Nameless Performance Equal Length Stepped Header

[sw20kosh]

I am dis-inclined to believe that 2.1 stock mid pipe is choking anything as you would see losses in the high rpm when flow is maxed.

This dip is obviously ECU based. It is gone after a reflash then re-appears. It is not hardware based guys.

[fenton]

Originally Posted by johnbradley

Yes I was re-setting. You can tell if you do the run too soon before it has learned and adequate amount before you make the pull. I have had a chance to tune the car, then put it back on the dyno with months in between and it doesnt take any longer than what I have observed.

1 pull 30 seconds after intial restart - XXX
2nd pull 1.5 minutes after that, identical numbers with torque dip
3rd pull days apart and miles put on the car, identical to the 2nd pull

Could it be torque limits in the ecu that haven't been removed?

How much of the dip are we talking is gone on the first run? All of it or just what we are seeing in the graphs and then it gets worse?

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD

[Dimman]

How much does the oil pressure change after a dyno pull? Does it get hot enough to noticeably drop?

Is there a way you could test the pressure around/in the AVCS? Could the oil pressure drop enough that it affects the AVCS ability to hold the cams in the desired positions?



(shot in the dark...)

[OrbitalEllipses]

Blue > Red > Green, but I'm not about to sacrifice my ears and liveability to squeeze every last drop of power. The red line is sufficient, but blue is just so juicy.
@Calum it's been more or less discounted that port injectors cutting out is responsible for the torque dip.

[fenton]

I love the torque these things are making I have not seen anyone get close to this yet with bolt ons. Very cool stuff. A little worried that the 2.5 system two is a little longer than the 3 inch one and it actually depots lower than the stock lowest torque level (for a second only I know)

Can't wait for more information.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD

[dabocx]

The torque dip is still the biggest mystery on this car, seems like boost is the only surefire way of getting rid of it.

Still the dynos still pretty good and the midrange is awesome. Really curious to see what cams and the intake manifold do to the dip.

[Calum]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

Blue > Red > Green, but I'm not about to sacrifice my ears and liveability to squeeze every last drop of power. The red line is sufficient, but blue is just so juicy.
@Calum it's been more or less discounted that port injectors cutting out is responsible for the torque dip.

I'm just trying to go through things that could change to cause this. The cams should have feedback so the ECU knows where they are, not just where they should be, and its been said that they are logging correctly. The air fuel would have been watched like a hawk. They also said there was only about a degree of ignition timing difference between the runs which shouldn't make anywhere near this much difference. So to my mind that leaves either the throttle plate closing and not being noticed or combustion efficiency.

Sent from mission control

[Calum]

Originally Posted by sierra

The direct injection runs all the time but the port injection cuts out from about 3,000rpm to 5,000rpm

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...84&postcount=1

Could it be that with the high torque and fuel demand, the direct injection alone at that rpm range, is close to it's limits and the ECU is bringing it back to safer levels?

I'm not saying my suggestion is the right suggestion, but it is plausible.

1) ECUTEC allows the port and DI injection schedules to be changed. There may have been some hysteresis in the change over, caused by a drop or increase in fuel pressure as the DI boost pump changes load states, that wasn't accounted for.

2) IIRC they said they hadn't even dug into every map so one of the other maps may have been responsible for changing one of the schedules. It doesn't seem too far fetched to think that toyota/subaru came up with some way to approximate combustion chamber temperatures and vary the injection schedules in an effort to prevent coking as has been seen in other DI engines.

That's a crap ton of what if and assumptions but it was still a valid question. Please stop shooting down everything I say.

[sierra]

Originally Posted by Calum

I'm not saying my suggestion is the right suggestion, but it is plausible.

1) ECUTEC allows the port and DI injection schedules to be changed. There may have been some hysteresis in the change over, caused by a drop or increase in fuel pressure as the DI boost pump changes load states, that wasn't accounted for.

2) IIRC they said they hadn't even dug into every map so one of the other maps may have been responsible for changing one of the schedules. It doesn't seem too far fetched to think that toyota/subaru came up with some way to approximate combustion chamber temperatures and vary the injection schedules in an effort to prevent coking as has been seen in other DI engines.

That's a crap ton of what if and assumptions but it was still a valid question. Please stop shooting down everything I say.

Makes a lot of sense.
I think you may have cracked it!

[mad_sb]

Originally Posted by Calum

I'm not saying my suggestion is the right suggestion, but it is plausible.

1) ECUTEC allows the port and DI injection schedules to be changed. There may have been some hysteresis in the change over, caused by a drop or increase in fuel pressure as the DI boost pump changes load states, that wasn't accounted for.

2) IIRC they said they hadn't even dug into every map so one of the other maps may have been responsible for changing one of the schedules. It doesn't seem too far fetched to think that toyota/subaru came up with some way to approximate combustion chamber temperatures and vary the injection schedules in an effort to prevent coking as has been seen in other DI engines.

That's a crap ton of what if and assumptions but it was still a valid question. Please stop shooting down everything I say.

