Ace 4-2-1 Header

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

That's my guess, but haven't seen confirmation on that.

BTW if you look at CSG's Ace header thread, CSG lists results as tested against a "leading UEL header", but no name given. I think that might be Tomei. They also post a dyno (different car, same dyno) showing results from PTuning's 4-1 header.

I'm just going by the earlier dip and then torque mountain signature dyno shape.

Nice to see Ace doing proper benchmarking and independent development.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Dimman

I'm just going by the earlier dip and then torque mountain signature dyno shape.

Nice to see Ace doing proper benchmarking and independent development.

Agreed those seem to indicate Nameless (or Nameless clone) for sure. If I wasn't so addicted to the UEL rumble, I'd be tempted to switch to Ace, Nameless or PTuning lol.

[churchx]

To me that 'unknown' with that characteristic narrow dip at lowered rpms also reminded nameless. It's wonderful to see both powerup AND dip fixed and even with rest unupgraded stock exhaust and intake bits. Win-win.

[ohmai18]

Sound clips!!!

And is your grade steel ok with thermal coating?

[350matt]

agreed, does its 'rasp'?

[AceHeader-MT]

Hey Folks,

After getting some feedback from the track day guys this past weekend we will incorporate a change in our bend radius.

Current gap at point "A" is around 2-3mm we will increase due to the boxter engines change from hot to cold conditions. This is a condition that doesn't have any effect on 95% of cars, but it's easy for us to adjust to avoid that 5% group

See attached photo below.

As far as test comparisons; we will never mention another exhaust company buy name. In this case, the compared header had great results and is a great choice. Other times the compared header does much worse. In either case, we will never mention by name.

Somewhere there was a comment about ceramic coating; Here in Taiwan there are no coating facilities, so we cannot offer this service. The headers are ready to be coated if anyone wanted to perform this on their own.

Happy drivin everyone

[steve99]

Originally Posted by churchx

AceHeader-MT: i meant - low gains shown not due dyno (that's very common problem with trying to compare results from different dynos and going just for numbers, not +%), but low gains shown relative on baseline oem stock. Of course, some dynos may show much higher relative to others, but if baseline is done on same dyno and at similar weather (air temp/pressure wise), then relative % gains should be same no matter what dyno is used for both baseline & with header+tune.
And i don't get - why. Maybe baseline is too high for some reason (mixed up with chart from different configuration? Or not stock, but with tune?), maybe something wrong with aftermarked parts installed runs (wrong or no tune? bad install with leaking gaskets?). I fail to see why there is just 172.4 whp stock 176.4 4-2-1(+FP) (+2.3%), 200.3 Nm stock 202.8 4-2-1(+FP) (+1.2%), when for example with custom tunes Nameless or PTuning headers can get from 175 whp baseline to 200 header+tune (+14%).
It's not +5whp vs +25whp, that might be due different dynos, that seems wrong to me. It's +2.3 vs +14% that seems wrong.
And i have no clue for reasons, as i see nothing wrong with how header is designed, it even seems more promising design wise to me then other headers with sharper bends, shorter runner lengths, with collectors of runners at wider angle. Magic
IIRC, even just and only off-the-shelf tune on full-oem-stock can give at least +10whp/+5% on petrol, twice what your header+tune shown. I just don't get what might be wrong. Tune + catted header should give +15whp. Your uncutted one SHOULD be much better :/
LOL, usually some unbelieving customers distrust vendor supplied results being too high .. now it's other way around, with me trying to distrust too low ones

Yes quite strange good gains showed till about 6000rpm then all drops away.

maybe they had crawford BPB installed :-) or something weird restricting gains over 6000.

really need to see log with IAM and knock, only thing that comes to mind is it was usa 93 petrol tune and their fuel (98ron) is likely not as good as 93 USA hence lots of knock at higher rpm reducing power/torque.

Theirs got to be something going on as the % gains are low for catless header and tune.

CSG testing seemed to get results you would expect around 20hp header plus tune and 30hp header plus tune plus E85, the 38hp gain was over stock car on 91 octane which would have been low base.

[churchx]

steve99: i wonder it's worth to overanalyze further due data released by CSG. Main fact was there revealed, that header is about as good as one can get. Be bad numbers for AceHeader-MT own runs be caused by using throttled back performance of tune meant for better fuel, or be it because of used off-the-shelf tune (due limited time for dyno runs and retuning for all tested configurations) very badly matching optimizations needed for this header, whatever. With right tune header shines, that was what i needed to find out/proven by someone. Now all i need is $$$ for placing order

[CSG David]

We have 1 header + front pipe set in stock right now.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by steve99

Yes quite strange good gains showed till about 6000rpm then all drops away.

maybe they had crawford BPB installed :-) or something weird restricting gains over 6000.

really need to see log with IAM and knock, only thing that comes to mind is it was usa 93 petrol tune and their fuel (98ron) is likely not as good as 93 USA hence lots of knock at higher rpm reducing power/torque.

Theirs got to be something going on as the % gains are low for catless header and tune.

CSG testing seemed to get results you would expect around 20hp header plus tune and 30hp header plus tune plus E85, the 38hp gain was over stock car on 91 octane which would have been low base.

I'm sure the runner lengths and diameters were tuned for scavenging effect right around where the torque dip is located (much like a certain popular "USA header") in the power band and tapers off right above 6K rpms. The configuration and location of the last merge collector is where this one stand out over the "USA header." It looks to be a straighter shot to the front pipe from the cylinder head exhaust ports without the bunched up, pretzel-like bends.

I would not be surprised at all if the primaries and secondaries on the ACE 4-2-1 are extremely similar in lengths and diameters as the USA "no-name" 4-2-1. Just as the USA header seem to taper off at the top end, so does this header for the same reasons.

[steve99]

Originally Posted by solidONE

I'm sure the runner lengths and diameters were tuned for scavenging effect right around where the torque dip is located (much like a certain popular "USA header") in the power band and tapers off right above 6K rpms. The configuration and location of the last merge collector is where this one stand out over the "USA header." It looks to be a straighter shot to the front pipe from the cylinder head exhaust ports without the bunched up, pretzel-like bends.

I would not be surprised at all if the primaries and secondaries on the ACE 4-2-1 are extremely similar in lengths and diameters as the USA "no-name" 4-2-1. Just as the USA header seem to taper off at the top end, so does this header for the same reasons.

yes, the long tube headers likely need a specific tune(cam timings) to extract power high end.

however it does appear that there are other bottlenecks NA as once people get to about 35hp gain its hard to get any further even with e85. wether its intake manifold heads valve sizes or just at the volumetric limit of engine .

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by steve99

yes, the long tube headers likely need a specific tune(cam timings) to extract power high end.

however it does appear that there are other bottlenecks NA as once people get to about 35hp gain its hard to get any further even with e85. wether its intake manifold heads valve sizes or just at the volumetric limit of engine .

Hopefully we will know about one of those soon!

[sw20kosh]

Originally Posted by raven1231

Hopefully we will know about one of those soon!

CSG is doing independent testing/tuning of this header.... just saying...

[churchx]

Or rather they already did, with wonderful results at that.
As for if +35whp is point, where diminishing returns spike in price and drop in gains a lot .. than this header (with proper tune of course) might aswell be only bolton upgrade installed at all, if it alone with everything rest being stock performed so well for CSG.