Header Types Defined/Discussed + Photos of all C63 Headers and Manifolds
#76
Member
Here is some more food for thought. These are excerpts and quotes from the same guy MBH quoted. Actually the same article he posted. He just left this stuff out.
From this article. http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...ech/index.html
One of the largest errors street enthusiasts make is in running too large of a primary pipe, and too large of a collector. For example, NHRA and IHRA Stock teams using Burns' headers in H/SA in traditional small-block powered musclecars are running 1.5-inch diameter primary pipes- much smaller than many street machines are trying to use.
"The purpose and rpm range of the engine determine the primary pipe length, while pipe diameter is governed by engine displacement, valve diameter, and valve curtain area (determined by camshaft dimensions). The exhaust port design is critical in determining the size differential and placement of steps in a step header, and since we create our headers individually on a case-by-case basis, we can create truly optimal headers. We don't make any production headers; each and every set is custom."
The primary header pipe diameter is determined using basic engine mechanical specifications, such as: Bore Stroke Compression Ratio Valve diameter Cam specifications (lift and duration) Target rpm range.
"The overall length of the primary header pipe is governed almost exclusively by the target engine's rpm range, which is dependent upon wave tuning. Typically, a lower engine rpm range likes a longer primary pipe, while a high rpm engine prefers a shorter primary."
"The purpose and rpm range of the engine determine the primary pipe length, while pipe diameter is governed by engine displacement, valve diameter, and valve curtain area (determined by camshaft dimensions). The exhaust port design is critical in determining the size differential and placement of steps in a step header, and since we create our headers individually on a case-by-case basis, we can create truly optimal headers. We don't make any production headers; each and every set is custom."
The primary header pipe diameter is determined using basic engine mechanical specifications, such as: Bore Stroke Compression Ratio Valve diameter Cam specifications (lift and duration) Target rpm range.
"The overall length of the primary header pipe is governed almost exclusively by the target engine's rpm range, which is dependent upon wave tuning. Typically, a lower engine rpm range likes a longer primary pipe, while a high rpm engine prefers a shorter primary."
From this article. http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...ech/index.html
Last edited by TexasEngineer; 01-07-2011 at 02:41 PM.
#77
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Here is some more food for thought. These are excerpts and quotes from the same guy MBH quoted. Actually the same article he posted. He just left this stuff out.
From this article. http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...ech/index.html
From this article. http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...ech/index.html
One thing is for sure, Jack Bruns hasn't seen how huge the exhaust ports are on a the 63 motor.
#78
Member
Yes, but he has seen the exhaust ports of race cars. Oh, and the exhuast port shape and size does not determine the proper size of the primaries.
#79
Hooleyboy,
Instead of explaining something in a technical format (by the way, this was supposed to be a technical tread) you have attacked me and some company that went out of business. Goodness, I sure hope you stay in business forever. If not, you might be considered a know nothing.
I was really hoping you would come back with some kind real technical explanation or documentation backing your claims. By the way, why would it cause a hot spot? There is no way that a 1 ¾” piping or 1 7/8” is causing a restriction. In fact, velocities increase with the smaller diameter. Also, what problem would a “hot spot” cause? Also, you keep talking about tuned area. If tuned area is so important to your design, why are all of you primary lengths and secondary lengths so different? As I understand it, this completely defeats the purpose.
I think we are all disappointed in how this thread turned out. I was simple asking questions and seeking some data.
I guess we can all talk theory tell we are blue in the face, but results are what really matters. Maybe we should put together a headers results page with dyno numbers and track times, but that would probably end up with name calling and ticked off vendors as well just like all the other threads have ended up lately.
Please note that I tried to be respectful here and felt no need to use red font.
Instead of explaining something in a technical format (by the way, this was supposed to be a technical tread) you have attacked me and some company that went out of business. Goodness, I sure hope you stay in business forever. If not, you might be considered a know nothing.
I was really hoping you would come back with some kind real technical explanation or documentation backing your claims. By the way, why would it cause a hot spot? There is no way that a 1 ¾” piping or 1 7/8” is causing a restriction. In fact, velocities increase with the smaller diameter. Also, what problem would a “hot spot” cause? Also, you keep talking about tuned area. If tuned area is so important to your design, why are all of you primary lengths and secondary lengths so different? As I understand it, this completely defeats the purpose.
