Quote:
Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17
All the ace headers are great, very unique design to have the most overall benefits.
But in specific regards to 150 vs 250 vs 350, when released the 350 was the most expensive 150 was 300$ less 250 was 150$ less. The 350 was the most heavily marketed. The 350 has the highest peak torque gains, albeit because of the gain in torque dip. And i think the torque dip although very real and would be good to eliminate i think is way over hyped in how detrimental and impactful the dip really is. But it leads to easy marketing by being able to make true claims of “40 peak ft lbs of gains over stock!” But this gain is in the dip and has minimal real “performance” increase as you don’t “performance” drive in the dip. Still a great overall option vs other headers but the 250 seems it has the meatiest “performance” powerband.
|
A long primary runner length 4-1 header is the best for top end performance, from what I have read here. Many people with superchargers seem to want to fill the low end torque. This is especially true for JRSC/centrifugal systems because they seem to build their torque higher in the rpms. For these owners, an Ace 350 header seems to fill the low end torque that their centrifugal supercharger is lacking.
For roots style systems, the question is what would be best? Low end torque is always good because boost builds with RPMs, but there seems to be more low/mid range torque than centrifugal units, so maybe a 250 or 150 would give more even gains across the rpms. Unlike NA applications, maybe there is different things to consider with FI applications. I don't know.
Regardless, I would like to see any dynos with the 150 or 250 system. Maybe the 350 will be best because there is more volume to the headers, regardless of runner length or something I haven't considered.