## Advise on P.E's equel length headers please ##
19 April 2002, 12:35 PM
#31
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's more a pressure thing. Number 3 cylinder goes pop from time to time, it seems for (insert masses of arguments 
) reasons.
All a bit wishy-washy to me, really
, but as far as I'm concerned any help with equal-loading should be a good thing. This is just one of them.
) reasons.All a bit wishy-washy to me, really
, but as far as I'm concerned any help with equal-loading should be a good thing. This is just one of them.
19 April 2002, 02:09 PM
#33
Errr...why doesn't the HKS manifold match the ports well???
I fitted on myself and it was an absolute doddle, once I'd got the rusted heatshileds off the standard manifoled I did have to slacken off the slip joints to get it to fit but that wasn't really a chore and I did them back up again afterwards.
The HKS kit comes with a full set of the necessary gaskets (3 of them) and some heat shield material. I used some of this stick on reflective stuff, but also wrapped the complete assembly in heat wrap before fitting it. That was a bore, but worth it in the long run!
On the performance front a friend fitted the manifold on its own (I fitted it with an HKS FMIC kit at the same time) then a front mount. In his opinion the manifold made more of a difference to his car on it's own than the FMIC did later! The only downside with the HKS manifold in my opinion is the lack of an Up pipe in the kit, my stock one has just split, but this does mean it only takes an hour to fit if your handy with spanners and have ramps!
The sound on each of our cars is awsome! He has a 3" mongose system fitted with a Scoobysport style down pipe and it sounds like a 911 Turbo racer with attitude Mine has the Scoobysport down pipe and an HKS Hiper, it sounds evil, like a scoob/911/V-Tec...raspy, deep and the ability to roar, particularly above 5000rpm when it goes all V-Tec!
If people want to do a group buy...then drop me a mail, I can arrange a very good price on these manifolds, and may also be able to get an up pipe made cheaply too
I fitted on myself and it was an absolute doddle, once I'd got the rusted heatshileds off the standard manifoled
I did have to slacken off the slip joints to get it to fit but that wasn't really a chore and I did them back up again afterwards.The HKS kit comes with a full set of the necessary gaskets (3 of them) and some heat shield material. I used some of this stick on reflective stuff, but also wrapped the complete assembly in heat wrap before fitting it. That was a bore, but worth it in the long run!
On the performance front a friend fitted the manifold on its own (I fitted it with an HKS FMIC kit at the same time) then a front mount. In his opinion the manifold made more of a difference to his car on it's own than the FMIC did later! The only downside with the HKS manifold in my opinion is the lack of an Up pipe in the kit, my stock one has just split, but this does mean it only takes an hour to fit if your handy with spanners and have ramps!
The sound on each of our cars is awsome! He has a 3" mongose system fitted with a Scoobysport style down pipe and it sounds like a 911 Turbo racer with attitude
Mine has the Scoobysport down pipe and an HKS Hiper, it sounds evil, like a scoob/911/V-Tec...raspy, deep and the ability to roar, particularly above 5000rpm when it goes all V-Tec!If people want to do a group buy...then drop me a mail, I can arrange a very good price on these manifolds, and may also be able to get an up pipe made cheaply too
19 April 2002, 02:38 PM
#34
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The manifold match up thing I got from JamesS...
a few posts up!
All we've got to go on here is people's own judgements, and someone saying 'it's great just do it' isn't very persuasive.
Yes, they're all good in their own way, but which particular way makes all the difference to the individual buyer. Some of the bits of information collected here might be wrong - or at least open to argument - but it's probably still more useful than the marketing bumph that's all we've got to go on instead!
PS the HKS headers duplicate the original cast headers exactly ie there is still a mismatch between the openings in the flange and the exhasut ports. I flowed these as well!
All we've got to go on here is people's own judgements, and someone saying 'it's great just do it' isn't very persuasive.
Yes, they're all good in their own way, but which particular way makes all the difference to the individual buyer. Some of the bits of information collected here might be wrong - or at least open to argument - but it's probably still more useful than the marketing bumph that's all we've got to go on instead!
19 April 2002, 04:51 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
listen to tim cos he is right.
Nom, which headers are best for you will depend on the rest of your mods. You cant say x is better than y. Especially not without trying both.
How comes you listen to James S but not to me?
I think I said quite clearly that the boxer sound is pretty much lost entirely with all tubular headers, it comes fromt he cast manifold, and the resonance characteristics of the stainless will remove it regardless of length.
I think you are totally msunderstanding the theory behind equal length headers on a turbo charged car.
