ACE Header Independent Testing Results and Review - 199.6WHP on CA 91 Octane

[CounterSpace Garage]

Introduction
It's been quite a while since we've posted a review of any product. While CounterSpace Garage does quite a bit of in-house, independent testing, most of the results, whether positive or negative, are usually not noteworthy, and we file the results away for reference if we ever need it. This test result, is noteworthy.

In fact, the results are so significant, that we're publishing our findings and thoughts, before we've even finished testing. This is highly out of character for CSG, but given our excitement, we hope you understand.

Testing Methodology
As always, all testing conducted by CSG is done independently, at a time, setting, and venue of our choice. Some background information on our testing choices and methodology
- We choose to use a dynapack, because results have less variation. The dyno attaches directly to the hub, and eliminates the variation introduced by the tires. There is no tire slippage, and alignment/tire pressure/wheel weight/tire weight have zero effect on the torque applied from the car's drivetrain to the ground (or rollers in the case of a Dynojet or Mustang dyno). Results are repeatable within a 0.5% window, all day, every day.
- A fresh 2015 FRS was used for testing purposes. Zero drivetrain modifications were made, other than the headers involved, overpipes, and a flex fuel kit.
- The baseline, although not the exact same car, is a 100% stock BRZ, and is in line with the baseline dynos at this facility. A baseline on the 2015 FRS with nothing on it was not run as a cost saving measure, as we believe that a reasonably large sample of data for stock numbers is out there. (Dyno time is not cheap!).
- We do not do "hero" runs. All dyno numbers shown are the numbers generated after repeated back-to-back pulls. These are real world numbers reflecting the output of the engine under a track condition. If we were to let the car cool down completely between runs, we would show higher numbers across the board.
- The tunes performed on the cars are not designed to extract every last bit of power. Rather, they are designed to be safe to run in any condition in any weather, because when we track, it's not unusual to see temperatures as low as 25F to temperatures as high as 120F. Can we extract more power that's safe to use on the street? Absolutely, but that's not how we tune our cars.

The test vehicle:
- 2015 Scion FRS, 6MT
- @Delicious Tuning Flex Fuel Kit, OEM connections
- ACN 91 octane aka "pisswater" (Arizona California Nevada)
- Propel E85, mixed with ACN91 to be E70 (time conservation, getting full E85 in the tank would take too long, so we compromised by doing all Ethanol tuning at E70).
- OEM front pipe (yes, OEM secondary cat!)
- OEM midpipe
- OEM catback exhaust
- OEM intake (including sound tube)
- OEM paper filter
- Basically the entire car is stock except for the variables below:

The test candidates:
- Leading brand UEL header and overpipe combination
- ACE 4-2-1 EL Header and overpipe

The Dynographs:

First, here is a graph of the ACE 4-2-1 vs Stock.
- Orange - ACE 4-2-1 E70
- Red - ACE 4-2-1 ACN 91
- Green - Stock

Test notes:
- The torque dip is GONE. GONE GONE GONE. With an EL header.
- There is a gain of 10.8 lb/ft wtq, peak vs peak, on ACN 91
- There is a gain of 28.5 whp, peak vs peak, on ACN91
- There is a gain of 22 lb/ft wtq, peak vs peak, on E70 vs stock
- There is a gain of 39 whp, peak vs peak, on E70 vs stock



Second, here is the same graph of the ACE 4-2-1 vs Stock, but with the peak torque gain (maximum delta) highlighted
- Orange - ACE 4-2-1 E70
- Red - ACE 4-2-1 ACN 91
- Green - Stock

Test Notes:
- There is a peak gain of 30.4 lb/tq, on ACN 91
- There is a peak gain of 22whp at that same RPM, on ACN 91
- E70 gains speak for themselves over Stock.





Third, here is a graph of a leading UEL header + OP combo, vs the ACE 4-2-1 Header + OP. Both setups have been dyno tuned per our methodology. Peak power for ACN 91 is highlighted.
- Orange - ACE 4-2-1 E70
- Red - ACE 4-2-1 ACN 91
- Purple - UEL + OP E70
- Blue - UEL + OP ACN 91

Test notes:
- The UEL makes more power from 2400-3150 on E70
- The UEL makes more power from 2450-2950 on ACN 91
- The ACE header makes more power through the rest of the RPM range on both E70 and ACN 91.