I think we are all disappointed in how this thread turned out. I was simple asking questions and seeking some data.
I guess we can all talk theory tell we are blue in the face, but results are what really matters. Maybe we should put together a headers results page with dyno numbers and track times, but that would probably end up with name calling and ticked off vendors as well just like all the other threads have ended up lately.
Please note that I tried to be respectful here and felt no need to use red font.
What all his responses show is that despite all the contradictory data, he made the headers different because sometimes different sells. They make good power and they use less tubing so they're cheaper to make and sell (Seriously, he uses straight tubing in his merges). That's good enough for a lot of people. Pretty much any kind of mid-long tube header design with a dyno tune will make solid power on the M156 and I'm guessing he's smart enough to know that. I mean, seriously, Keith's car made 460rwhp with the MKB shorties. It's not hard to make power on our cars, even with a marginal design.
All the empirical data in the world isn't going go get him to admit he chose different just to be different (but continually prodding him for honest technical design information does make for some entertaining outbursts).
Josh
Last edited by C63 Guy; 01-07-2011 at 04:16 PM.
#80
I have one question, if your fabricator has his roots in IRL which all use 4 into 1 design, why are the C63 headers (another NA application) Tri-Y?
I just can't get past that fact. ?
I just can't get past that fact. ?
#81
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Great follow-up, Tex. Thank you for adding to the technical discussion in a very data-driven manner.
This thread isn't about header pricing, etc. I'd prefer us not going down that road. It is what it is.
I'm 100% in favor of having an educated discussion of the various types of header designs.
Let's keep it civil & professional so this thread grows as a valuable resource.
This thread isn't about header pricing, etc. I'd prefer us not going down that road. It is what it is.
I'm 100% in favor of having an educated discussion of the various types of header designs.
Let's keep it civil & professional so this thread grows as a valuable resource.
Tex, thanks again for contributing with data. You touched on a few of the same points I've made.
Note to all: Let's keep this a technically-oriented thread free of emotion and/or personal attacks. We haven't crossed that line "yet" but I know this forum.
Data-driven discussion and argument is welcome. In fact, we need more of it!
Note to all: Let's keep this a technically-oriented thread free of emotion and/or personal attacks. We haven't crossed that line "yet" but I know this forum.
Data-driven discussion and argument is welcome. In fact, we need more of it!
#82
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Every other header we make is a 4 into 1. We originally made a 4 into 1 for the c63 and after testing we found that the Tri-Y made more power on the 63. I'll state this as fact. its cheaper to make a 4 into 1 header than a Tri-y. We are going to make what makes the most power. I currently have a jig for a 4 into 1 header for the C63. There is no scene in making that header if it makes us less power. My turn around time for my guys to build a 4 into 1 header is about 2 days. The Tri-Y header takes about 1 week once building starts. Problem is people don't see what I do outside of MBW. I'm constantly trying to improve my products. Until I see my data come back staying my 4-1 header is out performaning my tri-y. Thats what we are sticking with. Plus the customers are not complaining about the performance of the Tri-y either.
#84
Hooley, Hooley, Hooley...
Here's the truth: You consistently ignore legitimate technical questions about your headers and then go ballistic when people make assumptions because you give them nothing to go on. I'm not even the only one questioning you, I'm just the best at baiting you into showing your depth of knowledge and, unexpectedly, true colors as a person. I've never said anything about you or your personal life or even your general design skills. Just specifically the design theory and fact behind your Tri-Y headers.
By the way, yes, I did specifically ask "did you make a header that was to be different?" (Well, I actually asked in English, not jibberish, but it was the same idea) Your refusal to answer that simple question in the first place was what started all of this animosity between us. C'mon, try to keep up. Nonetheless, thank you for FINALLY admitting it.
Also, if your fabricator takes a week to make those headers, I could probably be persuaded to make myself available to help you with production design, because they should really only take 2-3 days max, especially in any kind of batch quantity. You do know I'm a full time designer AND fabricator, right? I also happen to be really good at my job.
