Nameless Performance Equal Length Stepped Header

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by StormTrooper

Would be nice if someone with experience tuning this platform was closer than 10hrs away.

Maybe later this summer when a shop in Boise gets experience in his own car I'll head over.


It seems to be getting a little better as the tune is adding timing but the top end is still a little weak. 3.5 to 5 is pretty nice.
(if you believe the stock sensor I'm running rich at 11.5-12.0 at wot)

The stock sensor is typically more accurate than people tend to think. Sounds like you are running fairly rich considering I run FI cars at roughly that AFR (depending on conditions).

Here is a screenshot while I was tuning a car a while back. LM2 in the tailpipe of a single exit 3" catless exhaust vs OEM sensor post-turbo. Mind you that AFR while lag behind the request AFR, and the LM2 will lag slightly behind that. Also it will not always be like this, not all cars respond the same and there are conditions where it gets skewed but somehow this has become "common knowledge" that is is vastly inaccurate, which isn't exactly true. I use my LM2 stand alone wideband when tuning and occasionally if the OEM is accurate enough I'll use the OEM when people are doing longer tests (such as commute to work etc).

[nelsmar]

And hearing these reviews doesn't mean a lot to me I see people running the header with canned tunes designed for a different header and running rich etc with no logs showing anything and only butt dynos. It isn't exactly scientific but a vague check for flow increase could be done by doing 5x 3rd gear pulls and averaging the mass air flow g/s in excel, then 5x after the header averaged to see flow increase. But this is not very accurate. There are also so many more things that tuning for the actual header could increase such as egt changes allowing for additional timing.

Saying you didn't get what promised off a butt dyno and from the "scientific" tests done so far there is nothing to report yet :P. Hopefully no one takes these as negatives when considering this header. I am sure it will do quite well with some quality time on the dyno.

[tennisfreak]

Well we were told by nameless that a stock tune dyno would be provided and it has not happened. Now they simply ignore any requests for it.
At least provide what you promise or at a minimum respond to inquiries.

[StormTrooper]

So far I'm only a little irritated by the lack of instructions.... As for impressions, well like nelsmar said it needs a good tune and that isn't possible for me at the moment.

I'd probably do the road tuning myself if I could get a walk through of how the program works. (understand tuning philosophy and parameters) I'm not good with the software side.

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by tennisfreak

Well we were told by nameless that a stock tune dyno would be provided and it has not happened. Now they simply ignore any requests for it.
At least provide what you promise or at a minimum respond to inquiries.

I'm sure this is no accident either

[mad_sb]

People need to keep in mind that:

• As others have said, running a tune with Avcs tuned for a different header will not be optimal, nor will a tune designed for no header etc. I have yet to see any logs posted by anyone running this header so who knows how those cars are running and how far off the tune is from where it needs to be.
  
• A power increase across the entire rev range is harder to feel than peaky gains.

So, lets say your mods lift the ENTIRE whp curve by exactly 10whp.... Odds are most people would have a difficult time "feeling" the increase because it will pull the same as it did before just a little harder. However, If I pull a little power at 4k and add power at 5k it will feel faster because you will feel the surge at 5k.

Lets wait for some independent shops / people to baseline and tune for this header before we start condemning Nameless.

Hell even if i don't gain any power but end up with better fitment (no melting cam sensor harness, no cross member interferance, no leaks) I will still be happy since it will be better than my current fa20club header.

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by mad_sb

People need to keep in mind that:

• As others have said, running a tune with Avcs tuned for a different header will not be optimal (will confirm when i get on the dyno with my coated header in a couple of weeks)
  
• A power increase across the entire rev range is harder to feel than peaky gains.

So, lets say your mods lift the ENTIRE whp curve by exactly 10whp.... Odds are most people would have a difficult time "feeling" the increase because it will pull the same as it did before just a little harder. However, If I pull a little power at 4k and add power at 5k it will feel faster because you will feel the surge at 5k.

Lets wait for some independent shops / people to baseline and tune for this header before we start condemning Nameless.

Hell even if i don't gain any power but end up with better fitment (no melting cam sensor harness, no cross member interferance, no leaks) I will still be happy since it will be better than my current fa20club header.

This exactly. I just helped two people with their cars... I made some changes that gave overall power everywhere vs mostly gains at peak. They told me the car felt slower. Their dyno plot however disagree's. They were used to a "surge" of power feeling at certain RPM's that was now gone as the rest of the power band now had the same power. The OEM tq dip will make your car feel faster, just as turbo spool makes your car feel faster than an NA car at the same HP level.

[slava]

Replaced the 3" midpipe with the stock one. Still not perfect, but sounds a million times better. I think the right muffler would make it way better too. There's also an exhaust leak between the downpipe and midpipe that I need to fix.

