Ace 350 vs JDL 4-2-1

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

Yeah I tend to thing that's one of the biggest benefits of the ACE headers, they offer a well vetted starter tune along with optimization once you put it on the car. Smart idea - I think other header manufacturers would benefit by following this model and partnering with a tuner.

Also I think there's a good mix of 4-2-1 EL headers (mine is 4-1 EL) for the 86 platform, I always thought the EL OTS maps from openflash were 4-2-1 optimized, but I don't really know - where do you get your info from regarding that? if it's 4-1 optimized then maybe that makes sense why their stage 2 EL tune works so well with the P&L unit I have.

The tunes can either be optimized for 4-2-1 or 4-1 not both, the open flash header they used to create the original tunes, and later revised to be more compatible with both EL and UEL headers but still made around a 4-1 header. At first they had one for EL and UEL but later changed to a more universal one but slightly more optimized for UEL. But the design of the ace header using the OP to increase runner length makes it way too different to use with those tunes.

also anecdotally when i had them custom tune my ace header it took 7 revisions to dial in, and it made a drastic night and day difference in not only overall power, top end pull, torque dip etc..., but also a huge improvement in driveability. I think it would have taken less revisions and i would have noticed much less improvement if the OTS tune was designed around a 4-2-1 design.

[JBezugs]

Some in this thread have already made good points which I won't repeat. At the end of the day, the only way to truly compare the two headers on a level playing field would be same car, same dyno, same conditions.

From my own experience being in Canada (where the weaker Canadian dollar, shipping fees and taxes/duties are the enemy), the JDL 4-2-1 was much more cost effective for the gains I was after compared to getting an Ace A350 here.

Compared to the ACE A350 (non-coated) and a Delicious Tuning remote ECUTek tune, it cost me over $1000 less to get the JDL 4-2-1 (w/ full cerakoting) and a custom dyno tune with OnPoint Dyno.



Sasha said that it’s one of the highest HP NA BRZ’s he’s ever had. Car pulls strong right to redline and the torque dip is all but gone. These numbers are a 5th gear pull, with the stock intake, stock overpipe and stock front pipe still in place.

For reference, this dyno is a bit of a heartbreaker... stock BRZ’s typically make anywhere from 140 to 155hp on this dyno.

For more reference (and to contradict a bit on what I said above, but reference is reference), a 2014 FRS with a catless JDL UEL header made 166whp on the same dyno.

Do I think that the Ace A350 could have provided even bigger gains? A little bit more most likely, but I don't know for sure at this point, at least without seeing the results back to back on the same dyno. Also, for the extra cost, would it have been worth it? I personally don't think so based on my experience. However, YMMV.

[Dr. BRZ]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

The tunes can either be optimized for 4-2-1 or 4-1 not both, the open flash header they used to create the original tunes, and later revised to be more compatible with both EL and UEL headers but still made around a 4-1 header. At first they had one for EL and UEL but later changed to a more universal one but slightly more optimized for UEL. But the design of the ace header using the OP to increase runner length makes it way too different to use with those tunes.

also anecdotally when i had them custom tune my ace header it took 7 revisions to dial in, and it made a drastic night and day difference in not only overall power, top end pull, torque dip etc..., but also a huge improvement in driveability. I think it would have taken less revisions and i would have noticed much less improvement if the OTS tune was designed around a 4-2-1 design.

This is exactly why I kept the 2.76 oft tunes and not the v4.....I want a specific header tune not a universal

[Hawk77FT]

Ace header + OFT tune here. Recorded the highest HP on 98 and E85 petrol in Australia. Like someone mentioned here, OFT can do 90% of what the Ecutek tune can, it is all in finding the right source. Wayno and Steve to name couple have developed some really good tunes for different types of headers and intakes. it also come down to price as well.

[86MLR]

I made 198 from a full decat OEM header and 2.5" over pipe back, only other mods were intake tube and snorkle mod.

All my power came from Ecutek and the abilities and knowledge of Paul Fisher from Pulse Racing here in Sydney, Australia.