I thought it might fair to attach your picture of your headers with all the visibly cheated (i.e. non tangential) joints circled in red. If you're going to quote Jack Burns regarding tri-y design (even though he was actually only referring to collector design) I thought it might also be good to post how he feels about cheated welds such as the ones you have throughout your headers:
Though not directly related to welding, this is a good time to discuss "cheating bends." We consider a properly cut tubing bend as one where the tube is cut perpendicular to the tangent of the bend (Figure 5). It will often be tempting while fabricating a primary tube to "cheat" the bend, that is, cutting it "off-tangent." This is one of the most common "power-robbers" that is over looked by mediocre fabricators. (emphasis added)
source: http://www.burnsstainless.com/weldingarticle2.aspx
So there's that. Thank you Uncle Jack for not making me say it. Also, you're probably not going to answer me regarding your supposed discussion with Jack about the port size, are you?
Anyway I'm bored. These are your headers with just a few of the obviously cheated bends circled in red. Best built, indeed.
Josh
Here's the truth: You consistently ignore legitimate technical questions about your headers and then go ballistic when people make assumptions because you give them nothing to go on. I'm not even the only one questioning you, I'm just the best at baiting you into showing your depth of knowledge and, unexpectedly, true colors as a person. I've never said anything about you or your personal life or even your general design skills. Just specifically the design theory and fact behind your Tri-Y headers.
By the way, yes, I did specifically ask "did you make a header that was to be different?" (Well, I actually asked in English, not jibberish, but it was the same idea) Your refusal to answer that simple question in the first place was what started all of this animosity between us. C'mon, try to keep up. Nonetheless, thank you for FINALLY admitting it.
Also, if your fabricator takes a week to make those headers, I could probably be persuaded to make myself available to help you with production design, because they should really only take 2-3 days max, especially in any kind of batch quantity. You do know I'm a full time designer AND fabricator, right? I also happen to be really good at my job.
I thought it might fair to attach your picture of your headers with all the visibly cheated (i.e. non tangential) joints circled in red. If you're going to quote Jack Burns regarding tri-y design (even though he was actually only referring to collector design) I thought it might also be good to post how he feels about cheated welds such as the ones you have throughout your headers:
Though not directly related to welding, this is a good time to discuss "cheating bends." We consider a properly cut tubing bend as one where the tube is cut perpendicular to the tangent of the bend (Figure 5). It will often be tempting while fabricating a primary tube to "cheat" the bend, that is, cutting it "off-tangent." This is one of the most common "power-robbers" that is over looked by mediocre fabricators. (emphasis added)
source: http://www.burnsstainless.com/weldingarticle2.aspx
So there's that. Thank you Uncle Jack for not making me say it. Also, you're probably not going to answer me regarding your supposed discussion with Jack about the port size, are you?
Anyway I'm bored. These are your headers with just a few of the obviously cheated bends circled in red. Best built, indeed.
Josh
Last edited by superlubricity; 01-08-2011 at 11:45 AM. Reason: removed irrelevant remarks from previously deleted thread
#85
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Though not directly related to welding, this is a good time to discuss "cheating bends." We consider a properly cut tubing bend as one where the tube is cut perpendicular to the tangent of the bend (Figure 5). It will often be tempting while fabricating a primary tube to "cheat" the bend, that is, cutting it "off-tangent." This is one of the most common "power-robbers" that is over looked by mediocre fabricators. (emphasis added)
source: http://www.burnsstainless.com/weldingarticle2.aspx
So there's that. Thank you Uncle Jack for not making me say it. Anyway I'm bored. These are your headers with just a few of the obviously cheated bends circled in red. Best built, indeed.
Josh
source: http://www.burnsstainless.com/weldingarticle2.aspx
So there's that. Thank you Uncle Jack for not making me say it. Anyway I'm bored. These are your headers with just a few of the obviously cheated bends circled in red. Best built, indeed.
Josh
Originally Posted by Burns Stainless
The section of tubing coming off of the head flange should be aligned properly and not "cheated", either side to side or up or down. It is very important for the exhaust gases to enter the header tube in the same plane as the port itself (visualize the flange/tube interface as an extension of the port). A straight section or slight angle up with the direction of port flow is preferable, but not always possible. Many headers are built with a cheated radius angled downward at the flange, away from port flow, causing a disruption of exhaust flow and a loss of power. Be sure your header design does not make this mistake! Check that header bolts can be installed and removed at this time with wrench or socket clearance, and make sure spark plugs and socket can fit around your tubes.