The benefits of tuned exhaust headers are not the same as you achieve with a normally aspirated car.
Aside from the fact that none of the aftermarket systems are actually equal length anyway.
Nom, which headers are best for you will depend on the rest of your mods. You cant say x is better than y. Especially not without trying both.
How comes you listen to James S but not to me?
I think I said quite clearly that the boxer sound is pretty much lost entirely with all tubular headers, it comes fromt he cast manifold, and the resonance characteristics of the stainless will remove it regardless of length.
I think you are totally msunderstanding the theory behind equal length headers on a turbo charged car.
The benefits of tuned exhaust headers are not the same as you achieve with a normally aspirated car.
Aside from the fact that none of the aftermarket systems are actually equal length anyway.
19 April 2002, 05:48 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: London
Posts: 7,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've driven Scott's car a fair bit with and without the HKS headers and I think they are very good. The increase in drivability is quite noticable and the car just feels much more responsive, and possibly has a bit more urgency about it.
They sound great and it still sounds like a Scoob, just a different Scoob that's all
If I was in the market for some headers, I'd be considering the HKS and probably not a lot else.
Obviously all just IMHO
Matt
[Edited by mutant_matt - 4/19/2002 5:48:42 PM]
They sound great and it still sounds like a Scoob, just a different Scoob that's all
If I was in the market for some headers, I'd be considering the HKS and probably not a lot else.
Obviously all just IMHO
Matt
[Edited by mutant_matt - 4/19/2002 5:48:42 PM]
19 April 2002, 05:50 PM
#38
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam - just going from what is said on here (people's impressions) rather than the technical (as opposed to practical). The problem with the 'practical' bit is that people will 'feel' what they have been told that they should (but at a blind testing they wouldn't notice or would think something entirely different), but on the other hand it gives an interesting point of view...
As you say, it depends on the mods & there is no one better than the other, but the thing is to try to work out which is better with your own car. Tricky, without actually trying them both
Hey-ho, whichever & whatever. I don't think that either would be 'wrong'
{edited 'cos I managed to delete half the thing
}
[Edited by nom - 4/19/2002 5:56:59 PM]
As you say, it depends on the mods & there is no one better than the other, but the thing is to try to work out which is better with your own car. Tricky, without actually trying them both
Hey-ho, whichever & whatever. I don't think that either would be 'wrong'
{edited 'cos I managed to delete half the thing
}[Edited by nom - 4/19/2002 5:56:59 PM]
19 April 2002, 07:27 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a lot of mention of HKS. I suspect that it's partly to do with the limited availability of anything else outside of the Far East. Point of note - HKS are genrally accepted as manufacturers of top notch equipment here but, in truth, that is not necessarily a hard n fast rule. For example, a friend of mine bought a couple of headers (Honda CRX) to see which was better. The welds on the HKS were made on the inside of the ports! In the Far East there are substantially more options for aftermarket parts (naturally) and if those who are after performance parts are prepared to wait just a little longer then they can get a much better deal and often a better product as well. Unfortunately, Fujitsubo (amazing quality) don't do a header for the Scoob but a very good Japanese tuner is Zerosports. I once sent my mate there to ask one of the guys about a BB and he got stuck there for ages because the guy he spoke to was a complete Scooby nutter!
Anyway, suffice to say that the price of an HKS header here is just toooo much. I recently resisted the temptation to lug one over in my hand baggage - retail price new 680 quid!... and no I'm not going back there soon)
Anyway, suffice to say that the price of an HKS header here is just toooo much. I recently resisted the temptation to lug one over in my hand baggage - retail price new 680 quid!... and no I'm not going back there soon
)
19 April 2002, 10:55 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dont waste your time. if you do want to try anything by a half arsed route, better to use at least a fuel controller.
I use my whole **** most of the time. for talking at least.
I use my whole **** most of the time. for talking at least.
20 April 2002, 10:12 AM
#44
Adam, you have a tag line...it now has to go on the bottom (ahem) of all of your posts
But I agree with Adam, no matter how rich the stock Jecs ecu runs the car it would run very lean with a tubular manifold and stock ECU.
You could probably get away with porting the standard manifold, but it the gains would be minimal taking into consideration the effort involved, especially if your heat shields are rusty.
But I agree with Adam, no matter how rich the stock Jecs ecu runs the car it would run very lean with a tubular manifold and stock ECU.
You could probably get away with porting the standard manifold, but it the gains would be minimal taking into consideration the effort involved, especially if your heat shields are rusty.
