Soon to be a GT3076r BAT Member - Q about T3 Treadstone Manifold

[dfaudi]

Has anyone used the treadstone manifold? It seems like a really nice manifold and has symmetrical runners, ill assume are better for flow...the price is also not too bad for $309.

I have the Eurocode/REVO 550 GTRS file (mafless) so im just going to run a cone filter right off the turbo and eventually send my ecu in for the GT30 file when the head is built.

The problem is that im worried i wont be able to clear the headlight housing.

http://www.treadstoneperformance.com...Turbo+Manifold

BAT members please chime in...

[AudiA4_20T]

Chris (dirtybrd) runs this manifold with no problems. I believe you need to turn the WG but other than that its fine

[dirtybrd]

I'm the only one that runs it other then Dougyfresh. But his is the ASP version with no ext. WG provision and he has an internally gated 28 series on his. I don't see how a filter will fit on there without a 90* down putting the filter right behind the radiator.

[dougyfresh]

Here are some images on placement. Keep in mind this is a 2871R so a 30 series will be much larger.




This is the best top-down view I have with the headlight installed (single xenon)

[dirtybrd]

It's funny how much different a 30 series fits.

[dougyfresh]

It's funny how much different a 30 series fits.

Do you have a picture? I'd like to see how much closer the compressor housing is to the frame rail. My gut feel is that a 3076 will be extremely tight.

[dirtybrd]

These are all I have.

[DenverNoob]

i know im not running a 30 series turbo (in fact mine is a bit larger on the compressor side) but the treadstone didn't even come close to working for me. The drilled manifold mounts were not precise, the mani would have required alteration to fit my AEB head (some grinding), and overall I was not thrilled with it. Just me, but SPA is a better mani plus top-mount for looks, ease of access and exhaust plumbing.

[dfaudi]

Power/spool wise, what are your opinions on the ATP vs. the Treadstone? Im not trying to squeeze every single pony out of the BAT setup but i dont want to be missing out on 25+ whp by going with the ATP.

Looking at the treadstone, cyl's 1/4 have equal length runners so the exhuas pulses hit the turbine at the same time with strong blow, and same with 2/3. In contrast, the ATP runners are all different in lenght and seems like cyl 1 will hit and shortly after cyl 4. Same with 2/3. Could that possibly be a favorable pulse distribution?

I also like where the ATP mani places the turbo, nice and tucked beside the motor.

What do you all think?

[dfaudi]

i know im not running a 30 series turbo (in fact mine is a bit larger on the compressor side) but the treadstone didn't even come close to working for me. The drilled manifold mounts were not precise, the mani would have required alteration to fit my AEB head (some grinding), and overall I was not thrilled with it. Just me, but SPA is a better mani plus top-mount for looks, ease of access and exhaust plumbing.

Vital information. Thanks.

[dirtybrd]

i know im not running a 30 series turbo (in fact mine is a bit larger on the compressor side) but the treadstone didn't even come close to working for me. The drilled manifold mounts were not precise, the mani would have required alteration to fit my AEB head (some grinding), and overall I was not thrilled with it. Just me, but SPA is a better mani plus top-mount for looks, ease of access and exhaust plumbing.

Odd, it bolted right up for me.

[DenverNoob]

Odd, it bolted right up for me.

tried 2 even....possibly a bad batch but either way it didnt work.

[7speed]

I would reccomend the SPA Manifold also. It is excellent and very easy to install. Plus it places the turbo in a perfect spot for the plumbing

[B6Lovin]

Power/spool wise, what are your opinions on the ATP vs. the Treadstone? Im not trying to squeeze every single pony out of the BAT setup but i dont want to be missing out on 25+ whp by going with the ATP.

Looking at the treadstone, cyl's 1/4 have equal length runners so the exhuas pulses hit the turbine at the same time with strong blow, and same with 2/3. In contrast, the ATP runners are all different in lenght and seems like cyl 1 will hit and shortly after cyl 4. Same with 2/3. Could that possibly be a favorable pulse distribution?

I also like where the ATP mani places the turbo, nice and tucked beside the motor.

What do you all think?

the ATP isn't the BEST... but it's certainly not bad. it hasn't let me down and i've had zero problems with it. the T3 ATP mani is much easier to work with than the old eliminator manifold, and i've had no problems with snapped studs or anything like that.

