# Litchfield Turbo Manifold kit



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

We are proud to introduce the LM Manifold & Turbo kit for the Nissan GT-R. Alongside our state-of-the-art dyno cell, this kit represents one of the biggest technological advances we have made as a company. 

Designed with some of the UK's premier motorsport firms and with some of the country's leading F1 engineers, our manifold uses the very best of British engineering to create something truly special.

The LM Manifold & Turbo kit offers GT-R owners an express ticket to big power numbers with reliable performance, backed by a 5 year warranty.










Beautifully designed, machined and cast; every component of the LM Manifold and Turbo Kit has been carefully considered and tested. Custom components eliminate the need for gaskets whilst unique super alloy nuts and Inconel fastenings maintain the highest levels of durability. 

The LM Manifold & Turbo Kit is tailored to our customer's power goals with road engine conversions ranging from the 800bhp LM800 model all the way to up to the 1000bhp capable LM1000. 

For those with a competitive spirit, a range of race applications are also being tested for even higher outputs.

ORIGINS


The issue with the standard car, when looking to significantly improve performance, is the restrictive design of the factory manifold fitted to each bank of the 3.8 V6 twin turbo engine. The turbine housing and the exhaust manifold that connect it to the cylinder head are formed in one piece. As a result, in order to upgrade the turbo, the combined manifold and turbine housing must be modified together.



















We offer a halfway house to get around this problem, achieved by machining and welding each manifold and turbine housing. This allows it to accommodate different turbo cores allowing the user to select from a wider range of larger turbochargers.

This approach is restricted by the size of the internal volute (the inner scroll of the turbo) and the available thickness of material in the standard turbine housing. This therefore limits the size of exhaust turbine wheel that can be fitted.

With so much compromise we decided to start again from scratch and design our perfect manifold for the Nissan GT-R. Not an easy task!

We needed the car to still be driveable in the real world, meaning low end torque and quick turbo response. This and packaging were our most important considerations, just as they were for Nissan. 

We chose to design an asymmetrical log manifold and enlisted the help of some of the UK's top motorsport firms and leading F1 engineers to make it a reality.










THE DESIGN PROCESS

We began by designing and fabricating a pair of custom Inconel exhaust manifolds (above) using our combined knowledge and experience. These performed brilliantly but the cost and sheer amount of time needed to produce each kit (over four weeks) made them impractical for the majority of projects. 



















These manifolds were scanned into a computer in three dimensions along with the space limitations of the tight GT-R engine bay. We even made moulds of the cylinder head exhaust ports all the way back to the exhaust valves to fully understand the production of the exhaust energy.

Once we had defined the limits and constraints, we engaged another F1 consultancy firm for their expertise in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis.












The CFD analysis allowed us to make several key design modifications within the CAD software. Although often small, these modifications combine to help improve the flow characteristics throughout the manifold and increase the energy received by the turbo. These subtle improvements included the development of our unique conical design in just the right shape. This aids flow uniformity and scavenging from each cylinder as well as reducing areas of flow interference. Careful attention to detail was given to each of the internal curves and surfaces to further improve the efficiency.











This increase in gas efficiency maximises the energy to the turbo’s turbine wheel to improve response and reduce turbo lag. As the flow increases the same design improvements reduce the restrictions to peak engine power.

At the end of the process we had improved the manifold efficiency by over 18%. When we could no longer make meaningful improvements we knew we had arrived at our final, Patent Pending, conical log manifold design. 


The final manifold design was then 3D printed to allow all the components to be physically installed and checked. Once happy with the fitment we were able to progress onto making the multiple, and integrate, casting moulds. These then allowed our first samples to be completed ready for real world testing. 

The manifolds are cast in the same British foundry that produces components for the UK’s premier Supercar manufacturers.











UNCOMPROMISED QUALITY

We use the highest grade Ni-Resist D5S, which is an outstanding cast iron alloy in regard to coping with long term heat cycling and extreme temperatures.

There are only a few foundries in the UK capable of forming this best-of-the-best iron alloy. The material choice and thickness ensures it retains heat, vital for optimum spool, and won’t crack regardless of the power in even the most extreme of engine builds.

Our complete engineered solution also means that no gaskets are required for the turbochargers themselves. This avoids the likely risk of important, and harmful, exhaust gases escaping from a failed gasket in such a harsh environment.

Sealing is provided by CNC 321 steel V-band clamps, and unique in this application, custom-made high temperature Wills Ring seals which are typically only reserved for extreme cylinder head sealing applications.

The confidence we have in our build quality and design is backed by a 5-year warranty on the manifold itself, separate from the manufacturer's warranty for the Turbo and wastegate components.










We have been working with the biggest names in the turbo business for years and the LM Manifold & Turbo Kit was designed from the outset to unleash the very latest turbo technology. 

For customers looking for road applications we recommend the advanced Borg Warner EFR turbo range which offer incredible response and power. We were the first in the world to utilise the Borg Warner EFR turbos in the GT-R application, immediately recognising the advantage the latest turbo design would deliver. 

Our Race series of turbos is aimed at hardcore drag racing enthusiasts looking to extract the maximum performance from their engine build.










These turbos are Motorsport proven and in the case of the LM1000 turbos are currently used in the Indy Car race series. The LM1000 turbos also powered customer GT-Rs to the overall Winner of TOTB 2015 and also to 3rd place overall.










We have been using these kits in selected builds over the last year so we could confirm the results from our initial prototype sets. Having further refined each package we are delighted to officially launch the kits to our UK customers.











THE LM MANIFOLD & TURBO KIT:

• Cast Manifolds with Zircotec coating
• BorgWarner or Garrett ball bearing turbo assemblies
• V-band Stainless steel cast turbo exhaust housing
• Bespoke Wills Ring seals
• CNC V-band Turbo Adapters
• Inconel and Super alloy fastenings
• Large bore turbo intake
• 44mm water cooled external wastegates
• Stainless steel down pipes
• Goodridge heat insulated oil and water lines
• Turbo oil feed filters
• Upgraded Boost control solenoid
• Heat shielded boost control lines

For more information on our manifold kit as well as the complete range of turbo options visit our website:


----------



## Takamo (Oct 18, 2005)

Awsome.... I'm tempted


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Still brakes my heart that I never got to drive my car with these in place. The single most desirable mod there is for the GT-R.