A "cheated" tube radius is where a tubing bend is not cut perpendicular to the "tangent" line. The tangent line is a line perpendicular to a radius line. A line off-tangent would not be in line with the true radius. Both dashed cut lines in the diagram at right are perpendicular to tangent and intersect at the origin of the bend radius.
Any time two tubes are joined, they must be checked for alignment and be "on-plane" and tangent. Flow restriction is caused by cheated joints. Sometimes there is no choice due to space constraints and lack of a suitable bend radius, so some cheating may be necessary. Try to catch potential cheating in the mock-up stage and eliminate it as much as possible. Another tip is to try to use a bend with a straight section attached rather than to "piece" a tube together. A more professional appearance is made with the least possible weld joints.
A "cheated" tube radius is where a tubing bend is not cut perpendicular to the "tangent" line. The tangent line is a line perpendicular to a radius line. A line off-tangent would not be in line with the true radius. Both dashed cut lines in the diagram at right are perpendicular to tangent and intersect at the origin of the bend radius.
Any time two tubes are joined, they must be checked for alignment and be "on-plane" and tangent. Flow restriction is caused by cheated joints. Sometimes there is no choice due to space constraints and lack of a suitable bend radius, so some cheating may be necessary. Try to catch potential cheating in the mock-up stage and eliminate it as much as possible. Another tip is to try to use a bend with a straight section attached rather than to "piece" a tube together. A more professional appearance is made with the least possible weld joints.
Pictures of what appear, in my non-professional opinion, to perhaps be cheated radii:
I think the easiest way to envision this, is to just logically consider the natural direction of flow that a pipe is producing - then look at the joint and subsequent direction of the new pipe/collector. Do the angles and joint cause as little disturbance to the direction of flow possible? Or, are there any areas where the surfaces mate that would cause unnecessary turbulence and loss of flow?
My post is not intended to slam MBH's product - they've demonstrated that their headers and tuning offer a significant improvement in output over the stock AMG wares. Also, they may be knowingly making some of those cheated radii compromises because there may just not be enough room to do otherwise (especially with those 2" primaries) - so it might be a conscious decision and concession made. But, IMHO, a few of those areas could likely be improved with a little extra attention, effort, and perhaps a tweak or two to the bends/piping they use and/or overall product design. Please consider this simply a third-party observation and constructive criticism from an admitted non-expert on the subject matter.
Last edited by c32AMG-DTM; 01-08-2011 at 09:53 AM.
#86
Super Moderator Alumni
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,189
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
2011 GLK 350, 2013 GT-R, & 2013 RAM 1500
I've spent some time cleaning up this thread:
1. Pricing discussion and related posts have been removed.
2. Personal/irrelevant content has been removed.
Suggestions.
1. If you can't handle discussing things in a respectful manner please do not post.
2. Debate is healthy and not everyone will be right. If you disagree, politely present your reasons or agree to disagree and move on.
3. It's not personal. Keep it on subject and bring data.
1. Pricing discussion and related posts have been removed.
2. Personal/irrelevant content has been removed.
Suggestions.
1. If you can't handle discussing things in a respectful manner please do not post.
2. Debate is healthy and not everyone will be right. If you disagree, politely present your reasons or agree to disagree and move on.
3. It's not personal. Keep it on subject and bring data.
Last edited by superlubricity; 01-08-2011 at 12:48 PM.
#87
Guys, let's keep it technical. FWIW, I'd wondered about the "cheated bends" (I'd always heard it called "cheated radius" - but I think they're synonymous) on a few of the AMG header offerings, including MBH's. Since we're all universally fond of Burns Stainless, here's a quote:
Source: http://www.burnsstainless.com/construction.aspx
Pictures of what appear, in my non-professional opinion, to perhaps be cheated radii:
I think the easiest way to envision this, is to just logically consider the natural direction of flow that a pipe is producing - then look at the joint and subsequent direction of the new pipe/collector. Do the angles and joint cause as little disturbance to the direction of flow possible? Or, are there any areas where the surfaces mate that would cause unnecessary turbulence and loss of flow?
