Dyno test soon to follow, EQ Length tubular header

[turbovanman²]

That's all that's done to it. 249 WHP, 290 WTQ at 18 or so psi. Car usually runs 20 on the street.

I'll guess at 264 whp and 310 ft/lbs. Spool 500 rpm earlier,

[shadow88]

First off, Aaron, you do some fine work! I've said it before, you should be very pround of your abilities.

I'm going to be the only one who thinks it'll spool a touch later, by about 300 rpms. I'm betting a gain of 30whp and 35wtq all else being equal. I'd like to see your swingvalve.

[rx2mazda]

Very nice work indeed! i need Santa to bring me a welder for Christmas

[Anonymous_User]

I think this change will really wake up if you tweak the cal to make use of it.

But, and basing this guess on the fact that no modification has been done to the current exhaust manifold, I'll jump in at 269 hp.

[8valves]

Yes, the stock exhaust manifold is entirely untouched that I pulled off of the car.

I suppose we'll see. I'm still thinking it's going to spool quicker. Then again, 1 3/4" primaries is a LOT bigger than the stock runners, however the merge is ten million times better too. Tough call I suppose. At least I'll learn some things from it.

[Tony Hanna]

Wow! That's some fine looking work Aaron.

[moparzrule]

15-20 WHP gain in the top end, still under 300 ft pounds. Seriously doubt that header will help spool the turbo with 1 3/4'' primaries. Now if you had a ported high flowing head, maybe...but the primaries are simply too large for a stock head.
Oh, it does look really sweet though! But definitely IMO made for over 300 WHP applications.

[2.216VTurbo]

'Some scrap pieces I had laying around' Sheesh Aaron, your scrap pile header looks better than 95% of the headers out there. Nice work

So back to back with the 2.25 swingvalve staying on there eh? I'll guess you will get half your HP gain now and the other half of your totall gain *after* you change the swingvalve. I really like the idea of a strait back to back test, it almost never happens because other things get changed at the same time.

[BadAssPerformance]

....So back to back with the 2.25 swingvalve staying on there eh?........

Good point on the stock SV still there... Is that the case Aaron?

[Tony Hanna]

I'd love to see a DIY kit for a header that style. Something that comes with the bends and flanges but requires assembly and welding.
I like building stuff.

[8valves]

The 2.25 SV is going back on temporarily. I hate to do it, but I really want to know how the car will act with just the bolt on header. After that a new 02 housing will go on with an external gate off of the turbine housing and a seperate DP.

As Alan said, I'm guessing that will show just as large of results as the header will.

As far as 1 3/4" being too large for a stockish car, yup, you're probably right. But who has any proof that it will be detrimental? I've seen lots of good data on long tube headers with the secondary sizing, but not too much on a rather short piece with large primaries on a turbo car.

I figure our pressure ratio is probably so whacked out anyways anything that will get the exhaust gas farther away from the valve will help! Who knows though, that's what's so neat about testing!

[Shadow]

Nice, I'm glad to see some ppl stepping up and doing some BTB testing to finally set the record straight on some things....thing looks GREAT to boot!
With absolutly NOTHING else changed, what boost change are you anticipating? Will you dyno with the boost however it may end up, or are you going to reset the BC to get the boost back to where it was with the stock mani? I would anticipate the larger volume of exhaust to make the turbine a greater restriction and therefore give you more boost with no other change. Unless, of course, the lack of flow through the mtr at that HP level does not allow the header to work the way it should. If my first statement holds true, then I would also expect slightly faster spool, prob in the 2-300rpm range. If there is no change in boost, then I would expect it to spool about the same. IF it spools slower, then you know that that header is OVERKILL for the application your using it for. Any-which-way, I think it will tell alot, especially for initial mods! I think the volume of exhaust WILL make the turbine/wastegate a restriction and the turbo will have an increase in boost preasure. Once you level the boost to the same as you had before, I'll say 5-10hp gain and 5-10 wtq at a slightly higher rpm.