In fact, as the cherry I've never popped, it's the biggest pull factor making me want to buy another, regardless of when that ends up being.


----------



## turbomook (Aug 16, 2014)

Awesome!! Need these in my life..


----------



## Tinyflier (Jun 13, 2012)

Adamantium said:


> Still brakes my heart that I never got to drive my car with these in place. The single most desirable mod there is for the GT-R.
> 
> In fact, as the cherry I've never popped, it's the biggest pull factor making me want to buy another, regardless of when that ends up being.


We ALL want you to buy another Adam and start another Build Thread!


----------



## twobadmice (Jul 2, 2013)

Adam you can drive it with those in it!


----------



## jasonb (Jan 15, 2013)

I have had this kit for a while, fantastic performance and fantastic quality. 

800bhp on OE internals. Two track days, several 1000s of hard road miles, 3 drag racing events, 4th on Saturday, countless launches and several flat out top speed runs. 

Highly recommended. 

Jase.


----------



## Karls (Jul 12, 2010)

jasonb said:


> I have had this kit for a while, fantastic performance and fantastic quality.
> 
> 800bhp on OE internals. Two track days, several 1000s of hard road miles, 3 drag racing events, 4th on Saturday, countless launches and several flat out top speed runs.
> 
> ...


What about clutch/gearbox....any upgrades needed there?


----------



## GTRNICK (Apr 29, 2005)

I have to say that looks like a work of art. Lovely engineering going on in that picture. It looks like car porn at its best


----------



## GeeTR (May 13, 2015)

Looks like an awesome bit of kit. Almost a crime that it isn't on show once the engine is in!


----------



## jasonb (Jan 15, 2013)

Karls said:


> What about clutch/gearbox....any upgrades needed there?


I have only just had all the Dodson stuff done, but torque is capped due to OE engine, which is fairly ok on OE box.


----------



## mindlessoath (Nov 30, 2007)

can people now buy this kit world wide or is this still a Lichfield exclusive in house build thing?


----------



## Turbotwo (Jan 28, 2011)

Looks like proper engineering..18% more energy to spin the turbo sounds pretty good!..means i can now have big power and maybe retain a stock like spool?


----------



## rob2005 (Apr 26, 2015)

jasonb said:


> I have had this kit for a while, fantastic performance and fantastic quality.
> 
> 800bhp on OE internals. Two track days, several 1000s of hard road miles, 3 drag racing events, 4th on Saturday, countless launches and several flat out top speed runs.
> 
> ...


800bhp on stock internals, i didn't think this was possible.

Damn you for posting this my other half will hate you :chuckle: Wonder if she'll let me postpone the wedding 1 more year.


----------



## cormeist (Jan 2, 2013)

VERY good engineering this.. love it.


----------



## Chronos (Dec 2, 2013)

rob2005 said:


> 800bhp on stock internals, i didn't think this was possible.
> 
> Damn you for posting this my other half will hate you :chuckle: Wonder if she'll let me postpone the wedding 1 more year.


Is 800bhp safe on stock internals? and can the gearbox handle it? and if it is safe, whats the max safe bhp on internals nowadays then? Show's how strong the R35 engine is, amazing!


----------



## DRAGON (Nov 12, 2003)

Beautiful work, reminds me of the kits that where available when tuning stuff was only made in Japan, by the likes of Greddy and HKS. Not this dodgy Chinese stuff.


----------



## gtr mart (Mar 29, 2004)

Chronos said:


> Is 800bhp safe on stock internals? and can the gearbox handle it? and if it is safe, whats the max safe bhp on internals nowadays then? Show's how strong the R35 engine is, amazing!


I don't think the view on what's safe has changed (max 650lbft).

A drivable 800bhp is now possible as this set up can hold that 650lbft right upto the red line without using a monster sized turbo. 

Stock turbos make huge mid range torque that run out of puff as the revs get high. The stock manifold it seems is also restrictive meaning sensibly sized turbos until now, would not run efficienctly enough capped at 650lbft.

The maximum torque a car can run on stock internals has not changed, it's just tech and tuning has evolved such that better torque is now available at higher revs which equals higher peak bhp figures.


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

Glad you like it guys it has been a massive amount of work but we're really pleased with the results 

I have commented on this before but thought I'd just reiterate what is perceived as safe for a standard engine. We won't warranty 800bhp on a standard engine. 

We have warrantied our 750bhp Stage 5 conversion on the standard engine for years. We have always looked to improve our kits where ever possible with better software, turbo specs or intercoolers etc. With the introduction of our EFR turbos and Race intercooler the Stage 5 conversion was producing 770bhp with ease and at less boost than we previously used. We're happy to warranty these later specification conversions at this power 

The introduction of the LM Manifold kit saw performance jump forward again, now the engines are making 800bhp at slightly lower boost levels again. At this point we have explained to ALL customer who have them fitted that the choice is theirs as regardless of boost and heat reductions it's still 800bhp on the standard engine and we don't have the long term data. So far EVERYONE has asked for the extra 30bhp and we've have no failures 

Dragon, interestingly we were recently asked to tune both an original HKS kit and a Taiwanese/Chinese knock off version for other tuners. The HKS original significantly outperformed it and from I understand there has been a number of manifold failures from the copies. 

Adam, we both know I'm going to win the bet!


----------



## SI-R (Apr 21, 2011)

Just picked up my car today from Momentum Motorsport with one of these kits fitted, 

1200 break in miles to go until we get to see what it can do...

Awesome feet of engineering I literally cannot wait to see what its like when its finished.


----------



## mindlessoath (Nov 30, 2007)

Litchfield said:


> Dragon, interestingly we were recently asked to tune both an original HKS kit and a Taiwanese/Chinese knock off version for other tuners. The HKS original significantly outperformed it and from I understand there has been a number of manifold failures from the copies.
> 
> Adam, we both know I'm going to win the bet!


agree stay away from those zage/SBD kits, inefficient, not as good as the hks and they try to copy the hks which is what's really funny. so you pay 6-7k USD for a kit that's not fast, is inefficient, and a number of failures as you have mentioned (I have not followed that yet) but I also heard one set leaking oil.

all for what? to say you upgraded the turbos?

keep up the good work, engineering and quality!

anyways, can you answer my post above? lots of people world wide that want this kit without having to send the car to the UK.