My post is not intended to slam MBH's product - they've demonstrated that their headers and tuning offer a significant improvement in output over the stock AMG wares. Also, they may be knowingly making some of those cheated radii compromises because there may just not be enough room to do otherwise (especially with those 2" primaries) - so it might be a conscious decision and concession made. But, IMHO, a few of those areas could likely be improved with a little extra attention, effort, and perhaps a tweak or two to the bends/piping they use and/or overall product design. Please consider this simply a third-party observation and constructive criticism from an admitted non-expert on the subject matter.
Source: http://www.burnsstainless.com/construction.aspx
Pictures of what appear, in my non-professional opinion, to perhaps be cheated radii:
I think the easiest way to envision this, is to just logically consider the natural direction of flow that a pipe is producing - then look at the joint and subsequent direction of the new pipe/collector. Do the angles and joint cause as little disturbance to the direction of flow possible? Or, are there any areas where the surfaces mate that would cause unnecessary turbulence and loss of flow?
My post is not intended to slam MBH's product - they've demonstrated that their headers and tuning offer a significant improvement in output over the stock AMG wares. Also, they may be knowingly making some of those cheated radii compromises because there may just not be enough room to do otherwise (especially with those 2" primaries) - so it might be a conscious decision and concession made. But, IMHO, a few of those areas could likely be improved with a little extra attention, effort, and perhaps a tweak or two to the bends/piping they use and/or overall product design. Please consider this simply a third-party observation and constructive criticism from an admitted non-expert on the subject matter.
As stated each one of those non parallel cut and welds, cheated bends or welds, causes a huge disruption in flow. Just one is enough to disrupt flow throughout the entire header design, and I see multiple per primary or secondary in this set.
Good eyes gents.
#90
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
Check out dragtimes and get your answer.
#91
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
2013 Chevy 427 Torch Red
Using a machine with which a stationary car turns a set of rollers and a computer analyses the data to provide a HP measurement.........there is no clear distinction between designs or manufacturers.
Moving a 4,000 pound car 1,320 feet in the quickest time......the answer is obvious.
#92
Depends on how you want to measure power output.
Using a machine with which a stationary car turns a set of rollers and a computer analyses the data to provide a HP measurement.........there is no clear distinction between designs or manufacturers.
Moving a 4,000 pound car 1,320 feet in the quickest time......the answer is obvious.
Using a machine with which a stationary car turns a set of rollers and a computer analyses the data to provide a HP measurement.........there is no clear distinction between designs or manufacturers.
Moving a 4,000 pound car 1,320 feet in the quickest time......the answer is obvious.
There is no denying the amazing times put down by the MHP crew, however that doesn't "prove" anything. It simply shows the strength of that set-up. Just because the handfull of individuals who are dedicated to racing use a specific set-up doesn't imply similar results couldn't be obtained using a different product.
Dodger, Mthis, Dads, etc are dedicated to making the C63 go fast and have countless trips down the 1/4 mile to improve their technique. I am not aware of similar dedicated folks using a competing set-up. Thus, there is no true way to compare vehicles, let alone 1 piece of an over all package.
Until somebody tests different headers on the same car and same day to isolate variables, everything else is speculation.
Disclaimer - My car is bone stock, including the sexy Conti tires
#93
I disagree that the answer is obvious.
There is no denying the amazing times put down by the MHP crew, however that doesn't "prove" anything. It simply shows the strength of that set-up. Just because the handfull of individuals who are dedicated to racing use a specific set-up doesn't imply similar results couldn't be obtained using a different product.
Dodger, Mthis, Dads, etc are dedicated to making the C63 go fast and have countless trips down the 1/4 mile to improve their technique. I am not aware of similar dedicated folks using a competing set-up. Thus, there is no true way to compare vehicles, let alone 1 piece of an over all package.
Until somebody tests different headers on the same car and same day to isolate variables, everything else is speculation.
Disclaimer - My car is bone stock, including the sexy Conti tires
There is no denying the amazing times put down by the MHP crew, however that doesn't "prove" anything. It simply shows the strength of that set-up. Just because the handfull of individuals who are dedicated to racing use a specific set-up doesn't imply similar results couldn't be obtained using a different product.
Dodger, Mthis, Dads, etc are dedicated to making the C63 go fast and have countless trips down the 1/4 mile to improve their technique. I am not aware of similar dedicated folks using a competing set-up. Thus, there is no true way to compare vehicles, let alone 1 piece of an over all package.