You can log the fuel flow for each system (DI and Port) as well as the DI injection timing. If this were happening he would be able to see it in the logs. The only variables that need to be looked at in the first round of compairing the back to back runs are:
DI Injection Timing
Final Ignition Timing
Final Cam Timing
AFR
Injection quantity (from each system)
Throttle plate angle

If none of those change between runs, the ecu is not doing anything to "limit" the power. Even if you do see some variation it could be traced back to fluid temps and compensation maps. If on the other hand one or more of those variables changes consistently then you at least know what maps to look at.

I believe JB stated that after the second pull the subsequent pulls even many months apart will be the same as the second, so the most plausible thing to me is an extended check mode after the flash. During this extended check mode it may be using one set of maps then once the check completes it flips over to the other set of maps until it enter check mode again at the next reflash. It certainly could be soem DI related maps that are the culprit.

I know for a fact there are at least 3 sets of cam maps:
* Safe mode (smaller axis on the maps, i assume this is a fault mode map but it may be used right after the flash during the self check)
* Normal mode - This is used the majority of the time
* Unknown mode - This is probably a cold map

I'm sure @johnbradley would have checked all the maps he has visibility of and it is common practice to set the hot and cold maps the same at least during tuning. So, it is possible there are some undiscovered maps at play here. But again, you should be able to spot which system is responsible for the changes based on the logged data.

If a limiter were hit the ecu would throw a code so I don't believe that to be the case here.

[Chewie4299]

So I just finished reading this entire thread. I've been working on it during my off time over the last several days (busiest week of the year for me and I was out of town staying in a hotel for work).

I'm blown away by the approach this company is taking to R&D and their involvement in the community.

I've been active on these forums since about May of last year and witnessed this thread become the massive Threadnaught that it is but never bothered to read because I was not entirely pleased with the sounds I heard in videos of the Nameless Axleback and instead LOVED the Perrin Resonated. At the same time I was not in the market for headers.

Well now that my car's been cooped up in the garage for almost the whole winter I'm REALLY getting the mod bug more than ever and really interested in Nameless after really giving this thread a read.


Anyway, to my point. I want an exhaust that will give me more power and a mean yet subtle grown-up sound with no rasp or drone. I'd also like to retain ONE high flow cat NOT in the headers.

I'm really all about function over form in most cases but when it comes to the sound of my exhaust it is the priority.

I've been in love with the Perrin resonated catback and am about to pull the trigger (in the next 24 hours) on one. I love the approach taken by BOTH Perrin and Nameless so I don't feel like I'm supporting some cheap overseas company in this but I absolutely want to pair it with Nameless parts from the exhaust ports to the Perrin mid-pipe.

So my question is, to anyone familiar with both exhaust systems, am I likely to see similar numbers in the end? I'm willing to accept slightly less power THOUGH I would be a little disappointed of the Perrin parts produced lesser figures than pairing these headers (the final production version of course) with the Nameless axleback.

@Jason@Nameless Could you perhaps chime in with your thoughts on how a different design catback from the ones you've tested may effect the end result with the headers you are working on?

Also, just to be clear, at this point the only company I'd consider for headers would be Nameless after reading this and I'd just like to know how much regret I might feel later on by doing a mix n match rather than the whole system as tested.

[mad_sb]

You can log the actual cam position as well as the request cam position.

Originally Posted by Dimman

How much does the oil pressure change after a dyno pull? Does it get hot enough to noticeably drop?

Is there a way you could test the pressure around/in the AVCS? Could the oil pressure drop enough that it affects the AVCS ability to hold the cams in the desired positions?



(shot in the dark...)

[mad_sb]

Originally Posted by Chewie4299

... I want an exhaust that will give me more power and a mean yet subtle grown-up sound with no rasp or drone. I'd also like to retain ONE high flow cat NOT in the headers.....

You and me both I am planning on the nameless headers, nameless over/down pipe combo with high-flow cat and probably the hemholtz..... I'm still undecided on the catback.. I'm worried the perrin with be too loud with the headers and the invidia q300 will be too restrictive... and the ISIS is already louder than the resonated perrin but quieter than the non-resonated perrin

I'm gonna talk to jason next week about the catted over/down combo and the offset axleback to see what he has to say about the volume and if they have tested any other full catbacks with the front pipe.

[Chewie4299]

Originally Posted by mad_sb

You and me both I am planning on the nameless headers, nameless over/down pipe combo with high-flow cat and probably the hemholtz..... I'm still undecided on the catback.. I'm worried the perrin with be too loud with the headers and the invidia q300 will be too restrictive... and the ISIS is already louder than the resonated perrin but quieter than the non-resonated perrin

I'm gonna talk to jason next week about the catted over/down combo and the offset axleback to see what he has to say about the volume and if they have tested any other full catbacks with the front pipe.

The non resonated Perrin is out of the question for me but I have heard the resonated one as well and it is very tame hut mean. Love it.