----------



## Tin (Aug 15, 2010)

Excellent, was wondering where the good pics of this kit were hiding  
Top work from Iain and the team. :clap:
This kit is a massive step up from the stage 4.25, if you're pondering a stg5 conversion.. this is the defacto standard!
:flame:


----------



## Papa Smurf (Sep 25, 2008)

Adamantium said:


> Still brakes my heart that I never got to drive my car with these in place. The single most desirable mod there is for the GT-R.
> 
> In fact, as the cherry I've never popped, it's the biggest pull factor making me want to buy another, regardless of when that ends up being.


Adam, you still could pop that cherry with the build you had, just say the word


----------



## gtr mart (Mar 29, 2004)

Tin said:


> Excellent, was wondering where the good pics of this kit were hiding
> Top work from Iain and the team. :clap:
> This kit is a massive step up from the stage 4.25, if you're pondering a stg5 conversion.. this is the defacto standard!
> :flame:


Is this the set up you have Tin?


----------



## Tin (Aug 15, 2010)

gtr mart said:


> Is this the set up you have Tin?


Yup


----------



## Henry 145 (Jul 15, 2009)

Awesome work Mr Litchfield as ever - seeing this is not helping me convince myself to buy an M4 and let you loose on it!


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

If you bought an M4, these wouldn't fit! Surely that's reason alone to buy a GTR.


----------



## Henry 145 (Jul 15, 2009)

Adamantium said:


> If you bought an M4, these wouldn't fit! Surely that's reason alone to buy a GTR.


Same reason you should buy one as they wont fit an NSX


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Henry, over the years of giving Iain silly amounts of money, I feel like I have got to the level of being able to push him towards developing products I want.

The EFR turbo is an example although admittedly he pointed it out to me.

I've already made it clear to him that if I ever do take delivery (house is bringing that into question) then he's going to start working on a turbo kit like this one, straight away!

Might not make for a great ROI as they are only making 1-200/ year.


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

Looks like a great bit of kit - Am i the only one wondering how much these cost


----------



## matt4man (Feb 27, 2014)

terry lloyd said:


> Looks like a great bit of kit - Am i the only one wondering how much these cost


Litchfield GTR Manifold - Prices - Litchfield Motors


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

matt4man said:


> Litchfield GTR Manifold - Prices - Litchfield Motors


Holy shit balls  lol


----------



## gtr mart (Mar 29, 2004)

Yes Terry. I sought that info out quite quickly. Patiently waiting for the page to load, with fingers crossed it would be all in fitted for just under a grand LOL :chuckle:


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

gtr mart said:


> Yes Terry. I sought that info out quite quickly. Patiently waiting for the page to load, with fingers crossed it would be all in fitted for just under a grand LOL :chuckle:


With Rods and pistons thrown in as well


----------



## AnEvoGuy (Aug 17, 2011)

terry lloyd said:


> With Rods and pistons thrown in as well


I would expect a fully built engine for that amount of cash!


----------



## jasonb (Jan 15, 2013)

Quality and development, costs. Iain has spent a lot of time and money on these kits, the results speak for themselves.


Remember this, Quality is remembered long after the price is forgotten.

Jase.


----------



## gtr mart (Mar 29, 2004)

I don't think that's being called into question. Very little about GT-R ownership is what you might consider 'cheap' - so it would be unrealistic to expect cutting edge, leading tech to be retailed for 'peanuts'

Besides, +800bhp...........


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

If your talking built engine, and therefore gearbox also, I think the marginal extra cost for one of these vs anything else is insignificant in the grand scheme of the build. 

How early the torque comes in on the dyno print outs is remarkable from what I've seen on other threads!


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

It was just a bit of humour


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

http://www.amsperformance.com/cart/alpha-r35-gt-r-turbo-kit-alpha-16.html

Plus shipping plus 10% import duty plus vat.


----------



## splking (May 11, 2012)

Iain... pls pls pls can you ship your LM1000 to Portimao and get Rob Huff to do a time. I'd love to see how it compares to these epic hypercars! 

https://youtu.be/q3YPTkBRaOk


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Have you compared the times to the 0-180 mph times? My old stage 5 would be staying with the fastest of the three to 100 (918) then the P1 took over. I found that time very surprising in a bad way.


----------



## splking (May 11, 2012)

I was thinking the same... at the risk of being shot down on the forum here i am going to suggest that Iains LM1000 test car would do a time very similar to those on that test... with the EFR turbos producing so much torque from so low down, the GTR would surely pull harder out of the corners, 4WD too. The aero would be the big thing I guess, but just looking at the speeds on the footage i was expecting more... I could be completely wrong though!


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

I wouldn't want to say that a GT-R could hold a candle to a P1 with that kind of power around a track.

It has a 400kg weight disadvantage, much higher C of G and no downforce by comparison.

I would draw the line at a straight out drag race, but it's still impressive none the less.


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Adamantium said:


> I wouldn't want to say that a GT-R could hold a candle to a P1 with that kind of power around a track.
> 
> It has a 400kg weight disadvantage, much higher C of G and no downforce by comparison.
> 
> I would draw the line at a straight out drag race, but it's still impressive none the less.


The GTR is however a master of somehow overcoming it's weight dissadvantage. For example it's as quick if not quicker round a track, stock (so pretty much same bhp), than a 458 and its 300kg heavier.

I think how it uses it's 4wd would put it far closer than it should be.

Would be a really interesting comparison.

What was your 0-100? The P1 is meant to be 4.7s isn't it?


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

It was 5.56. The P1 might be quoted as that but if you look at the youtube test it didn't get close, even with the trofeo tyres.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

For those interested.