Until somebody tests different headers on the same car and same day to isolate variables, everything else is speculation.
Disclaimer - My car is bone stock, including the sexy Conti tires
I think more the later.
There have been cars like Petro that have ran in as good or better air than what the MHP cars have ran in and the results were not the same or close to it.
You can claim speculation all you want but there are too many numbers from too many cars across the world for you to feel comfortable with that assumption.
Sorry, not buying it.
#94
Super Moderator Alumni
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,189
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
2011 GLK 350, 2013 GT-R, & 2013 RAM 1500
I disagree with your comments. It's been 2+ years since headers and tuning were introduced on this make. Are you trying to tell me that one of the smallest tuning operations in MB land has more track racers than anyone else? Or could it be everyone else has just as many passes however only a few make them public since the rest of the results are not on par with the segment leader?
I think more the later.
There have been cars like Petro that have ran in as good or better air than what the MHP cars have ran in and the results were not the same or close to it.
You can claim speculation all you want but there are too many numbers from too many cars across the world for you to feel comfortable with that assumption.
Sorry, not buying it.
I think more the later.
There have been cars like Petro that have ran in as good or better air than what the MHP cars have ran in and the results were not the same or close to it.
You can claim speculation all you want but there are too many numbers from too many cars across the world for you to feel comfortable with that assumption.
Sorry, not buying it.
There is no side-by-side data on the same car, yet. Maybe I'll throw a different set of headers on after I've tested my new combo. I've already tested manifolds, catless down-pipes and long-tubes back-to-back at the same track in similar conditions. Perhaps this Spring I'll throw a set of Tri-Ys into the testing pool.
While certainly reflective of the overall Power output, you can't quite use Petro's car as a standalone header comparison. It just isn't 1:1. How do you know which of Petro's modifications are responsible for the lower output? Is it the headers? Is it the tune? Octane? Launch technique? Air pressure? Weight? There is simply more than one variable that could be responsible.
#95
I actually agree with WhiteC63. He pretty much nailed it in my eyes.
There is no side-by-side data on the same car, yet. Maybe I'll throw a different set of headers on after I've tested my new combo. I've already tested manifolds, catless down-pipes and long-tubes back-to-back at the same track in similar conditions. Perhaps this Spring I'll throw a set of Tri-Ys into the testing pool.
While certainly reflective of the overall Power output, you can't quite use Petro's car as a standalone header comparison. It just isn't 1:1. How do you know which of Petro's modifications are responsible for the lower output? Is it the headers? Is it the tune? Octane? Launch technique? Air pressure? Weight? There is simply more than one variable that could be responsible.
There is no side-by-side data on the same car, yet. Maybe I'll throw a different set of headers on after I've tested my new combo. I've already tested manifolds, catless down-pipes and long-tubes back-to-back at the same track in similar conditions. Perhaps this Spring I'll throw a set of Tri-Ys into the testing pool.
While certainly reflective of the overall Power output, you can't quite use Petro's car as a standalone header comparison. It just isn't 1:1. How do you know which of Petro's modifications are responsible for the lower output? Is it the headers? Is it the tune? Octane? Launch technique? Air pressure? Weight? There is simply more than one variable that could be responsible.
I never stated which specific parts or tuning from other tuners were responsible for the difference, just that others with the same parts changed (tuning, headers, airboxes, DRs) are not even close to the same results.
I would negate weight (especially when comparing against mthis's car) since he has no weight reduction mods. mthis didn't even have an airbox and from Petro's testing we know the RT boxes work.
Thanks
#96
I disagree with your comments. It's been 2+ years since headers and tuning were introduced on this make. Are you trying to tell me that one of the smallest tuning operations in MB land has more track racers than anyone else? Or could it be everyone else has just as many passes however only a few make them public since the rest of the results are not on par with the segment leader?
I think more the later.
There have been cars like Petro that have ran in as good or better air than what the MHP cars have ran in and the results were not the same or close to it.
You can claim speculation all you want but there are too many numbers from too many cars across the world for you to feel comfortable with that assumption.
Sorry, not buying it.
I think more the later.
There have been cars like Petro that have ran in as good or better air than what the MHP cars have ran in and the results were not the same or close to it.