There are no magic parts really needed to get up to around 200.

Disclaimer: although my peak is quite good, and it has had gains all through the rev range a different header may give me more down low and keep or improve my gains at the higher RPM.

Is the outlay worth it though?

For me, when I'm up it the car never gets lower than 4.5k rpm so for me it isn't, and when I'm just plodding along in traffic, it doesn't matter how much torque I'm making at 3.5k rpm.

The other benifit is the OEM heat sheilding which negates alot of long term issues.

The 17+ 4-2-1 slightly UEL OEM header is actually quite efficient for what it is.

If any Sydney based people want to hit WSID for a laugh one Wendsday night I'm all for it.

IMO the 1/4 is the only place to test for power gains, dynos are brilliant tuning tools but inherently inaccurate for gauging "real" power through the rev range.

Winner of the night (NA) gets free donuts, I'll buy.

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

I made 198 from a full decat OEM header and 2.5" over pipe back, only other mods were intake tube and snorkle mod.

All my power came from Ecutek and the abilities and knowledge of Paul Fisher from Pulse Racing here in Sydney, Australia.

There are no magic parts really needed to get up to around 200.

Disclaimer: although my peak is quite good, and it has had gains all through the rev range a different header may give me more down low and keep or improve my gains at the higher RPM.

Is the outlay worth it though?

For me, when I'm up it the car never gets lower than 4.5k rpm so for me it isn't, and when I'm just plodding along in traffic, it doesn't matter how much torque I'm making at 3.5k rpm.

The other benifit is the OEM heat sheilding which negates alot of long term issues.

The 17+ 4-2-1 slightly UEL OEM header is actually quite efficient for what it is.

If any Sydney based people want to hit WSID for a laugh one Wendsday night I'm all for it.

IMO the 1/4 is the only place to test for power gains, dynos are brilliant tuning tools but inherently inaccurate for gauging "real" power through the rev range.

Winner of the night (NA) gets free donuts, I'll buy.

Random dyno numbers are arbitrary without knowing baselines, conditions etc. also dynos are easy to manipulate to show higher numbers even selecting a lower gear like if he did it in 4th when the MT 1-1 is 5th would show higher numbers.
But you are right at the end of the day a HP number is irrelevant. What matters is what times you put down from a roll or a set speed to speed. Like 40-80 or 60-100 or any two points where traction isn’t a factor.

[PulsarBeeerz]

Originally Posted by Dr. BRZ

This is exactly why I kept the 2.76 oft tunes and not the v4.....I want a specific header tune not a universal

Have you tried any Wayno tunes? His E85 EL tune was night and day to the previous 2.76 and v4 OTS tunes.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

The tunes can either be optimized for 4-2-1 or 4-1 not both, the open flash header they used to create the original tunes, and later revised to be more compatible with both EL and UEL headers but still made around a 4-1 header. At first they had one for EL and UEL but later changed to a more universal one but slightly more optimized for UEL. But the design of the ace header using the OP to increase runner length makes it way too different to use with those tunes.

also anecdotally when i had them custom tune my ace header it took 7 revisions to dial in, and it made a drastic night and day difference in not only overall power, top end pull, torque dip etc..., but also a huge improvement in driveability. I think it would have taken less revisions and i would have noticed much less improvement if the OTS tune was designed around a 4-2-1 design.

Yeah I get that timing and AVCS is different btw 4-2-1 and 4-1 merge configurations (as well as primary/secondary lengths etc), I was just wondering about the source of your info. Did you work with Shiv on this stuff or are you just guessing? I would have imagined his EL tune would have been based on an actual EL header and not guessing changes from his UEL tune. I think he also had stage 2 tunes before he came out with the Open Flash header, but I may be remembering wrong. I also like the earlier tunes, the throttle mapping is more aggressive and makes the car more fun to drive

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[86TOYO2k17]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