SPA looks nice, and ATP works well, Full Race is the best performance wise, and to be perfectly honest - if i could do this all again i'd have just gotten a full race and a 35r from the get go. I'm not hte only one with that mindset either...

do yourself a favor and just go balls out with it now. even if you're not looking to squeeze every last drop out of your setup - you'll still have something to squeeze when you get thirsty again... the rest of us are left with having to buy (very expensive) new fruit.

[AudiA4_20T]

if i could do this all again i'd have just gotten a full race and a 35r from the get go.

interesting setup you speak of

[mike-2ptzero]

Power/spool wise, what are your opinions on the ATP vs. the Treadstone? Im not trying to squeeze every single pony out of the BAT setup but i dont want to be missing out on 25+ whp by going with the ATP.

Looking at the treadstone, cyl's 1/4 have equal length runners so the exhuas pulses hit the turbine at the same time with strong blow, and same with 2/3. In contrast, the ATP runners are all different in lenght and seems like cyl 1 will hit and shortly after cyl 4. Same with 2/3. Could that possibly be a favorable pulse distribution?

I also like where the ATP mani places the turbo, nice and tucked beside the motor.

What do you all think?

Equal length of pairs is not the same as having all 4 the same equal length to each other. 2 long and 2 short means the pulse could still hit each other as they enter the inlet of the turbo. You also want the pluse to come in straight which is why a collector tends to be used on high performance manifolds, most of the cast manifolds just turn 90 degs right at the flange.


Cut-out of a Full-race manifold.

[dougyfresh]

Power/spool wise, what are your opinions on the ATP vs. the Treadstone? Im not trying to squeeze every single pony out of the BAT setup but i dont want to be missing out on 25+ whp by going with the ATP.

Looking at the treadstone, cyl's 1/4 have equal length runners so the exhuas pulses hit the turbine at the same time with strong blow, and same with 2/3. In contrast, the ATP runners are all different in lenght and seems like cyl 1 will hit and shortly after cyl 4. Same with 2/3. Could that possibly be a favorable pulse distribution?

I also like where the ATP mani places the turbo, nice and tucked beside the motor.

What do you all think?

Now that we have had most of the manifold options thrown out on the table lets take a step back and determine what your goals are.

Your signature says 3076 is your turbo of choice along with a high-rev big port head. Aftermarket camshafts? What do you want to get out of this? Maximum Power? Driveability? etc...

Having said that one could argue that any of these manifolds work. Everyone has their opinions and everyone has their thoughts on each. Everyone is also hard pressed to push what they have chosen for their own vehicle. I would consider turbo intake routing and downpipe routing in choosing your manifold.


Charlie. That PagParts manifold looks nice. Reminds me of an APR. I think a fellow B6 on this forum is or will be running that manifold. I can not say who though...

[pac1085]

Do it!

Honestly, I didn't notice much of a difference when switching from the ATP to the Full-Race manifold, but the tests they've done prove otherwise. Probably just needs to be re-tuned a lot. The ATP did have a much harder hitting torque peak though, and way lower under hood temps. It (the ATP) didn't fit my huge (extra long) Holset turbo very well though.

[DenverNoob]

a pic of the final setup with SPA. As you can see, the turbo sits on top and well forward. Though there is a stainless steel heat shield there, that is how the exhaust pluming runs, so it is a straight shot to an existing exhaust system. In my case, the thermal downpipe was cut and refitted with a 3in DP to a 3in flow race-cat, then mated to the remaining thermal exhaust system (the OE thermal was 2.5in DP, with a 2.25 flow-through flex-joint). Now 3in DP to 3in Flow-through flex to 3in mid-pipe, then the 2.25in split mid-chassis.

anyways the point here is that the SPA mani puts just about everything in the easiest possible spot to access with one exception (external WG), which if necessary can be accessed via under the car with the belly pan off.