You can claim speculation all you want but there are too many numbers from too many cars across the world for you to feel comfortable with that assumption.
Sorry, not buying it.
The die-hard racers on this forum use 1 particular set-up, and have had great results. There is no evidence those results would not have been acheived using a competing set-up. Nothing anybody can say changes this fact. Perhaps once dodger achieves his goal, he can swap out headers and make 200+ passes with another brand.
In 1491, all the experts felt the world was flat; it turns out they were mistaken too... Until an unbiased experiment is performed, isolating headers as the single variable, conclusive exidence will remain unavailable.
#97
Super Moderator Alumni
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,189
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
2011 GLK 350, 2013 GT-R, & 2013 RAM 1500
I think you should do it (try some tri-ys).
I never stated which specific parts or tuning from other tuners were responsible for the difference, just that others with the same parts changed (tuning, headers, airboxes, DRs) are not even close to the same results.
I would negate weight (especially when comparing against mthis's car) since he has no weight reduction mods. mthis didn't even have an airbox and from Petro's testing we know the RT boxes work.
Thanks
I never stated which specific parts or tuning from other tuners were responsible for the difference, just that others with the same parts changed (tuning, headers, airboxes, DRs) are not even close to the same results.
I would negate weight (especially when comparing against mthis's car) since he has no weight reduction mods. mthis didn't even have an airbox and from Petro's testing we know the RT boxes work.
Thanks
#98
Super Moderator Alumni
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,189
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
2011 GLK 350, 2013 GT-R, & 2013 RAM 1500
I am not trying to convince you of anything, you are entitled to your opinion. However, your defense again is complete speculation. The bottom line is that a lack of evidence to the contrary does not provide evidence for your argument.
The die-hard racers on this forum use 1 particular set-up, and have had great results. There is no evidence those results would not have been acheived using a competing set-up. Nothing anybody can say changes this fact. Perhaps once dodger achieves his goal, he can swap out headers and make 200+ passes with another brand.
In 1491, all the experts felt the world was flat; it turns out they were mistaken too... Until an unbiased experiment is performed, isolating headers as the single variable, conclusive exidence will remain unavailable.
The die-hard racers on this forum use 1 particular set-up, and have had great results. There is no evidence those results would not have been acheived using a competing set-up. Nothing anybody can say changes this fact. Perhaps once dodger achieves his goal, he can swap out headers and make 200+ passes with another brand.
In 1491, all the experts felt the world was flat; it turns out they were mistaken too... Until an unbiased experiment is performed, isolating headers as the single variable, conclusive exidence will remain unavailable.
#99
Love to see the comparo happen, just don't believe it will. Other tuners seem to shy away from direct testing especially race testing vs this combo.
#100
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 2,207
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2012 CTS-V
I actually agree with WhiteC63. He pretty much nailed it in my eyes.
There is no side-by-side data on the same car, yet. Maybe I'll throw a different set of headers on after I've tested my new combo. I've already tested manifolds, catless down-pipes and long-tubes back-to-back at the same track in similar conditions. Perhaps this Spring I'll throw a set of Tri-Ys into the testing pool.
While certainly reflective of the overall Power output, you can't quite use Petro's car as a standalone header comparison. It just isn't 1:1. How do you know which of Petro's modifications are responsible for the lower output? Is it the headers? Is it the tune? Octane? Launch technique? Air pressure? Weight? There is simply more than one variable that could be responsible.
There is no side-by-side data on the same car, yet. Maybe I'll throw a different set of headers on after I've tested my new combo. I've already tested manifolds, catless down-pipes and long-tubes back-to-back at the same track in similar conditions. Perhaps this Spring I'll throw a set of Tri-Ys into the testing pool.
While certainly reflective of the overall Power output, you can't quite use Petro's car as a standalone header comparison. It just isn't 1:1. How do you know which of Petro's modifications are responsible for the lower output? Is it the headers? Is it the tune? Octane? Launch technique? Air pressure? Weight? There is simply more than one variable that could be responsible.
I have a great idea. I'll send you my MBH headers and you can send me
your MHP headers and we can finally put this to rest.
All kidding aside, I've been pushing hard for a custom dyno tune, preferably
something for 100 octane to eliminate that possibility.