's what they go with. Just because things weren't put together that way from the factory doesn't mean it's wrong.

The first setup I had in my Cougar was a hybrid motor and I later swapped it out for a ported 3L (planning for FI) which put out more power anyway. If anything I'd call a hybrid swap the "wrong way". Why carry the heads with oiling issues over to a new engine? The 3L heads have more oil drain backs to keep the oil in the pan from drying up.

I agree with you Chris...

[SpookSVT]

I've swapped quite a few oval 3L's and ported 3L's (more than 50) and the ported 3L's put out more power. That is what people want so that's what they go with. Just because things weren't put together that way from the factory doesn't mean it's wrong.

The first setup I had in my Cougar was a hybrid motor and I later swapped it out for a ported 3L (planning for FI) which put out more power anyway. If anything I'd call a hybrid swap the "wrong way". Why carry the heads with oiling issues over to a new engine? The 3L heads have more oil drain backs to keep the oil in the pan from drying up.

Oil starvation is not the problem with spun bearings...

I understand as a business man you have to stand up for what you do. I'm not taking that away from you so don't feel you have to do that here. Leave it at the door...

There is no justification in using split port manifolds on oval port heads. Can someone for once give a reason why? Not just 'they make more power' because the gains are marginal if that (I would know because I've driven both thoroughly).

I want to know specifcally why they are an improvement and how Ford F'd up when not using this arrangement. Don't throw useless flow bench CFM numbers or dynos because they don't tell me much of anything. No one has been able to answer that question for me in years. It's not that I'm not listening or I'm hard to please, the reasons don't back the physics or the decades of development that has occurred in high performance engines. I'm waiting...

I can give you several reasons why not to do this but no one has given me a reason as to why they should be put on an oval port. This isn't oval port engines are plain better than split port engines. With what people have available I feel the realiztion will not be made because there are no high performance parts available for the ovals. As is, split port engines will always make more power using factory parts and work more efficiently.

The idea that the oval port engines have a better port design is true. However, there is near zero gain at the levels of power people are making now. Understand there is no significant (if any) benefit to using the tumble port heads unless your making well over 100BHP/ltr+ to put a number on it. I feel this mentality is clouding the issue of the bastardized combo. The SVT name needs to go as well...

Boost changes nothing when it comes to port and manifold design. The compressor (BIG HINT) merely increases density of the air in the manifold. Tell me how a dinky fan blade is going to push large volumes of air through your hogged ports. Velocity, again, needs to be up for the same reasons as before. If anything the exhaust tract should be smaller than what you ASSume to be right to bump gas velocity up and spin the turbine. Kinetic energy is what turns the blades, no?

Gale banks once said, "You can turbo a dog, but all your left with is a turbocharged dog."

Same rules for port area on supercharged engines. Design the engine for N/A use, then throw boost at it. Camming will change with different forms of boost. Ports need only be enlarged (from what I've read) 10-15% above the ideal N/A port for every 1 bar of boost to allow additionl fuel flow and prevent excessive buildup in the ports/manifolds. This is from 80's turbo era Illmor F1 engineers and the physics doesn't change just because it's near 30 years later. Gravity still exists, no? People need to get information from reputable places (ie. credible race engine builders, cylinder head porters, SAE tech. papers, etc..) and not the magazine they pick up at the grocery store.

Until then, split port manifolds on split port heads and vice versa for oval.

[aircougar1]

This is where the debate starts getting out of hand...

This isn't about power numbers or how much better one setup is over the other, or whatever... Its about how someone personally wants their motor setup... Since there are a few different ways to set them up, people have choices of set-ups, and there are factors that influence that setup...

Many members here want to retain their secondaries, SVT UIM, and LIMS, cams, etc... Most for how it looks, but some of us here in NEW ENGLAND, have some problems due to Emissions testing and overall inspections... The closer to stock we look, the better we might make out at inspection time and pass with flying colors... MA and CT are starting to catch on the various TUNING products that affect ECUs. Some of the inspection stations here are repair shops, too, and those guys know what a Taurus/sable intake look like, and they know its not a stock motor for a Contour or Cougar... HEll, some of the guys at the local Autozones know that info too...!

You see, this isn't about what you are talking about SPOOK. Everyone is going to do what they want. And again, you have respect for having a good, smooth setup, and congrats on succeeding in your efforts, but why push the issue when its just going to lead to more and more useless threads like this???