20 April 2002, 02:20 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Location: SSO2003 2nd, SSO2005 1st, SSO2006 2nd, TACC Rd4 5th 4wd: In my car ;-)
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, rusty heat shields will lose at least 10bhp.........
And Adams FINALLY taken the HONESTY pill...........
Mark.
And Adams FINALLY taken the HONESTY pill...........
Mark.
20 April 2002, 04:51 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: www.cumbrianscoobs.co.uk/bbs
Posts: 4,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what i mean is could i run the car for a coulple of months with the fuel adjusted by the reg, untill fund`s allowed a ecu/controlers?
mike
mike
20 April 2002, 05:27 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
Don't see why not. As long as you set the fuel pressure so you are rich enough at high rpm WOT. (and your pump can cope?)
Closed loop cruise will still be ok but you will probably be too rich accelerating in the low RPM range.
Although ideally you fit an adjustable ECU and do it 'right' It is possible to work around the shortcomings of the JECS ECU.
I'm pulling over 330 bhp from a 95 WRX with std ECU, inj & turbo. Fuel is too rich at WOT low RPM but then why would you want to go there
Andy
Don't see why not. As long as you set the fuel pressure so you are rich enough at high rpm WOT. (and your pump can cope?)
Closed loop cruise will still be ok but you will probably be too rich accelerating in the low RPM range.
Although ideally you fit an adjustable ECU and do it 'right' It is possible to work around the shortcomings of the JECS ECU.
I'm pulling over 330 bhp from a 95 WRX with std ECU, inj & turbo. Fuel is too rich at WOT low RPM but then why would you want to go there
Andy
22 April 2002, 11:25 AM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Cosie
From what I understand you say that if the car runs rich enough with the OEM ECU (PPP in my case), it will cope with say a PE exhaust manifold if the fuel pump can "give" the required fuelling?
My friend Stelios had PPP with HKS headers & Magnex twin dump downpipe and his car was rich enough without det or fuelling problems (He had also Walbro uprated fuel pump).I ask cause I plan to go the same route with him (PE headers/Magnex downpipe/PPP exhaust/Walbro fuel pump) and what worries me is if the PPP ECU can cope with all the above mod without fuelling/det problems (SUL + OBooster)! I use a knocklink sensor and EGT sensor for monitoring parameters and I plan to buy Delta Dash software just in case.
I know an aftermarket ECU will be the best choice but my account is already high enough.
What is your opinion?
JIM
From what I understand you say that if the car runs rich enough with the OEM ECU (PPP in my case), it will cope with say a PE exhaust manifold if the fuel pump can "give" the required fuelling?
My friend Stelios had PPP with HKS headers & Magnex twin dump downpipe and his car was rich enough without det or fuelling problems (He had also Walbro uprated fuel pump).I ask cause I plan to go the same route with him (PE headers/Magnex downpipe/PPP exhaust/Walbro fuel pump) and what worries me is if the PPP ECU can cope with all the above mod without fuelling/det problems (SUL + OBooster)! I use a knocklink sensor and EGT sensor for monitoring parameters and I plan to buy Delta Dash software just in case.
I know an aftermarket ECU will be the best choice but my account is already high enough.
What is your opinion?
JIM
22 April 2002, 11:42 AM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Leeds - It was 562.4bhp@28psi on Optimax, How much closer to 600 with race fuel and a bigger turbo?
Posts: 15,239
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
How can you manually adjust the fueling?? Let me know the secret!!
Wasnt there a problem with the fuel rails on the early cars??
Can the fuel pump be uprated by using one of a different car?? instead of spending silly money??
David
Wasnt there a problem with the fuel rails on the early cars??
Can the fuel pump be uprated by using one of a different car?? instead of spending silly money??
David
22 April 2002, 12:50 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David
Yes, yes and yes !!
My fuel rails (connecting pipework) had a 6 psi pressure drop from inlet to outlet so I upgraded them using braided hoses. Later models pipework is designed better and probably does not require this.
My standard fuel pump pressure started to fall off at 5000rpm + Even after fitting an adjustable FP Reg the pressure was falling. I fitted an uprated pump (120 quid) and now can adjust the pressure as required.
I use this method i use to fine tune my mixture.
I can increase fuel flow by 14% over the standard pump/reg. This allows me to run 26psi on the standard 380's and TD05
Theo
I think the set up you intend to use will cope fine. I find that monitoring EGT as a safety back up is by far the best method. The lamda will read weak on full power runs due to heat.
I only experienced a 50 degree EGT rise going from 18psi approx 285bhp - to 26 psi approx 340bhp.