Fourth, the same graph as above, but with E70 peaks highlighted.




Some followup thoughts

- ACN91 is notoriously known as "pisswater", because it is, literally, the worst "premium" octane gasoline commonly available. Despite this, MUCH more timing could be added with the ACE 4-2-1. This indicates to us that the ACE 4-2-1 is evacuating the exhaust gas out of the cylinders faster and more completely than the OEM or UEL headers. Because we are able to add timing, the 91 octane gains are larger compared to the other options.

- However, for the very reason that 91 octane gains are larger, E70 gains are smaller. Ethanol allows you to add more timing, because it is both more knock resistant, and has superior cooling properties, which are compounded by the finer atomization of Direct Injection. Because we can already run so much timing on ACN 91, Ethanol gains are lower.

- Due to time and budget constraints, we elected to test on E70, rather than E85. While E85 would certainly yield higher numbers, purging the system completely enough to have E85 (instead of E84, or E82, etc.) would have been too time consuming. We compromised by testing at E70, which we could verify via our Delicious Tuning Flex Fuel kit. Additionally, we believe these numbers to be reasonably close to E85 numbers, as Ethanol has diminishing returns as the Ethanol content goes up with Naturally Aspirated cars.

- All testing was performed with an otherwise OEM car. We believe an aftermarket front pipe will free up the exhaust flow even more, allowing for more gains. This leads us to more testing next week; the ACE header will be tested with multiple diameter front pipes to see if any of them produce better results.

- We are absolutely certain that even deleting the cat in the OEM front pipe will yield more power. We are also of the belief that a properly matched front pipe will probably flatten out the torque drop between 5000 and 6800 RPMs. This is heavily reinforced by many dynos we've seen on other cars, including the fifth dyno above, that show the 5000-6800 range being flattened out when there are no cats in the exhaust system. Any peak gains are just icing on the cake.


With these results, CounterSpace Garage looks forward to eventually becoming a vendor for the ACE header.

More testing will be conducted in the near future, to see what else this header are capable of. Currently, we believe that these are, hands down, the best header available for the car.

Future testing plans
- Test the header on the JRSC Supercharged BRZ
- Test the header with various catless front pipes

Thank you for reading!

tl;dr: this header is the best header on the market.



**Edit*

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxuCovNLaak"]CSG Ace 4-2-1 FRS/BRZ/GT86/FA20 header dyno sound clip - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e31Ketqj38"]CSG Ace 4-2-1 FRS/BRZ/GT86/FA20 header Laguna Seca Sound Clip with 86CUP - YouTube[/ame]


**edit**

Some pictures as requested




Third party dynos from @Delicious tuning


ACN 91




E85

[CounterSpace Garage]

*edited 6/9/2015

Yes, here it is, one of the updates you've been waiting for. We'll let the results speak for themselves.

The test candidates:
ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE Front pipe. As before, the rest of the car remains OEM, and the results are on ACN 91 and E70 with custom tunes.

The Dynographs:

First, ACE 4-2-1 header vs ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE front pipe.
- Dotted red is ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE front pipe on ACN 91
- Striped red is ACE 4-2-1 header on ACN 91

Test notes:
- There is a gain of 13.8 lb/ft by adding the ACE Front pipe!
- Horsepower gains are only 5.5WHP. However, you can see a huge gain in the area under the curve; there's effectively a horsepower gain everywhere.
- The odd dip you see at 3700 RPM is not actually a dip. This is the AVCS being unable to keep up with the RPMS as the revs are climbing on the dyno. If we change the ramp rate, the dip will shift, based on how quickly you go through the RPM band. In actuality, the dip is not manifested under street driving conditions.
- 199.6WHP on ACN 91. This is a short 4th gear pull. As you know, CSG does not do "hero" dynos. Just to see what we could do, by altering *how* we performed the pull, we were able to make the dyno read 209whp with ACN91, but this is not representative of real world performance. This 199.6WHP is repeatable all day, every day, under heat soaked conditions, at the track.




Second, here is the same test, but on E70.
- Solid Purple is ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE front pipe on E70
- Striped orange is ACE 4-2-1 header on E70

Test notes:
- There is a gain of 8.6lb/ft torque
- There is a 7.7WHP
- As previously mentioned, you'll notice that odd dip has shifted. It's not really there, as it's a cam angle artifact from not being able to keep up with the rate of RPM rise.