Getting it tuned on Friday. No baseline info though.

[ame]http://youtu.be/lx9I8SD9IWQ[/ame]

[uspspro]

Sounds good to me!

[sato]

Originally Posted by uspspro

Sounds good to me!

What he said!

[regal]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

The stock sensor is typically more accurate than people tend to think. Sounds like you are running fairly rich considering I run FI cars at roughly that AFR (depending on conditions).

Here is a screenshot while I was tuning a car a while back. LM2 in the tailpipe of a single exit 3" catless exhaust vs OEM sensor post-turbo. Mind you that AFR while lag behind the request AFR, and the LM2 will lag slightly behind that. Also it will not always be like this, not all cars respond the same and there are conditions where it gets skewed but somehow this has become "common knowledge" that is is vastly inaccurate, which isn't exactly true. I use my LM2 stand alone wideband when tuning and occasionally if the OEM is accurate enough I'll use the OEM when people are doing longer tests (such as commute to work etc).

Vrey good points, although I think the factory tune is a bit lean and on the brink, this car is pretty high compression and some tuners run a little rich with all that compression (analogous to FI.)

Originally Posted by nelsmar

And hearing these reviews doesn't mean a lot to me I see people running the header with canned tunes designed for a different header and running rich etc with no logs showing anything and only butt dynos. It isn't exactly scientific but a vague check for flow increase could be done by doing 5x 3rd gear pulls and averaging the mass air flow g/s in excel, then 5x after the header averaged to see flow increase. But this is not very accurate. There are also so many more things that tuning for the actual header could increase such as egt changes allowing for additional timing.

Saying you didn't get what promised off a butt dyno and from the "scientific" tests done so far there is nothing to report yet :P. Hopefully no one takes these as negatives when considering this header. I am sure it will do quite well with some quality time on the dyno.

More good tuners for this car like yourself seem to be popping up by the day but they're all out west.

Originally Posted by tennisfreak

Well we were told by nameless that a stock tune dyno would be provided and it has not happened. Now they simply ignore any requests for it.
At least provide what you promise or at a minimum respond to inquiries.

Maybe they found that a good tune for this car doesn't add big numbers just makes a safe tune (as opposed to the factory tune+manifold cat.)


A solid , strong tune without the fireworks does sell or peak much public interest unfortunately. Has anyone asked them if they developed a safe track tune?

[StormTrooper]

I was pretty sure the stock tune was still on the rich side, although not as rich as some would think. Like 11.5 to 12 flat. And that 12.5 seems to be the NA sweet spot.

The tune they released was with stock afr aka 12 and under and said they did that to prove the header made power not just afr.

[verts]

My coated header just shipped.

Think I made a mistake though, for some reason chose 3" gasket when i have Nameless' 2.5" op/dp combo. Doh, what was I thinking in December haha. Got it changed to a 2".

[w00t692]

Originally Posted by Captain Insano

That's a complete BS conclusion one is drawing if they think "36whp over stock torque dip".
A - it's their tune
B - sure it made 36whp over stock in that one part... But it just moved the torque dip left... Move your focus to the left of the 36whp gain about 1 inch and it's actually making significantly less than stock.

Conclusion - did this header really make 36whp over stock in the torque dip or simply move the torque dip left?

Fact - it is making a lot more power than stock almost everywhere except of course where it still has a minor torque dip moved left.
Fact - it is a well engineered/built header
Fact - when people say "I want 215whp on pump gas" (see earlier in thread) with an NA header on a car that makes about 160-175 whp stock, that's unrealistic
Fact - when people say "I expect 40hp over stock" to me, that means they expect at least 240 chp (if not more) over the OEM car pwer levels. Again, completely unrealistic.

If you meant "40hp in the dip" that's great. But I will reiterate, it's important to consider that the dip is moved left (and is smaller) with the nameless header and LOTS of tuning. As evidenced by those charts. So I don't really think it's fair to say it's making "36whp in the dip" unless you qualify that with specifics on power before the dip. As well, after the dip it looks like a pretty standard header power levels... With LOTS of tuning.

To be clear, I think this looks like a great header. I would buy one if it was in my car budget (it's not, so I went with a cheaper option). I think people should stop complaining about power on the header as it's going to make a lot more power. I just don't think if you are objectively looking at the power levels you should expect 215whp or even "40hp over stock in the dip"... Because you will still have a torque dip making less power than stock a few RPMs before that big torque surge.

1200 rpms of torque dip vs 200 rpms of torque dip. What are you smoking to convince yourself that the former is better than the latter? All that earlier dip will do is make the car feel like it has vtec lol.