Yes, yes and yes !!
My fuel rails (connecting pipework) had a 6 psi pressure drop from inlet to outlet so I upgraded them using braided hoses. Later models pipework is designed better and probably does not require this.
My standard fuel pump pressure started to fall off at 5000rpm + Even after fitting an adjustable FP Reg the pressure was falling. I fitted an uprated pump (120 quid) and now can adjust the pressure as required.
I use this method i use to fine tune my mixture.
I can increase fuel flow by 14% over the standard pump/reg. This allows me to run 26psi on the standard 380's and TD05
Theo
I think the set up you intend to use will cope fine. I find that monitoring EGT as a safety back up is by far the best method. The lamda will read weak on full power runs due to heat.
I only experienced a 50 degree EGT rise going from 18psi approx 285bhp - to 26 psi approx 340bhp.
22 April 2002, 01:49 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Leeds - It was 562.4bhp@28psi on Optimax, How much closer to 600 with race fuel and a bigger turbo?
Posts: 15,239
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
What sort of fuel pressure regulator are you using?? Is this in the tank and part of the fuel pump? Is there anypoint point using a swirl pot? Where did you get your fuel lines from or did you just get them made up... and you were on about cutting the 90deg. bit of your turbo... how you going to run the hose to it? Under the inlet manifold? I have also found some pictures of a throttle body welded to the front of the inlet if you are interested.... Mine will be getting chopped off soon... just need to get a lorry intercooler...
David
David
22 April 2002, 03:43 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If any of you are interested, I'll be at PE on Saturday for the rolling road day. I have a PE true equal length manifold on my car, and contrary to what some people have said, I have not lost power at any revs, and yes, have gained 25-30BHP in the midrange and large amounts of torque at low revs - no losses there either.
I'm sure I'll be dyno testing my car at some point during the day, and it'll be logged with DeltaDash too, so anyone interested can see the results. The gains were without mapping, though the car is now custom mapped too.
Incidentally, another advantage of decent manifold is that you seem to be able to significantly increase ignition advance at low revs. This is possibly due to the better scavenging effect of the manifold, resulting in less hot gases remaining in the cyclinder after the previous firing. I am running several degrees (0-2800RPM) more advance than before, and have no detectable det whatsoever, with superb improvements in spool up. At low revs, I have about 100 LBFT more torque than an STI 5, as tested at PE on Sunday (weekend dev work !!!).
I saw lower boost pressure after fitting the manifold. Note that this doesn't mean reduced air flow (I logged that too). It is because there is less restriction in the exhaust that the charge is not queing to enter the engine. How else do you explain 312 LBFT at 16.5 PSI ??? The only mod I have that others don't is the manifold.
Cheers
Steve
www.steve.ukmail.org
P.S. I got my manifold long before my association with EcuTek and PE, and paid the full price of £1275 (roughly). It was and still is my favourite mod. I no longer wake the dead when I drive home at night either.
P.S.#2 And I still have a CAT and have just passed my MOT.
[Edited by StephenDone - 4/22/2002 3:44:51 PM]
I'm sure I'll be dyno testing my car at some point during the day, and it'll be logged with DeltaDash too, so anyone interested can see the results. The gains were without mapping, though the car is now custom mapped too.
Incidentally, another advantage of decent manifold is that you seem to be able to significantly increase ignition advance at low revs. This is possibly due to the better scavenging effect of the manifold, resulting in less hot gases remaining in the cyclinder after the previous firing. I am running several degrees (0-2800RPM) more advance than before, and have no detectable det whatsoever, with superb improvements in spool up. At low revs, I have about 100 LBFT more torque than an STI 5, as tested at PE on Sunday (weekend dev work !!!).
I saw lower boost pressure after fitting the manifold. Note that this doesn't mean reduced air flow (I logged that too). It is because there is less restriction in the exhaust that the charge is not queing to enter the engine. How else do you explain 312 LBFT at 16.5 PSI ??? The only mod I have that others don't is the manifold.
Cheers
Steve
www.steve.ukmail.org
P.S. I got my manifold long before my association with EcuTek and PE, and paid the full price of £1275 (roughly). It was and still is my favourite mod. I no longer wake the dead when I drive home at night either.
P.S.#2 And I still have a CAT and have just passed my MOT.
[Edited by StephenDone - 4/22/2002 3:44:51 PM]
22 April 2002, 07:16 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David
I use an FSE regulator, it mounts on the inner wing beside the fuel filter. The original is on the end of the fuel rail, the FSE comes with an adaptor to remove this.