All of the facts and charts, and whatever, aren't going to change perosnal preferences as long as there are choices available for members to choose from... End of my rant.;)

[SpookSVT]

That's completely different than those that try to put it across as a performance benefit and make profit (whether they know it or not). I can't stand that kind of rubbish and I don't see how others do too. Even so, why not still keep the split port heads if you want secondaries. If boost is of concern, use a split port 3L. So what if you have to get an EWP, it's not much more than the marvelous 'adapter'.

It does not work nearly the same or as efficiently when you dump one port into another near twice the size. Add to that the variance of charge velocities between the two ports creates excessive turbulent flow. It does not stay segregated! Not a surprise...

There are options out there to do it right that arn't expensive at all.

Why I push this? I don't know sometimes myself with all the apprehension I get. Please understand, this is in no way a plug at you, Blackcoog, and your respective businesses. I guess what I'm getting at is that I'm trying to open peoples eyes as to 'how it works' and the consequnces of modification the right and wrong way. I know I'm preaching and I'll stop now as I hate being preached to myself. But please understand, this isn't directed at you two guys to demeane your businesses.

[BurritaSVT]

OK guys this is a rerun of what was we all talked about two months prior. I did actually test the setups like I said I would the car I compared my datalogs too put down 207whp with 198wtq and I did a flow chart between the motors to compare the SVT cams and the taurus cams I do know the it flow 3 lbs more a minute at 6900 rpms which will net put the SVT cams making 240hp and the Taurus 2004 cams at 211hp with .90 VE. Now the Taurus 2004 flowed more air mid range but less down low around 2k and alot less up top. I will be putting on the VVT intake 3 literUIM which is the same as 2004 Upper taurus and I will do flow chart on it too. This will tell me alot of how the intakes flow against each other. I will reschedule the dyno I missed Tues due to bad weather. I will see if I can put a flow chart together on the two different intakes, Now being the motor is the same and the car is a NA the power output will reflect the same curve as the Airflow and so far I do know that the SVT cams do flow more period in the SVT UIM because the customers car was setup the same

So to break it down here it is

SVT cams w/SVT LIM UIM flowed 928 AD (25 lbs/min) = 240hp crank
2004 Cams w/SVT LIM UIM flowed 869 AD (22 lbs/min) = 211hp crank
2004 cams w/ oval port LIM & UIM ??? tomorrow hopefully

SVT cams SVT UIM lowend good, low mid mild, topend pwr(Peak range 5k-6k)
2004 cams SVT UIM lowend ok, midrange great, topend pwr mild(Peak 4k-5k)
2004 cams ???? will see

[wadespencer99]

Enough of the pissing contest.

Spook, it's quite obvious most of the Cougar owners seem to prefer split port over oval port. I hope that's not making you lose sleep. If you don't like it, find your way back to FCO and stop needlessly pissing all over random threads.

[Blackcoog]

That's completely different than those that try to put it across as a performance benefit and make profit (whether they know it or not). I can't stand that kind of rubbish and I don't see how others do too. Even so, why not still keep the split port heads if you want secondaries. If boost is of concern, use a split port 3L. So what if you have to get an EWP, it's not much more than the marvelous 'adapter'.

It does not work nearly the same or as efficiently when you dump one port into another near twice the size. Add to that the variance of charge velocities between the two ports creates excessive turbulent flow. It does not stay segregated! Not a surprise...

There are options out there to do it right that arn't expensive at all.

Why I push this? I don't know sometimes myself with all the apprehension I get. Please understand, this is in no way a plug at you, Blackcoog, and your respective businesses. I guess what I'm getting at is that I'm trying to open peoples eyes as to 'how it works' and the consequnces of modification the right and wrong way. I know I'm preaching and I'll stop now as I hate being preached to myself. But please understand, this isn't directed at you two guys to demeane your businesses.

Again, whether you consider it right or wrong the split ports do put out more power so that is what people want. I'm not going to force people to go with something they don't want. The ported out oval ports with SVT intakes run perfectly fine even without tunes (on SVT's). If there were drivability issues I would start looking for a different setup but that isn't the case. I agree things could be engineered better but with the age of these cars and there value it really isn't worth it.

[mikehayes1999]

wow

[TommyAtomic]

Wow.

I am going to be buying a 01 or 02 cougar because my current car (an 03 ZX2) cannot be imported into Canada and I am moving (perminently) to Canada. I find this thread very educational. With my ZX2 I had I/H/E/TB/UDP and with the Cougar I can potentially look forward to built motors and motorswaps using split port or ovalport heads and such.

Having not been a contributer to this forum previously I shouldnt say anything so by all means flame away but really performance wise matching the port of the intake manifold to the port on the head is almost always going to provide better flow.

What I dont understand is what this arguement has to do with the topic of this thread : msds headers.