918:

1.36 to 30
2.85 to 60
5.52 to 100
11.25 to 150
22.95 to 186

LaFerrari:

1.7 to 30
3.68 to 60
6.48 to 100
12.12 to 150
21.99 to 186

P1 (Trofeo tyres)

1.37 to 30
3.22 to 60
5.93 to 100
11.21 to 150
20.11 to 186

Source is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H43_lkBkGkg


----------



## Chronos (Dec 2, 2013)

borat52 said:


> The GTR is however a master of somehow overcoming it's weight dissadvantage. For example it's as quick if not quicker round a track, stock (so pretty much same bhp), than a 458 and its 300kg heavier.
> I think how it uses it's 4wd would put it far closer than it should be.
> Would be a really interesting comparison.
> What was your 0-100? The P1 is meant to be 4.7s isn't it?


Makes one wonder, what an R35 that's been on a diet would be like, anyone ever stripped one out, and tested? u offering Borat? ha ha


----------



## AnEvoGuy (Aug 17, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> For those interested.
> 
> 918:
> 
> ...


Autocar have figured the P1 as 2.8 and 5.2, must have been a better surface which matters more for a rear wheel drive car


----------



## splking (May 11, 2012)

Not meaning to do Adam's car any disservice, but his GTR was medium to heavy tuned, but not a full fat tuned gtr... I'd think that a GTR running 1000bhp EFR's with the new Cup tyres would probably be capable of a 5.2 0-100 whilst being a completely road legal and road friendly. Do we know what the LM1000 can do in a straight line? 

H


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

No offence taken, completely agree.

My car was running 740bhp and 710lbft on mpss when it set its time. Also 2.65 to 60 which trumped all three.

A proper low lag 6758 equipped car with a gearbox to suit, running nigh on 1000bhp will be pretty incredible in comparison.


----------



## twobadmice (Jul 2, 2013)

Im sure it would be a touch quicker now Adam and a lighter driver! ;p


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Why don't you give it a try?

If you check the table, you'll see my 0-60 and 0-100 has been one of the quickest cars on road tyres regardless of power!

Let's see what you can manage!


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Chronos said:


> Makes one wonder, what an R35 that's been on a diet would be like, anyone ever stripped one out, and tested? u offering Borat? ha ha


I'm only a little chap, so I'll volunteer to sit in it and press play. My wallet's not thick enough for that experiment though :bowdown1:


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Vernon Jones' car is mega powerful and pretty light weight.

Litchfield's own race car is even more so but they aren't into straight line bragging rights.


----------



## newbi (Sep 16, 2009)

borgwarner and garrett turbo, which one better ?


----------



## darmawaa (Sep 5, 2013)

BW less lag
Garrett more top end


----------



## Turbotwo (Jan 28, 2011)

darmawaa said:


> BW less lag
> Garrett more top end


Borg Warner certainly less laggy than Garrett and when coupled with the super efficient Litchfield manifold it`s an excellent combination.Big BHP and oem like spool  ..keep an eye out for my build thread,i just can`t not do it..


----------



## newbi (Sep 16, 2009)

Thanks mate.


----------



## newbi (Sep 16, 2009)

Turbotwo said:


> Borg Warner certainly less laggy than Garrett and when coupled with the super efficient Litchfield manifold it`s an excellent combination.Big BHP and oem like spool  ..keep an eye out for my build thread,i just can`t not do it..


Where is your build thread ? Do you mind to give me the link ?

Thanks


----------



## Turbotwo (Jan 28, 2011)

newbi said:


> Where is your build thread ? Do you mind to give me the link ?
> 
> Thanks


No Problem,it`s not started yet though,just deciding on final spec at the moment,engine gearbox etc..As you might imagine there`s many ways to go in that respect.What i do know is that it will be based on the Litchfield manifold and Borg Warner EFR kit as the starting point,the seed dna so to speak..I`ve always fancied monstrous torque and low lag, now i can have both  ..as soon as i get the thread going i`ll send you the link..will be early next year i reckon.


----------



## newbi (Sep 16, 2009)

Turbotwo said:


> No Problem,it`s not started yet though,just deciding on final spec at the moment,engine gearbox etc..As you might imagine there`s many ways to go in that respect.What i do know is that it will be based on the Litchfield manifold and Borg Warner EFR kit as the starting point,the seed dna so to speak..I`ve always fancied monstrous torque and low lag, now i can have both  ..as soon as i get the thread going i`ll send you the link..will be early next year i reckon.


Nice , ok, will wait for your thread start.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

darmawaa said:


> BW less lag
> Garrett more top end


I think that's a poor summary.

The BW gives nothing away at the top, it just gives more at the bottom. Please don't confuse boost threshold with response. The BW doesn't provide the magical holy grail of turbos, it just feels more normally aspirated than other turbos. 

It's the manifold set up that significantly widens the effective range of the torque available but it would have the same effect with a Garrett. It's only when you combine the manifold with an EFR that you then get improved throttle response as well (you can't plot that on a dyno graph) that makes the EFR set up feel like it ticks all boxes to create the perfect set up.


----------



## Donbona (Apr 18, 2013)

Great info... now to find an extra £10k :O


----------



## Juhani (Jun 12, 2010)

I wonder how stock manifold EFR6758s compare to Litchfield manifold set up. Would the upsides justify the cost of upgrading?


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

yes.

There's about 100bhp top end power capality and about 3-400 rpm spool difference.

There's also the knowledge of having a work of art residing in your engine bay.

Then there's infinitely better boost control by way of the external wastegate (also responsible for reducing back pressure to provide more power.


----------



## Juhani (Jun 12, 2010)

Haven't maxed out my current set up yet, will have to find out what the car will do and then consider about moving on. The kit sure is a piece of art, but also has a price tag to match. Already spent too much money on parts this year...


----------



## mindlessoath (Nov 30, 2007)

Juhani said:


> I wonder how stock manifold EFR6758s compare to Litchfield manifold set up. Would the upsides justify the cost of upgrading?


there is only one more efr kit on the market and its not working right and taking way to long for them to figure out the problems, its highly doubtful that kit when finished will be as good as the Lichfield brand.
... goes to show Lichfield have the right kit with quality and r&d in it. well worth the costs.

and iirc the efr turbos won't bolt to just any manifold, def not the stock one.

so essentially you won't find anything better, at least nothing soon.


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

As good as this kit looks and performs i cannot help wondering if the if the similar looking Hks gt1000 kit will perform as well at a fraction of the cost - any thoughts ?