If I take it circuit racing then I'll be fitting a swirl pot, don't think it's needed for road use.
I got the high pressure braided fuel line from Demon Tweeks, you will need to move your original hard fuel lines if you want to front feed the TD05.
I have 4 spacers made up to lift the inlet manifold 20 mm to allow a 75mm air feed to the front of the turbo under the manifold. This will require an adaptor on the front of the turbo.
I would be interested in pics of the throttle body mods, that is on the list of 'things to do' after trying the water jacket on the intercooler.
Stephen - Do STi5's only have 212lb torque ?
Andy
PS Sorry to hi-jack the thread Chris !!!!!!
[Edited by Cosie Convert - 4/22/2002 7:18:38 PM]
I use an FSE regulator, it mounts on the inner wing beside the fuel filter. The original is on the end of the fuel rail, the FSE comes with an adaptor to remove this.
If I take it circuit racing then I'll be fitting a swirl pot, don't think it's needed for road use.
I got the high pressure braided fuel line from Demon Tweeks, you will need to move your original hard fuel lines if you want to front feed the TD05.
I have 4 spacers made up to lift the inlet manifold 20 mm to allow a 75mm air feed to the front of the turbo under the manifold. This will require an adaptor on the front of the turbo.
I would be interested in pics of the throttle body mods, that is on the list of 'things to do' after trying the water jacket on the intercooler.
Stephen - Do STi5's only have 212lb torque ?
Andy
PS Sorry to hi-jack the thread Chris !!!!!!
[Edited by Cosie Convert - 4/22/2002 7:18:38 PM]
22 April 2002, 07:59 PM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think Stephen said at low revs he has 100 lb ft more than an STi.
Stephen do you still use the original up pipe?
Adam, you know what I am like a difficult argumentative type, I am just puzzled and want to learn no offence intended good man - what's this about 1.1 bar being vastly more powerful on a large turbo compared with a small turbo? Since PV=nRT, and P, V, and R are constants then n is inversely proportional to T. So the only gain from a larger turbo running at the same boost pressure is a reduction in charge temp. If my charge temp at 1.1 bar on a TD04 is 25 degrees at 10 ambient then am I really putting a lot more air in since the T is in absolute, so a 10K reduction in charge temp is only a 3.5% increase in air mass? Granted in less favourable conditions then the temp will go up, and presumably there will be less back pressure from a larger turbo running the same boost. But if you are running with even a TMIC at fairly low boost like 1.1 bar where are the massive gains? I am a growing fan of big turbos merely on the basis that they run a cooler when you run them at decent boost and that they hold top end boost
Anyway, back to the topic (sorry ), for a rampant cheapskate like me how does flowing the original headers and uppipe compare to replacing them?
Edited to correct a confusing typo.
[Edited by john banks - 4/22/2002 8:48:58 PM]
Stephen do you still use the original up pipe?
Adam, you know what I am like a difficult argumentative type, I am just puzzled and want to learn no offence intended good man - what's this about 1.1 bar being vastly more powerful on a large turbo compared with a small turbo? Since PV=nRT, and P, V, and R are constants then n is inversely proportional to T. So the only gain from a larger turbo running at the same boost pressure is a reduction in charge temp. If my charge temp at 1.1 bar on a TD04 is 25 degrees at 10 ambient then am I really putting a lot more air in since the T is in absolute, so a 10K reduction in charge temp is only a 3.5% increase in air mass? Granted in less favourable conditions then the temp will go up, and presumably there will be less back pressure from a larger turbo running the same boost. But if you are running with even a TMIC at fairly low boost like 1.1 bar where are the massive gains? I am a growing fan of big turbos merely on the basis that they run a cooler when you run them at decent boost and that they hold top end boost
Anyway, back to the topic (sorry
), for a rampant cheapskate like me how does flowing the original headers and uppipe compare to replacing them?Edited to correct a confusing typo.
[Edited by john banks - 4/22/2002 8:48:58 PM]
22 April 2002, 10:19 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PE manifold includes up-pipe it's all one item, not two as oem.
I was seeing 16.5 PSI held, 17.4 o/b on the dyno and 18.4 on a cold day on the road. Fuel cut at 19.5. I've since been playing with my boost control quite a bit and don't see much more than 17PSI overboost on the road. Depends on which map I am running.
Steve
I was seeing 16.5 PSI held, 17.4 o/b on the dyno and 18.4 on a cold day on the road. Fuel cut at 19.5. I've since been playing with my boost control quite a bit and don't see much more than 17PSI overboost on the road. Depends on which map I am running.
Steve