[b6-sr20det]

Looks awesome guys! I run a gt3076r .63 on my sr20det 240sx track car and jesus! does it hit hard :)

[dfaudi]

[QUOTE=7speed;3215304]I would reccomend the SPA Manifold also. It is excellent and very easy to install. Plus it places the turbo in a perfect spot for the plumbing



Yeah that does fit pretty nice. Is that compressor housing a 4" on that 3071? Looks like theres plenty of room for a normal-sized cone to go in front of that.
Is the compressor on the 3076 pretty much the same size/depth?

Also, does the manifold runner allow for the compressor housing to be clocked so the oulet is facing down a little more?

[dfaudi]

Now that we have had most of the manifold options thrown out on the table lets take a step back and determine what your goals are.

Your signature says 3076 is your turbo of choice along with a high-rev big port head. Aftermarket camshafts? What do you want to get out of this? Maximum Power? Driveability? etc...

Having said that one could argue that any of these manifolds work. Everyone has their opinions and everyone has their thoughts on each. Everyone is also hard pressed to push what they have chosen for their own vehicle. I would consider turbo intake routing and downpipe routing in choosing your manifold.


Charlie. That PagParts manifold looks nice. Reminds me of an APR. I think a fellow B6 on this forum is or will be running that manifold. I can not say who though...

Im in the process of determining what cams would go good with the setup (cat 3658s, recommended by chris), but in reading some other threads seems the bugs are not worked out. I have to call Eurocode to see if i can run without vvt and also figure out the warm start issues some are having. I got the head torn apart rigth beside me on my desk and i need to make a move on it. AEB intake manifold and 3076 have been ordered and on the way.
What are the "best bang for the buck" valve springs/retainers out there?

My goal is to have a fun daily driver that has a good amount of power to smoke most cars on the road. I rarely go to the track/dyno (however this might change) and im not looking for every bit of horsepower either unless its cost effective.

I have considered the plumbing of intake/exhuast. Exhaust i currently have is 3" custom to dual 2.25. So im going to fab up the new exhaust to 3076. Intake plumbing: I called eurocode about their GT307r file and they recommend running a maf, (vr6...a restriciton imho) but im going to call them again to verify i can run mafless or at least something bigger...s4? MY goal is to throw a cone filter on the inlet and be done with it.

[DenverNoob]

nothing wrong with a MAF...in fact most people worth their salt who actually know what they are talking about would tell you that a MAF is in fact preferable for MANY reasons. Those same people will also tell you that a MAF can be a challenge, more so than running without one. The benefits outweigh the hassle of running one, take my word for it. Any tuner worth what a person would pay them can and should be able to tune around a MAF and give you far better ECU adaptability and part-throttle control. Without a MAF, the maps are the maps, they are largely non-adaptive and can likewise be problematic. Lastly, there is not really any inherent restriction in running a MAF setup. I'm sure someone could certainly dispute that, but I would love to see a tangible difference based upon "restriction" alone. I'm guessing somewhere between slim and none. Believe me when I tell you that the compressor can and does get all of the air it needs.

just my $.02

[dfaudi]

Advice taken.
However with a VR6 2.75" id maf sufficient? Thats what ECode is tuning with. Is it worth goint to a S4 3" id MAF?

What i always go back to thinking is this...that if Audi set up a car for X horsepower and is using a 2.75" (VR6 for example) then if im running near double the power, how is that not going to a restriction? Im not saying running double the MAF size, but something larger.
S4 MAF?

[dfaudi]

a pic of the final setup with SPA. As you can see, the turbo sits on top and well forward. Though there is a stainless steel heat shield there, that is how the exhaust pluming runs, so it is a straight shot to an existing exhaust system. In my case, the thermal downpipe was cut and refitted with a 3in DP to a 3in flow race-cat, then mated to the remaining thermal exhaust system (the OE thermal was 2.5in DP, with a 2.25 flow-through flex-joint). Now 3in DP to 3in Flow-through flex to 3in mid-pipe, then the 2.25in split mid-chassis.

anyways the point here is that the SPA mani puts just about everything in the easiest possible spot to access with one exception (external WG), which if necessary can be accessed via under the car with the belly pan off.

That turbo shield is a nice piece. You make that yourself?

You doing lines on your manifold? lol..