Yeah I get that timing and AVCS is different btw 4-2-1 and 4-1 merge configurations (as well as primary/secondary lengths etc), I was just wondering about the source of your info. Did you work with Shiv on this stuff or are you just guessing? I would have imagined his EL tune would have been based on an actual EL header and not guessing changes from his UEL tune. I think he also had stage 2 tunes before he came out with the Open Flash header, but I may be remembering wrong. I also like the earlier tunes, the throttle mapping is more aggressive and makes the car more fun to drive

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

All the information on developing these tunes is all over the forums, he used to be very active on here up to a little over a year ago. I believe he made the original EL tunes with a borla 4-1 catless EL header, which is why now he has essentially been able to combine the EL and UEL tunes into one V4 tune because they where both designed based on a 4-1 header which is similar enough in design rather then a 4-2-1 EL header and 4-1 UEL would be. The V2 EL specific tunes are no longer available unless you can find them from someone, but they are also old dated tunes now that most people usually use as a base starting point and tweak themselves. But again the tunes have to be made to work with numerous headers so it cant maximize one specific one.
This would also explain why your 4-1 header ran very well and made a big difference with the OTS tune and my 4-2-1 ace header felt like it ran worse and lost power with the OTS tune.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17

All the information on developing these tunes is all over the forums, he used to be very active on here up to a little over a year ago. I believe he made the original EL tunes with a borla 4-1 catless EL header, which is why now he has essentially been able to combine the EL and UEL tunes into one V4 tune because they where both designed based on a 4-1 header which is similar enough in design rather then a 4-2-1 EL header and 4-1 UEL would be. The V2 EL specific tunes are no longer available unless you can find them from someone, but they are also old dated tunes now that most people usually use as a base starting point and tweak themselves. But again the tunes have to be made to work with numerous headers so it cant maximize one specific one.
This would also explain why your 4-1 header ran very well and made a big difference with the OTS tune and my 4-2-1 ace header felt like it ran worse and lost power with the OTS tune.

Cool, that makes a lot of sense. I missed out on the Borla being the basis for his EL tunes, good to know. And you're right - out of the box the early tune I had worked with the 4-1 header I'm using pretty well, but I tweaked it afterwards. Before tweaking I tried the V4 tunes but didn't like them - felt soggy, not sure if it was an actual power difference or throttle mapping (I think maybe the latter but didn't check).

[Irace86.2.0]

This thread is comparing the 4-2-1 el headers from each manufacturer, right, the ones that are actually a 4-2-1 header with a 1-1 overpipe, right? Doesn’t ace make a 4-2 header with a short or long 2-1 overpipe? Aren’t those headers better? Maybe I haven’t seen pictures and prices of each of these headers.

[JBezugs]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

This thread is comparing the 4-2-1 el headers from each manufacturer, right, the ones that are actually a 4-2-1 header with a 1-1 overpipe, right? Doesn’t ace make a 4-2 header with a short or long 2-1 overpipe? Aren’t those headers better? Maybe I haven’t seen pictures and prices of each of these headers.

JDL’s 4-2-1 is a full 4-2-1 on the header portion, with a 1-1 overpipe (I’m using the stock overpipe in my case)



ACE A350 is a 4-2 on the header side with an included overpipe which brings it down from 2-1 at the front pipe location.

Given the different shapes of the two headers, JDL was able to keep the secondaries as long as possible with the packaging restriction they imposed on themselves. IIRC it’s longer than the A150 at the very least; I’ll update with pictures and confirmation shortly.

EDIT: ACE A150

[tomm.brz]

the 2 fotos of JDL 4 2 1 seem different to each other?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by JBezugs

.
Given the different shapes of the two headers, JDL was able to keep the secondaries as long as possible with the packaging restriction they imposed on themselves. IIRC it’s much longer than the A150 at the very least; I’ll update with pictures and confirmation shortly.

Ok that’s what I thought, so this really isn’t an apples to apples comparison, right? Those longer runners will impede the exhaust from working its way back to the cylinder at low rpms, right, which is why the ace would be better?