HKS GT1000 1000hp Turbo Kit Nissan GTR GT-R R35 VR38DETT Skyline GTR 11003-AN013 | eBay


----------



## Turbotwo (Jan 28, 2011)

terry lloyd said:


> As good as this kit looks and performs i cannot help wondering if the if the similar looking Hks gt1000 kit will perform as well at a fraction of the cost - any thoughts ?
> 
> 
> HKS GT1000 1000hp Turbo Kit Nissan GTR GT-R R35 VR38DETT Skyline GTR 11003-AN013 | eBay


By perform i assume you mean how well any given turbo will spool?..From what i`ve seen of the HKS kit it looks fairly generic in terms of it`s flow efficiency,i could of course be wrong but they haven't made any claims in that direction and it`s one of the main areas,if not the main area,where a log manifold can be improved.If they had made significant gains i think they`d be shouting it from the roof tops so to speak.Does the Ebay price inc vat?

Looking at the development and cfd results that Litchfield has published at the top of this thread i doubt the HKS is anywhere near the efficiency that the Litcho manifold is demonstrating,18% more energy to spool the turbo.

I can`t claim to be anything but a fan of this Litchfield Kit,it looks fantastic and from both dyno plots and anecdotal evidence it performs astonishingly well ie Big power with oem like spool.As i mentioned in a previous post i can`t not do this conversion.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

Late to this thread. I have EFR 6758 manifold kit. Spools like stock, turbos have real nice sound to them. Mine only mapped to circa 800bp / 630lbft as on stock gears. I need to go back for map tweak now engine has 1000 miles on, will ask for about 830bhp / 650lbft.


----------



## mindlessoath (Nov 30, 2007)

terry lloyd said:


> As good as this kit looks and performs i cannot help wondering if the if the similar looking Hks gt1000 kit will perform as well at a fraction of the cost - any thoughts ?
> 
> 
> HKS GT1000 1000hp Turbo Kit Nissan GTR GT-R R35 VR38DETT Skyline GTR 11003-AN013 | eBay


that all depends on you. the two kits are similar in power but that's about the extant of it. the hks with supporting mods can and has gone 8s recently, so its not slow. hks has also lapped a record lap time in Japan with the hks gt1000 (and then a prototype gt1200 kit after). just saying its not a slow kit by any means, but the Lichfield kit is like the AMS of Europe for the race track. I'm not sure if that's the best analogy to use, but I think the quality of the kit is up top, its also the latest efr technology on the r35.

if you were never going to spend what this kit is worth the alternative kits are probably for you, but you won't be wasting your money with this kit. CFD analysis, custom parts from real r&d... real track testing and data. proper fitting, quality materials and a kit that works (unlike the other efr kit brand).

the hks was born to make effective power at lower costs/mass production. it works very well compared to other competing kits but its no AMS kit which is the most well known brands for drag racing and quality.


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

Turbotwo said:


> By perform i assume you mean how well any given turbo will spool?..From what i`ve seen of the HKS kit it looks fairly generic in terms of it`s flow efficiency,i could of course be wrong but they haven't made any claims in that direction and it`s one of the main areas,if not the main area,where a log manifold can be improved.If they had made significant gains i think they`d be shouting it from the roof tops so to speak.Does the Ebay price inc vat?
> 
> Looking at the development and cfd results that Litchfield has published at the top of this thread i doubt the HKS is anywhere near the efficiency that the Litcho manifold is demonstrating,18% more energy to spool the turbo.
> 
> I can`t claim to be anything but a fan of this Litchfield Kit,it looks fantastic and from both dyno plots and anecdotal evidence it performs astonishingly well ie Big power with oem like spool.As i mentioned in a previous post i can`t not do this conversion.


Not sure if im comparing the dyno graphs right but to me the hks kit makes more power at lower rpm ? 

Price will include vat another shop has them at £7k think its due to the value of the yen atm


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Hopefully this will add some good side by side comparison.
The first picture is a EFR 6758 on a stock engine, the second are the stage 4.5 turbo's (ie stock turbo's with billet compressor wheel) on a stock engine. Both on Litchfield's dyno

The EFR posted by blade here:
http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/320257-litchfield-stage-5-a.html

The stage 4.5 is mine.
The spec will be close as mine has downpipes and forge intercooler.

1. Notice that the EFR's hit 560lbft around 2500rpm, the stage 4.5 doesn't make 260lbft until 3000 rpm (so EFR's with the trick manifold spool 500rpm sooner)
2. from 3000-6000 they are very similar, most likely due to needing to cap torque on a stock engine.
3. From 6000 the EFR's push on to 800+ while the 4.5's are out of puff, my understanding is that EFR's would go on to close to 900bhp if the health of the engine were not a concern.


As Adam has repeatedly pointed out, they give all the power of larger turbo's with much better spool than stock. I thought I was going to get close to them in terms of spool with my 4.5. In reality I'm 500rpm late which is very significant.


----------



## Juhani (Jun 12, 2010)

mindlessoath said:


> there is only one more efr kit on the market and its not working right and taking way to long for them to figure out the problems, its highly doubtful that kit when finished will be as good as the Lichfield brand.
> 
> ... goes to show Lichfield have the right kit with quality and r&d in it. well worth the costs.
> 
> ...



Me and Adam were talking about EFR internals in stock turbo housing, not the other EFR + manifold kit that has had some problems. I'm interested in how they compare because I have the stock housing ones.

By the way, does anyone know which Litchfield kit has 6758s and which 7163s? They don't have the info on their web page.


----------



## Turbotwo (Jan 28, 2011)

terry lloyd said:


> Not sure if im comparing the dyno graphs right but to me the hks kit makes more power at lower rpm ?
> 
> Price will include vat another shop has them at £7k think its due to the value of the yen atm


 Terry..I`m not sure which graphs you`re referring to but have a look at Blade`s graph here.. http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/320257-litchfield-stage-5-a.html#post3435521 it illustrates the extraordinary effectivness of Litcho`s manifolds in conjuction with the EFR`s..in fact the whole thread is a very informative read on the subject we`re discussing here..

