Skunk2 vs Square/Flat Top Intake Manifold - Dyno Results
#1
![Arrow](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon2.gif)
There have been a few discussions recently surrounding the Skunk2 manifold and in a nut shell (feel free to correct) it's been a great competitor to the Square-top. Coming in at a similar price point, often less, I'd say it's an excellent contribution to the aftermarket support these cars have. We've shipped over 100 of these manifolds and decided it was time to fill the gaps in the results that have been posted. We're blessed to have a community that is so result driven and kudos to the guys who have also shared their findings: FM, 949 and anyone else who might have been overlooked.
Skunk2 vs Square-Top (Naturally aspirated/Same Calibration) 949 results:
Square-Top: 150.41/123.19
Skunk2: 154.71/123.29
Skunk2 vs VTCS (Turbocharged/Unknown modification to boost or calibration) FM results:
VICS: 318.5/280.2
Skunk2: 350.8/278
Skunk2 vs Square-Top (Turbocharged/Same Calibration) Fab9 results:
Square-Top: 341.8/295.4
Skunk2: 341.8/298.8
Darby continued to up the boost by 3-4 psi and was able to knock out some pretty serious numbers with an end result of 365/309 on the Skunk2 manifold but this was done after changes were made in the calibration.
Plenum spacer? We're installing one Saturday and will test again, identical boost levels and calibrations.
Bottom line: You decide, but it's my interpretation that your decision can be made easily with the information we've been able to put together here.
The dyno operator and tuner was A Star Fabrication just up the road from us. This isn't the best representation of the plot but you can see the square top results blend right along side the S2. We will try to update the thread with a better screen shot after we play with spacers.
Skunk2 vs Square-Top (Naturally aspirated/Same Calibration) 949 results:
Square-Top: 150.41/123.19
Skunk2: 154.71/123.29
Skunk2 vs VTCS (Turbocharged/Unknown modification to boost or calibration) FM results:
VICS: 318.5/280.2
Skunk2: 350.8/278
Skunk2 vs Square-Top (Turbocharged/Same Calibration) Fab9 results:
Square-Top: 341.8/295.4
Skunk2: 341.8/298.8
Darby continued to up the boost by 3-4 psi and was able to knock out some pretty serious numbers with an end result of 365/309 on the Skunk2 manifold but this was done after changes were made in the calibration.
Plenum spacer? We're installing one Saturday and will test again, identical boost levels and calibrations.
Bottom line: You decide, but it's my interpretation that your decision can be made easily with the information we've been able to put together here.
- VTCS or USDM intake manifold owner (naturally aspirated) MAYBE: Buy yourself a S2 intake, you'll pick up numbers either way. If you're running any sort of FI you'll apparently see tremendous gains.
- VTCS or USDM intake manifold owner (forced induction) ABSOLUTE YES: This seems like a no brainer, tremendous gains and it's a quick way to clean up your engine bay for internet fame. It's also nearly the same price of sourcing a EDM Square-Top.
- Square-Top owner (naturally aspirated) MAYBE: Your call if a few ponies is worth the coin but you aren't at risk of losing anything.
The dyno operator and tuner was A Star Fabrication just up the road from us. This isn't the best representation of the plot but you can see the square top results blend right along side the S2. We will try to update the thread with a better screen shot after we play with spacers.
![](https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4647/27422616259_1fe694c95e_z.jpg)
Last edited by FAB; 12-21-2017 at 01:35 PM.
#2
Elite Member
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Detroit (the part with no rules or laws)
Posts: 5,683
Total Cats: 805
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Props for the post.
It should also be noted that some people were experiencing fitment issues with fuel rails. Someone will post the correct info or correct me, I can't seem to remember off the top of my head. Was it return-less NB guys? There is also a relocation of the TB inlet location, people with rigid charge pipes or reroute could have fitment issues they didn't have before.
Again, just something to keep in mind for a bottom line decision.
