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

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by gtengr

I think the CS400 was developed due to the 350 interfering with the steering shaft on RHD cars ? Something like that I recall. It's also a different construction. The primary tubes on the A350 are all 1-piece while the CS400 uses 2-piece welded. The CS400 is supposed to have better low end torque than the A350, but loses to it everywhere else.

losing by how much? Are there any like for like dynos comparing the 350 to CS 400? I am really interested in seeing the curves.

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

losing by how much? Are there any like for like dynos comparing the 350 to CS 400? I am really interested in seeing the curves.

Very small amounts, I'm not sure if there's a good dyno comparison out there or not. I went with the CS400 because I prefer low end anyway and that last little bit just wasn't worth it imo.

[SuperTom]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

how much was the difference was the jump between the 2 setups? I an trying to avoid the ecutek as the cost of a license, tune and headers are a large chunk of change just not sure it's worth it over a solid UEL header and oft.

To be honest its not a huge jump performance wise on my butt dyno...


That said its a very smooth power delivery which could be why its harder to feel. Hence their moto "smooth is fast"


Major plus is the exotic smooth tone of the Ace setup.
Some people prefer the missing cylinder sound of UEL.
I feel like long term the engine prefers the equal pulses of the ACE.


Again performance wise a UEL and OFT will get you 90% of the way cheap. ACE + Ecutek is if you want the best you can get staying NA with the option of FI.

[86_IT]

I'm making the switch from the ACE 42.7mm Anaconda to the A350 this week. I'll only be able to post but dyno results as I havent dyno'd the anaconda, but maybe it will help.

[gpvecchi]

Sorry guys, there are some dynos here in Italy that show that 350 is not so effective in terms of max power with 100 octanes fuel (we have just 95 or 100). I find it quite strange, can you please comment it?

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by gpvecchi

Sorry guys, there are some dynos here in Italy that show that 350 is not so effective in terms of max power with 100 octanes fuel (we have just 95 or 100). I find it quite strange, can you please comment it?

Don't focus on max power numbers, focus on gains under the curve throughout the whole rev range.

Max hp numbers are boasting points for people who know no better.

As for dyno numbers, take with a grain of salt, but, you can see how the engine performs looking at the curves.

Even then, curves can be smoothed or fudged to make them look better.

It's a deep pool if you jump in

As for your fuel, RON or MON?

[churchx]

As 86MLR wrote, ACE 350 is focused on most gains overall, often referenced "area under curve". Top numbers, usually near very top, often are not that different from other headers. And that is good, as when you think of it - how long do you spend near very redline? Daily driving for economy & noise reasons usually happens at low rpms. Track driving .. i better have 4/5ths the range of 4K-7.3K rpms pulling strongest/more gains/"more area under curve" then slightly higher top number (useful mostly for bragging contests) at very narrow top rpm range i see for half a second prior upshift.
I also recall reading something similar on E85 and Ace, that gains vs RON91 were smaller with Ace headers then on other headers. Imho that should be taken not as "E85 (IIRC octane number ~ 110)" is worse, rather that how good Ace works even with 91 or 93. After all - it's not that fuels of higher octane number produce more power by themselves. Higher octane number = detonation/knock has less chance to occur. Thus one can turn up boost for higher compression ratio, run leaner, adjust ignition & valve timings for more efficient instead of retarding them like on less efficient engine/intake/exhaust, that would have started to knock with fuel of worse octane number by then, and THAT ability to dial/use more efficient running mode makes/shows more power, not because "100 fuel is more powerful then 95". Think that Ace headers enhance scavenging enough to enable dialing more efficient timings even on worse fuels too rather then "having less gains" vs other headers on gas vs high octane gas, which need later to be able to use those more efficient timings/to run leaner/to use more boost. Running worse on lower octane rating fuel also shows "more gains" for switching to higher octane fuel, after all .
So there you have it - focus on overall gains instead of absolute top numbers at top rpms (where one can see biggest increases on higher octane fuels) + lot of gains from better (higher octane) fuel you simply get even on worse fuel too.

[gpvecchi]

Italian fuel are measured in RON. Yes, curve is wonderful, but if there are no top end gains, cheaper UEL headers provide the same curve...

[churchx]

same, in similar shape (filling torque dip), but with less overall gains there, less "area" under curve.

[86MLR]

Originally Posted by gpvecchi

Italian fuel are measured in RON. Yes, curve is wonderful, but if there are no top end gains, cheaper UEL headers provide the same curve...

Yeap

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by gpvecchi

Italian fuel are measured in RON. Yes, curve is wonderful, but if there are no top end gains, cheaper UEL headers provide the same curve...

They do not. It seems you may need to spend some more time on your tune. Peak numbers are only matched by a handful of top shelf headers.

[gpvecchi]

Not mine, my car is brand new and under warranty... I’m planning for an ACE or JDL UEL and Delicous tuning... Just debated between them because of the price...

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by gpvecchi

Sorry guys, there are some dynos here in Italy that show that 350 is not so effective in terms of max power with 100 octanes fuel (we have just 95 or 100). I find it quite strange, can you please comment it?

Can you post those dynos? i would love to see them.
If not..

what where the before vs after numbers and the percentage increases at peak power as well as the before and after numbers and percentage increase at the point of the greatest increase. (usually around torque dip)

most people just look at two random dynos compare peak vs peak numbers and dont factor in anything else. unless you have dynos on the same day with the same car and the only difference was swapping headers, you can only compare headers with dynos by looking at the percentage increase compared to a baseline.

for example you see OF header show something like 200whp but baseline was 176whp, or you see ace dynos show 195whp but baseline was 160whp. which one increased the most? and what one had the highest percentage increase?

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

Can you post those dynos? i would love to see them.

Here you go:




I guess it needs a more refined tune to see the best result.