The bottom line as i see it is this..The manifold in the Litchfield kit, having undergone significant development, suffers far less back pressure(therefore maintaining air speed and energy in the charge air) than either the oem or other kits offered by various tuners.Consequently when paired with the much refined and optimized exhaust wheel in the EFR Turbo and Iain`s attention to detail mapping, the spool and transient response characteristics are as least as good on a 900/1000 bhp engine as they are in the standard oem state of tune.

On the same thread Adam summarized it very well here.. http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/320257-litchfield-stage-5-a-2.html#post3436601


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

Turbotwo said:


> Terry..I`m not sure which graphs you`re referring to but have a look at Blade`s graph here.. http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/320257-litchfield-stage-5-a.html#post3435521 it illustrates the extraordinary effectivness of Litcho`s manifolds in conjuction with the EFR`s..in fact the whole thread is a very informative read on the subject we`re discussing here..
> 
> The bottom line as i see it is this..The manifold in the Litchfield kit, having undergone significant development, suffers far less back pressure(therefore maintaining air speed and energy in the charge air) than either the oem or other kits offered by various tuners.Consequently when paired with the much refined and optimized exhaust wheel in the EFR Turbo and Iain`s attention to detail mapping, the spool and transient response characteristics are as least as good on a 900/1000 bhp engine as they are in the standard oem state of tune.
> 
> On the same thread Adam summarized it very well here.. http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/320257-litchfield-stage-5-a-2.html#post3436601


There is a dyno graph in the ebay link i posted earlier - i compared that to the litchfield dyno graph on the website for there kit


----------



## mindlessoath (Nov 30, 2007)

not all dyno graphs & numbers equations the same as others. the tuner may have run in different gears, each dyno brand calculates different than the next brand and many dynos take additional data to adjust the numbers which could change due to the current days DA.

really a dyno is just a tool, its not a power meter that shows how fast you are (cause if your clutch is slipping you might make big numbers on the dyno but on track you could be slow).

so regardless the most notable numbers that should be used for power estimates are 1/4 mile trap speeds. but a dyno is a good tool for tuning, diagnosis, burn ins, showing how much power you made vs your baseline (should be same dyno and same conditions).


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

mindlessoath said:


> not all dyno graphs & numbers equations the same as others. the tuner may have run in different gears, each dyno brand calculates different than the next brand and many dynos take additional data to adjust the numbers which could change due to the current days DA.
> 
> really a dyno is just a tool, its not a power meter that shows how fast you are (cause if your clutch is slipping you might make big numbers on the dyno but on track you could be slow).
> 
> so regardless the most notable numbers that should be used for power estimates are 1/4 mile trap speeds. but a dyno is a good tool for tuning, diagnosis, burn ins, showing how much power you made vs your baseline (should be same dyno and same conditions).


I guess and just noticed the test car has a 4.1 engine so will help it spool a bit quicker never the less looks impressive for the cost


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Terry, appreciate the points you make, but having been involved in the R and D of these kits (mostly watching), side by side before you even turn on the engine, the quality and value of this kit versus the hks is an unfair comparison. It's like comparing an old corvette to the latest ferrari, except the price difference is MUCH less extreme.

The hks is a log manifold that fits the space and connects to a basic large turbo. The litchfield kit was engineered at EVERY step to be better than the comoetition at every step. Before you even consider how much better the EFRs are than the HKS options, just look at how the turbos are attached - wills rings for god sake! Look at the shape of the log manifold, you can see tbe litchfield kit has been designed and angled at every point forva reason. You dont get to that weird shape for fun. The hks is a parallel walled tube. Then theres the material, the coating, the casting quality, the fasteners (litchfield logo embossed), the list goes on.

I think it makes the hks look really expensive. You get MUCH less kit for not MUCH less money.


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

While i understand you passion for the litchfield kit Adam - i was not comparing the quality of the two kits more the figures they produce for the cost (spool and power) - saying that i dont believe the quality of HKS product is as bad as your making out when you look closely at the specs the turbos are quite high end with proven results


----------



## Theskycankill (Apr 27, 2015)

Thing that gets me is people who budget for a 1000hp road car !!!!!


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

I don't think the quality is bad at all. HKS do not make bad stuff, it's just not in the same league.

As for comparing power and spool, as stated, you can't compare unknown dynos against each other and the fact that it's a 4.1 totally destroys any comparison they make in their own graph against their "stock" line, unless of course the stock set up was also a 4.1.

You don't need me to convince you, but don't assume lag and power will compare, if they did Iain could have saved a fortune on r and d.


----------



## splking (May 11, 2012)

I had the AMS kit before... I am going to be running the Litchfield + EFR kit now... i will let you know my thoughts. Just to let people know... the AMS turbo kit is a good purchase for the lucky gent who bought mine at the heavily discounted price i sold it at 2nd hand, but would i pay 16k GBP for it new if I had to make that decision again... I wouldn't! It doesn't even ship with zircotec coatings, I had that done on my kit at a cost of over £1200+...

I will reserve judgement on the Litchfield kit until i drive mine... it's currently being mapped and run in on the new Jun engine with syvecs. 

H


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

splking said:


> I had the AMS kit before... I am going to be running the Litchfield + EFR kit now... i will let you know my thoughts. Just to let people know... the AMS turbo kit is a good purchase for the lucky gent who bought mine at the heavily discounted price i sold it at 2nd hand, but would i pay 16k GBP for it new if I had to make that decision again... I wouldn't! It doesn't even ship with zircotec coatings, I had that done on my kit at a cost of over £1200+...
> 
> I will reserve judgement on the Litchfield kit until i drive mine... it's currently being mapped and run in on the new Jun engine with syvecs.
> 
> H


Is the JUN engine 4.0 litre? Which EFR's are you going for? The 6758's spool like stock so presume you'll be going for the larger ones?


----------



## splking (May 11, 2012)

Going for the 6758 mate, definitely keen on having spool or faster than stock spool, i think the 900-1000bhp these turbos will be capable of on that engine will be more than sufficient... I feel that with the setup I am going for now, the components should all be well within their tolerances, which should aid reliability. We know from Jurgens build that the engine is good for 1400bhp+, the transmission should be able to handle 1000bhp, the turbos are tried and tested Litchfield units, and the car has a host of cooling mods. Fingers crossed for some trouble free motoring. Iain is in the process of carefully mapping the car I believe.