[Shadow]

The 2.25 SV is going back on temporarily. I hate to do it, but I really want to know how the car will act with just the bolt on header.

Agreed. If you change the SV then you really find out nothing, upgrade in the SV alone could be all the difference. I would expect up to 3X my original guestimate with a proper 3" mandrel dump, free flow exhaust and external WG.

[Mopar318]

I'd love to see a DIY kit for a header that style. Something that comes with the bends and flanges but requires assembly and welding.
I like building stuff.

Um, just buy some bends, and flanges, and thats the kit.

[8valves]

I'll put the car back at the same boost level it was before. However, if it works the way I think it will, then the car may not have enough fuel to sustain that boost level.

If the car makes more power at X less boost then we'll have a decent answer. I think a shift in RPM range as you predicted shadow will be something to see.

A neat aspect to this particular car is that with just the .63 housing the car has a higher HP/TQ peak than most of teh typical TD's, as well as a lower torque to HP difference. Wouldn't most 2.2's at nearly 20 psi making mid 200 WHP be over 300 tq? This car picked up ZERO torque gain from the FMIC. Just a max gain of 13 WHP, and a average gain of 10 whp from 3500-6000. Interesting stuff.

If it acts like it's too much for the car then I can always sell it to someone who can utilize it fully and make a smaller runner one. I'm sure there are more than a few people that would be able to put it to good use.

I just wish I didn't HAVE to use a stock SV. If I didn't plan on that, then a really nice header could be made with no restriciton on how the exhaust housing could be oriented.

[turbovanman²]

I just wish I didn't HAVE to use a stock SV. If I didn't plan on that, then a really nice header could be made with no restriciton on how the exhaust housing could be oriented.

I think we are all glad you are, just so we can see what happens. I always wanted to try back to back stuff but like everyone else, ended up changing a ton of stuff.

That header would look badass at the back of a TIII,

Wonder what one would cost?

[Shadow]

The header will outflow everything else hands down, and by not changing anything else we're going to get a REAL good look at how restrictive the stock pieces really are. Regardless of which way the results go, I'm sure you have a perspective buyer out there just waiting for that puppy to become available!

[8valves]

Well, didn't someone claim that Stephane made a shorty equal length that was eventually on that Van out west that ran real strong... something like a 50HP gain on a stock TII setup? That's back in the day stuff, don't know if anyone remembers it. There is a very small picture of it floating around somewhere.

Or a TBI header for that matter. Guys pick up good power off of those, but has anyone ever really tested what they gain? And if it gains anything with a stock head and intake ahead of it? Or a stock turbo behind it? I know there are lots of assumptions, but I don't know if there are any hard facts.

[turbovanman²]

Well, didn't someone claim that Stephane made a shorty equal length that was eventually on that Van out west that ran real strong... something like a 50HP gain on a stock TII setup? That's back in the day stuff, don't know if anyone remembers it. There is a very small picture of it floating around somewhere.

Or a TBI header for that matter. Guys pick up good power off of those, but has anyone ever really tested what they gain? And if it gains anything with a stock head and intake ahead of it? Or a stock turbo behind it? I know there are lots of assumptions, but I don't know if there are any hard facts.

Yes, Corby aka Umbass put it on his van, I think I have the pic saved somewhere.

No one has ever done a true back to back on any header made as far as I know. All I ever recall seeing is flow numbers using a flowbench, thats it,

I know I had a stage III turbine on my old 8 valve head and the log header helped spool it better than the stocker.

[Shadow]

Well, didn't someone claim that Stephane made a shorty equal length that was eventually on that Van out west that ran real strong... something like a 50HP gain on a stock TII setup? That's back in the day stuff, don't know if anyone remembers it. There is a very small picture of it floating around somewhere.

IMS I think it was 19hp on a stock T2 and close to 50 on a fully built mtr. + that header, by design, was garanteed to spool the turbo faster!