It should also be noted that some people were experiencing fitment issues with fuel rails. Someone will post the correct info or correct me, I can't seem to remember off the top of my head. Was it return-less NB guys? There is also a relocation of the TB inlet location, people with rigid charge pipes or reroute could have fitment issues they didn't have before.
Again, just something to keep in mind for a bottom line decision.
#4
Junior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Metro Detroit, MI
Posts: 397
Total Cats: 36
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Props for the post.
It should also be noted that some people were experiencing fitment issues with fuel rails. Someone will post the correct info or correct me, I can't seem to remember off the top of my head. Was it return-less NB guys? There is also a relocation of the TB inlet location, people with rigid charge pipes or reroute could have fitment issues they didn't have before.
Again, just something to keep in mind for a bottom line decision.
It should also be noted that some people were experiencing fitment issues with fuel rails. Someone will post the correct info or correct me, I can't seem to remember off the top of my head. Was it return-less NB guys? There is also a relocation of the TB inlet location, people with rigid charge pipes or reroute could have fitment issues they didn't have before.
Again, just something to keep in mind for a bottom line decision.
#6
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I'm working with them to get a different line thickness.
#11
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Kudos for the work, hard data is always appreciated and I know it requires time and expense to get it, so thanks.
I’ve wrestled with this decision when comparing variables. It’s good scientific practice to change only one variable and measure. The issue is that changing the IM surely changes the volumetric efficiency, and the gains that the manifold may provide would be unrealized without a re-tune. “Changing only one variable” could mean running an ideal tune for the VE that each manifold provides. Keeping the tune the same may actually introduce a confounding variable.Just thinking out loud here...
I’ve wrestled with this decision when comparing variables. It’s good scientific practice to change only one variable and measure. The issue is that changing the IM surely changes the volumetric efficiency, and the gains that the manifold may provide would be unrealized without a re-tune. “Changing only one variable” could mean running an ideal tune for the VE that each manifold provides. Keeping the tune the same may actually introduce a confounding variable.Just thinking out loud here...
#12
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Farmington Hills, MI
Posts: 1,218
Total Cats: 175
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I think tuning for intake changes would depend on competency of the tuner. Ideally, the fuel and spark would be updated for the new intake to extract the best power curve for each. If tuning for the new intake manifold is going to produce inconsistent results (due to an inconsistent tuner) then just leave it be.
#14
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I think tuning for intake changes would depend on competency of the tuner. Ideally, the fuel and spark would be updated for the new intake to extract the best power curve for each. If tuning for the new intake manifold is going to produce inconsistent results (due to an inconsistent tuner) then just leave it be.
There’s always Autotune. For better or worse, it follows the same algorithm every time.
#17
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
1. It's new
2. It can be taken apart for port/polish work to be done easily
3. It looks nicer
I think tuning for intake changes would depend on competency of the tuner. Ideally, the fuel and spark would be updated for the new intake to extract the best power curve for each. If tuning for the new intake manifold is going to produce inconsistent results (due to an inconsistent tuner) then just leave it be.
You're telling me, I'm awaiting cleaner lines - sorry guys. The bottom line is, minimal improvements were achieved with just the swap and then with 3psi she seems to be touching the efficiency pocket of that turbocharger.
#18
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I gotta say I like the look of the manifold on a table but when its installed in the car I think its odd, maybe just because of how far out it pushes out. I'm not sure if that's just my OCD wanting the distance from end of manifold to spark plug holes to be the same on both the intake and exhaust side, or maybe its because I think it looks out of place in a Miata. That might be due to years of seeing non S2 manifolds in them. Nice that it performs well, and will be an alternative to the JDM manifold when they run out or if importing them becomes harder. Any competition in the market is good. But for me, since I already own a Squaretop, I'm going to port that to match my S2 TB and install it. If I didn't already own a square top, I'd probably just get this because i guess I wouldn't even need to match it to the TB