H


----------



## Hustong (Nov 19, 2015)

it's very hard to regroup these union together in my opinion.hope you have a good start.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Hustong said:


> it's very hard to regroup these union together in my opinion.hope you have a good start.


totally agree!


----------



## terry lloyd (Feb 12, 2014)

Adamantium said:


> totally agree!


Very unlike you Adam :chuckle:


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

terry lloyd said:


> Very unlike you Adam :chuckle:


I disagree with that!


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Just ordered one of these babies for myself.

Finally going to get to have one installed on my car, assuming, unlike last time, I can keep the car long enough.


----------



## Karls (Jul 12, 2010)

Adamantium said:


> Just ordered one of these babies for myself.
> 
> Finally going to get to have one installed on my car, assuming, unlike last time, I can keep the car long enough.


Well done Adam!

By the way, can I have first dibs on the kit?


----------



## TABZ (Apr 30, 2003)

I honestly think I should sell my car, save a few more pennies and then buy Adams car once it comes up .


----------



## goRt (May 17, 2011)

TABZ said:


> I honestly think I should sell my car, save a few more pennies and then buy Adams car once it comes up .


Please stop posting things like this, there's a queue, I'm at the front of it, end of ;-)

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk


----------



## Henry 145 (Jul 15, 2009)

goRt said:


> Please stop posting things like this, there's a queue, I'm at the front of it, end of ;-)
> 
> Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk


I called shotgun yesterday


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Henry did call it first


----------



## gtr mart (Mar 29, 2004)

Adam, have you been out in a car with these turbos on? Will you be going for the 800bhp ones?


----------



## Henry 145 (Jul 15, 2009)

Adamantium said:


> Henry did call it first


:bowdown1:


----------



## john beesla (Jun 6, 2011)

gtr mart said:


> Adam, have you been out in a car with these turbos on? Will you be going for the 800bhp ones?


+1 :chuckle:


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Which do you think are 800bhp ones?

6758s have a 52lb/min wheel. Perfect potential of 1040bhp.

This is of course unrealistic but 950/980 isn't.


----------



## goRt (May 17, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> Henry did call it first


Third post in the correct thread.

Shotgun my ar5e ;-)


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Link?


----------



## gtr mart (Mar 29, 2004)

Adamantium said:


> Which do you think are 800bhp ones?
> 
> 6758s have a 52lb/min wheel. Perfect potential of 1040bhp.
> 
> This is of course unrealistic but 950/980 isn't.




The ones Iain Litchfield sells as part of his LM800 conversion of course.

I had assumed you would be conservative in your approach and _just_ opt for the _entry level_ 800bhp set up

But from your message above, all kudos to you going for the 900/950 set up.


----------



## Tin (Aug 15, 2010)

gtr mart said:


> The ones Iain Litchfield sells as part of his LM800 conversion of course.
> 
> I had assumed you would be conservative in your approach and _just_ opt for the _entry level_ 800bhp set up
> 
> But from your message above, all kudos to you going for the 900/950 set up.


The 6758's support higher bhp than 800, but you need all the supporting mods, forged internals, gearbox work, intercooler, along with bigger fuel pumps etc

Congrats on the new (well old, but you know what I mean) GTR Adam.


----------



## goRt (May 17, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> Link?


http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=3756209

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk


----------



## twobadmice (Jul 2, 2013)

Can we stop arguing, if you look back you will clearly see that I called shotgun the day he announced selling his last one.
He can put the oem wheels straight on mine. The TSW's are much nicer and show the brakes off nicely.


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Tin said:


> The 6758's support higher bhp than 800, but you need all the supporting mods, forged internals, gearbox work, intercooler, along with bigger fuel pumps etc
> 
> Congrats on the new (well old, but you know what I mean) GTR Adam.


Something I've given some thought to lately is what would be required to raise the rev limit to 8000. If you could do it without touching the bottom end, then 600lbft at 8000rpm would be 915bhp.

I'd have thought you could replace everything necessary in the heads for under £5k.

No idea if you'd explode your bottom end with this, but it would certainly make an interesting little jolly.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

I have considered something similar. Average piston speed would be over 4000ft/sec which is a typical reliability tipping point. I suspect the short block geometry would make it not "feel" comfortable up there.

It already feels strained at 6750 onwards and that's nothing to do with the valve train. You really need to contemplate a longer rod set up for 8000rpm redlines.


----------



## Anders_R35 (Jul 20, 2011)

I don't know what Iain calls the 800bhp version but I see no reason going smaller than 6758s as they spool like stock and are good for circa 950bhp.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

I'm not sure they are what is considered the lm800.

There are a lot of other turbo options out there!


----------



## Johnny G (Aug 10, 2012)

borat52 said:


> Something I've given some thought to lately is what would be required to raise the rev limit to 8000. If you could do it without touching the bottom end, then 600lbft at 8000rpm would be 915bhp.
> 
> I'd have thought you could replace everything necessary in the heads for under £5k.
> 
> No idea if you'd explode your bottom end with this, but it would certainly make an interesting little jolly.


I spoke with Iain Litchfield about this a couple of weeks ago. If you buy a Litchfield Sport Engine, then the rev limit is ~8200rpm. That'll then give you the power up top where you need it, and maintain a lovely flat torque curve.


----------



## gtr mart (Mar 29, 2004)

Adamantium said:


> I'm not sure they are what is considered the lm800.
> 
> There are a lot of other turbo options out there!


I was curious on turbo size and if it was the same turbo for a few of the power options.

What I am quoting is Iain's website in the log manifold / turbo section which has LM800 / LM900 / LM1000 specs for road use.

Litchfield GTR Manifold - Turbos - Litchfield Motors


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

got it.

I suspect the LM800 and LM900 options will be 6758 based. The LM1000s will be 7163 based.

The number should be taken with a pinch of salt and will depend on supporting mods.

The turbos mentioned can annihilate the 800 and 1000bhp mark respectively.


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

Out of interest, how much is the gearbox/clutch upgrade on this LM800+ turbo kits to stop the car shitting itself on track a while after the upgrade?

I was trying to work out how many thousands more than stage 4/4.25/4.whatever the bigger turbos really cost. For the extra 150bhp.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

I've had bigger turbos on several occasions and never lost a gearbox from it. I should say, nor have the subsequent owners, touch wood.