[DenverNoob]

well if you are going to run a MAF, and again, I would argue the turbo is not being choked in any way, the combination of the sensor and its housing BOTH are part of the load calculation the ECU is seeing. Load calculation is critical to both fueling and part-throttle mapping. There are numerous MAF sensors and housings out there, lord knows on my setup I have tried about four of each to get it right! I have yet to see any data supporting the theory my turbo is not getting enough air. Moreover, I have yet to see another car pull past me thus far! hehehe (I know my days are numbered...but on the kill list in the current state of tune are catless and dinan exhaust e46 m3, several 335is in various states of tune (i.e. vishnu with cat delete and exhaust), a few b5 s4s (none stage 3....still on the prowl for one of those), a number of sti's and evo's, etc etc etc.

[DenverNoob]

That turbo shield is a nice piece. You make that yourself?

You doing lines on your manifold? lol..

hahahaha...no....had just finished trimming a few other hoses...forgot it was there!

[dfaudi]

DenverNoob,
Check your PM

[dougyfresh]

Im in the process of determining what cams would go good with the setup (cat 3658s, recommended by chris), but in reading some other threads seems the bugs are not worked out. I have to call Eurocode to see if i can run without vvt and also figure out the warm start issues some are having.

What warm start issues?

Running without VVT is fine. VVT is only used for cold starts and/or idle.

nothing wrong with a MAF...in fact most people worth their salt who actually know what they are talking about would tell you that a MAF is in fact preferable for MANY reasons. Those same people will also tell you that a MAF can be a challenge, more so than running without one. The benefits outweigh the hassle of running one, take my word for it. Any tuner worth what a person would pay them can and should be able to tune around a MAF and give you far better ECU adaptability and part-throttle control. Without a MAF, the maps are the maps, they are largely non-adaptive and can likewise be problematic. Lastly, there is not really any inherent restriction in running a MAF setup. I'm sure someone could certainly dispute that, but I would love to see a tangible difference based upon "restriction" alone. I'm guessing somewhere between slim and none. Believe me when I tell you that the compressor can and does get all of the air it needs.

just my $.02

correct - in bold
For daily drive-ability and part throttle response... Put a MAF in and run all the sensors the engine is designed to use. The software should be written for those sensors anyway and everything is there for a reason.

Advice taken.
However with a VR6 2.75" id maf sufficient? Thats what ECode is tuning with. Is it worth goint to a S4 3" id MAF?

What i always go back to thinking is this...that if Audi set up a car for X horsepower and is using a 2.75" (VR6 for example) then if im running near double the power, how is that not going to a restriction? Im not saying running double the MAF size, but something larger.
S4 MAF?

If you plan on using the REVO software that is currently being developed by EuroCode (the stuff David and Greg are doing) then I suggest you run the MAF sensor and housing that they recommend. The software will be written for a specific set-up and David knows what that is. Contact him before you go buying various MAF housings and sensors...

[dirtybrd]

The hot start could be related to be Mafless. I can deal with it, a little gas and it fires right up and purrs like a tiger.

[A4 TSCHUSS]

my car ever since the 2.0 rebuild, cams, etc. takes a little extra effort to start. Gotta hold the key and turn it over for 2 or 3 seconds half the time, it then idles perfect though.

[dfaudi]

The hot start could be related to be Mafless. I can deal with it, a little gas and it fires right up and purrs like a tiger.

What exactly is the issue with the hot start? Does it just crank and not fire unless you give it some throttle? And is it an intermittent thing or happen every single time?

I guess ill be running a maf.

[dfaudi]

I guess you just answered that.

[dirtybrd]

The flash programming just isn't made for adding cams, etc. Adding, cams, P+P head, 2L with no MAF, the ECU doesn't have anything to base start up off of. It's assuming everything is stock still. Adding a BT like the files are designed for doesn't affect cold/hot start up at all. I think this is the reason you can run Mafless on stock motors and get away with it, but motors flowing more air won't.

[A4 TSCHUSS]

couldnt run mafless on mine stock or built

[dirtybrd]

Freak.

[A4 TSCHUSS]

homo

[dirtybrd]

That'd be the pot calling the kettle black, don't you think?

[A4 TSCHUSS]

lmao, go fly a kite.....

[A4 TSCHUSS]

There is also the 034 motorsport manifold.

http://www.034motorsport.com/popup_i...ID=712&invis=0