Third, we add stock to the graph, with ACN 91 results highlighted.
- Dotted Green is stock on ACN 91
- Striped Red is ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE FP on ACN 91
- Solid purple is ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE FP on E70

Test notes:
- There is a peak gain of 45lb/ft torque at the wheels on ACN 91
- There is a peak gain of 33.8WHP at the wheels on ACN 91



Fourth, we take the same graph and highlight E70 results.
- Dotted Green is stock on ACN 91
- Striped Red is ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE FP on ACN 91
- Solid purple is ACE 4-2-1 header + ACE FP on E70

Test notes:
- There is a peak gain of 50lb/ft torque to the wheels on E70
- There is a peak gain of 46.4WHP on E70

[CounterSpace Garage]

reserved for more future testing results

[Baldoak]

Woah.

[projek_01]

Subbed for JRSC results. I may have to bite the bullet if it looks good.

[Slowmotion]

I find it very interesting how the dip has changed location and range between Ace's test and CounterSpace Garage's test or just the fact that the whole characteristic of the torque curve changed. I'm curious to know why there was such a difference, since I would almost think the results posted here should be from Ace and the other test results form CounterSpace. In the end it's interesting to see a tuner get better results than the company who design and created the header.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Slowmotion

I find it very interesting how the dip has changed location and range between Ace's test and CounterSpace Garage's test or just the fact that the whole characteristic of the torque curve changed. I'm curious to know why there was such a difference, since I would almost think the results posted here should be from Ace and the other test results form CounterSpace. In the end it's interesting to see a tuner get better results than the company who design and created the header.

To be fair, ACE was testing a lot more combos, and if they had custom tuned for each combo, testing would have extended nearly two weeks, rather than just one day. This header had some pretty shitty results with stock and OTS tunes. The flow is so different that you don't see the true strengths until a custom tune is used.

Based on other dynos, and the other independent result, I expect to see solid AUC and some minor peak gains with more breathing mods.

Because there is no live tuning available for the FA20, tuning is very tedious and slow. In contrast, with my S2k, I can live tune, and literally tune 5x-8x faster. Even CSG's testing was nearly two full days.

[Shady195]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

To be fair, ACE was testing a lot more combos, and if they had custom tuned for each combo, testing would have extended nearly two weeks, rather than just one day.

Because there is no live tuning available for the FA20, tuning is very tedious and slow. In contrast, with my S2k, I can live tune, and literally tune 5x-8x faster.

Pardon my lack of tuning knowledge..

What keeps the FA20 ECU from being able to be tuned live like many other manufactures? And is this something that can be changed in the future with advancement in tuning devices?

[DuMa]

[steve99]

Originally Posted by Slowmotion

I find it very interesting how the dip has changed location and range between Ace's test and CounterSpace Garage's test or just the fact that the whole characteristic of the torque curve changed. I'm curious to know why there was such a difference, since I would almost think the results posted here should be from Ace and the other test results form CounterSpace. In the end it's interesting to see a tuner get better results than the company who design and created the header.

Counterspace Baseline is stock BRZ on stock tune on 91 fuel (different car to tuned one with header). To get rated output from a stock BRZ/86 you need 93 fuel. The stock tune pulls a lot of timing on 91 fuel, probably worth 7 or so hp loss especially if it crap 91.

I would imagine the ACE header baseline was done on 98 ron fuel in their country which is probably closer to 93 aki usa fuel.

[DeliciousTuning]

Not to mention they're using two completley different dynos for testing, between Ace & CSG. In completely different areas of the world. Test results can have a healthy margin of difference when you consider all of the factors.

I do appreciate all the numbers and the consistency of this testing here. Good stuff!

Sincerely,

Zach
Delicious Tuning

[Cop]

Nice and succinct on the TLDR

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by Shady195

Pardon my lack of tuning knowledge..

What keeps the FA20 ECU from being able to be tuned live like many other manufactures? And is this something that can be changed in the future with advancement in tuning devices?

ECUtek is the closest you can get to live tuning using ECU inputs to vary map outputs. The stock ECU cannot be live tuned, in other platforms aftermarket ECUs are required like Hondata on the S2K. It's due to the way the data is stored and accessed.

[Cop]

Any thoughts on or plans to test the 4-1 EL header?