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> I've had bigger turbos on several occasions and never lost a gearbox from it. I should say, nor have the subsequent owners, touch wood.


A number of R35s used on track have though with upgraded turbos.
Not just one or two.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

in that case - gearbox clutch budget 10-12k depending on choice of components.


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

GTR Mart, The 58mm EFR turbine wheel forms the bases for both the LM800 and LM900 versions of our turbo kit but we have the option of running a smaller compressor wheel on the LM800 versions if it suits the customer. We have had a number of customers choosing to run our LM800 turbo on standard engines to make 800bhp as easily as possible. We’re also trying a larger compressor wheel on our demonstrator to see how much extra power it frees up (if any) for those looking at just hitting four figures 

Richard, for 800bhp we would recommend at least having a Dodson first gear and shaft upgrade which strengthens the box for 650-700lbft. Depending on the parts used this is circa £4,200 inc. VAT for the 1st gear kit, forged basket, upgraded clutch, FWD Clutch upgrade, oils and labour. As you know Trackdays will always put a lot more stress on the car than normal road use. 

The gearbox tends to fail through fatigue over time, increased power just speeds it up. If you look at John’s last car or Goldie’s car they have done a huge number of trackdays and 20,000-30,000miles on the road at Stage 4.5+ on standard boxes (John’s was on 44,000miles) before they had their first failure. My previous demonstrator was running 850+bhp/750lbft for over 18 months with lots of trackdays before it had a 3rd gear failure. However we’ve also seen other customer’s cars last a matter of weeks at similar power so it’s really down to how it is used and time it is exposed to the increased stress. I could give Adam 1,600bhp and an oe gearbox would last his ownership  

The gearboxes take Stage4/5 power very well but going for more torque from engine builds will tip the balance and it’s a case of how long and owner is prepared to roll the dice based on their use.

Iain


----------



## john beesla (Jun 6, 2011)

So for customers running lm800 Turbos to make 800bhp on a stock engine 
which figure do you cap the torque at? Most of the stage 4.25 cars are at 620tflbs aren't they.

John


----------



## Litchfield (Feb 26, 2008)

John, we warn customers going for 800bhp on a stock engine and explain we won't warranty it past 775bhp. However if they choice to go for this (we've seen no issues so far) then we will limit torque to around 640lbft. The increase is achieved at less boost and temp compared to a Stage 4 car which is producing 610lbft so you could argue it is under less stress but 800bhp is still 800bhp!!!


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

That sounds like a nice target for me to go for.

Doesn't quite match the 740lbft I used to run on stock internals.


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Adamantium said:


> Doesn't quite match the 740lbft I used to run on stock internals.


Is that for real?:bowdown1:


----------



## john beesla (Jun 6, 2011)

Adamantium said:


> That sounds like a nice target for me to go for.
> 
> Doesn't quite match the 740lbft I used to run on stock internals.


Is that run or walk on stock internals? :chuckle:


----------



## paulmc (Oct 31, 2004)

john beesla said:


> Is that run or walk on stock internals? :chuckle:


Come on John, you know you want to:thumbsup:


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

borat52 said:


> Is that for real?:bowdown1:


Yes


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

john beesla said:


> Is that run or walk on stock internals? :chuckle:


That's a fair point! I did run it long enough to post my 0-60 and 0-100 times.


----------



## Juhani (Jun 12, 2010)

Stock internals won't even handle E85 FBO if giving the car boot (track days, mile events, etc.), so I'd recommend to get bottom end built when upgrading turbos. A lot cheaper to build it before blowing up than after, I know it all too well. It's also frustrating to know that you have lot of potential you can't use. I'd say it's future proofing your build for if and when you want to turn things up.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Juhani said:


> Stock internals won't even handle E85 FBO if giving the car boot (track days, mile events, etc.), so I'd recommend to get bottom end built when upgrading turbos. A lot cheaper to build it before blowing up than after, I know it all too well. It's also frustrating to know that you have lot of potential you can't use. I'd say it's future proofing your build for if and when you want to turn things up.


Agree with this to some degree although with this particular kit with the smaller EFR option there is only a drivability upside. Since it genuinely does spool faster than stock turbos (even with downpipes) the everyday drivability improves and that's before you consider much better throttle response.

Even at completely stock power levels the manifold/turbo combination makes for a much more enjoyable drive - that's why I bought another bloody GTR just so I could finally benefit from this set up.

When you add the above to a 300bhp higher ceiling, it's a no brainer for me.

Of course it would be stupid to buy these and operate at stock power but a low torque limit and higher power remains a very valid reason to purchase. That's all I'm doing for now. 

It is of course nice to have the four figure output in the back ground but that opens up a world of other costs.


----------



## borat52 (Jan 29, 2006)

Juhani said:


> Stock internals won't even handle E85 FBO if giving the car boot (track days, mile events, etc.), so I'd recommend to get bottom end built when upgrading turbos. A lot cheaper to build it before blowing up than after, I know it all too well. It's also frustrating to know that you have lot of potential you can't use. I'd say it's future proofing your build for if and when you want to turn things up.



I don't know much at all about where they get them from but AMS advertise on their forged short motor that they can build without a donor block for just a USD$4500 surcharge. 

If that's true then the risk of blowing a stock motor is a calculated risk which could be justified.


----------



## Juhani (Jun 12, 2010)

Even if it's that 'cheap', you can add shipping, import tax and vat to have one in Europe. And you also risk blowing bellhousing, starter, steering gear and front diff, all of which blew up on my car. I wouldn't count on the engine lasting on significantly over stock power in the long run. Just my two cents, I learned the hard way and would play it safe if I could choose again.

Then again, if Litchfield gives warranty for their builds, they most likely have mastered their art.


----------



## Tiler (Mar 28, 2014)

Looking forward to the LM turbos and manifold kit.


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Have you bought one?


----------



## Tiler (Mar 28, 2014)

:chuckle::bowdown1:


Adamantium said:


> Have you bought one?


----------



## Adamantium (Jun 24, 2002)

Which size are you going for?


----------



## Tiler (Mar 28, 2014)

Only the baby ones. LM 900


----------

