Nameless Performance Equal Length Stepped Header

[johnbradley]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Cam timing is my first guess, as well.

But the high-low 'reverse' is strange. I would have expected the first run to be all high, if it were only cam timing, though.

Personally, I think the Hydra EMS may be a better tuning tool for parts development if it bypasses the stock ECU for engine control because it's looking like Ecutek's incomplete map definitions is interfering with hard parts R&D.

Ruled it out and been both ways with cam timing, more intake advance and more exhaust retard is what the doctor ordered.

Originally Posted by Calum

@johnbradley, or @Jason@Nameless

What fuel you were running for these tests?

92 octane, I presume not Arco.

Originally Posted by Calum

Honestly, I think the stock exhaust looks pretty decent. I'm amazed (and giddy) that they're getting this much gain from the exhaust system.

It's my guess that another half liter of intake plenum alone would allow power to keep climbing steadily to redline. With optimized runner length & cross section and plenum size I think they'll see gains like this on top of those from the exhaust.

Anyway I'm just waiting to see if nameless can match the results of the vortech SC without boost.

2.5x engine displacement at a minimum is the rule. I have done motorcycle stuff at 10x in turbo applications and while it doesnt make more power past 2.5 it picks up response.

Originally Posted by mad_sb

@johnbradley mentioned that he did not have the IAM set to 1 (ignition advance multiplier) so the area it picks up power is because it picks up ignition advance on the 2nd run.

So less timing in the dip would make more power if it was knocking which its not from the log. I will test with racegas to be 100% sure though and remove that from the table. With the IAM less than 1 it makes less power up top for sure though. Once its back to 0.92 or higher its 1% or so off peak.

[Simmons]

Originally Posted by johnbradley

It makes less in 5th than 4th because of the 20 second pull but yes it was 5th. Nameless and myself agreed that since it was believed it HAD to be 5th we wouldnt release data that wasnt. I did a 4th gear pull as well but it hasnt been posted.



I have literally been every direction with AFR and while it likes leaner it doesnt matter once its above a 12.3 or so.

Mine made more in 5th then 4th both times we tried 5th?

I made 191 whp on 93 octane in 5th gear.

Simmons

[johnbradley]

Originally Posted by Simmons

Mine made more in 5th then 4th both times we tried 5th?

I made 191 whp on 93 octane in 5th gear.

Simmons

On a dynojet it only wants the pull between 8-12 seconds, if it wasnt a DJ then yes it may have as some dynos (i.e. Dyno Dynamics, Mustang) do need to target a 1:1 ratio.

[johnbradley]

Blue is 4th gear, red is 5th. This is Pretune on the 3" exhaust and new header. 5th picks up minute amounts of torque but the length of pull leads to a detonation/timing pull condition near the end. Peak power is still the same but power past peak definitely isnt-

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by johnbradley

Blue is 4th gear, red is 5th. This is Pretune on the 3" exhaust and new header. 5th picks up minute amounts of torque but the length of pull leads to a detonation/timing pull condition near the end. Peak power is still the same but power past peak definitely isnt-

When I'm looking at the AFR, what exactly am I seeing? Is the straight dotted line the 'target' and the wavy solids the actual?

[fenton]

eagerly awaiting more information. Would be nice to see a street review of power and sound. I think(hope) the dyno session was distorted due to being in a closed shop.

Thanks,

[FR-S Matt]

Well, we can at least see the header itself is producing amazing power, but that dip is all ECU. P&L is running their tests on E85 so the dip isn't as apparent.

I'm not going to let it bother me too much. If the dip is there for MPG reasons, I'm all for it since my FR-S is my DD and when I want to floor it, I get the power I want. I'm sure many track drivers aren't going to be a fan of it at all. I guess we'll see what happens with more time and going through more maps with Ecutek. I'm learning a ton myself with all of this.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by FR-S Matt

Well, we can at least see the header itself is producing amazing power, but that dip is all ECU. P&L is running their tests on E85 so the dip isn't as apparent.

I'm not going to let it bother me too much. If the dip is there for MPG reasons, I'm all for it since my FR-S is my DD and when I want to floor it, I get the power I want. I'm sure many track drivers aren't going to be a fan of it at all. I guess we'll see what happens with more time and going through more maps with Ecutek. I'm learning a ton myself with all of this.

I disagree. The 'regression' around the dip between runs is ECU. The dip itself is an acoustics artifact.

[mad_sb]

Originally Posted by Dimman

I disagree. The 'regression' around the dip between runs is ECU. The dip itself is an acoustics artifact.

Yeah, the dip is a combination of compromises NOT just the tune. There are only so many variable you can adjust in the tune and by this point the combination of tuners have touched them all on various cars and no one has eliminated the dip.

This header design and tune combination has already turned a big chunk of what was the dip into a mound of torques... I stoked to see the finished product and how it performs.

[Shankenstein]

Originally Posted by Dimman

If you look at the 'regression', though it's not all loss. A tune that can keep the low-end increase from ~2600-3200 rpm from the second (red graph) run and the 3200-3900 increase (blue graph) from the first, it would be amazing.

But it is a somewhat symmetric gain/loss which seems a lot like wave effects. If, hypothetically, it were acoustics causing it, it would be from either changing the distance the wave travels (header/exhaust lengths which hasn't changed) or changing the wave speed (temperature changes local speed of sound, which could change).

The EGT could be extrapolated from O2, known fuel, and ignition on a table?

Edit: Also cams, though you mentioned they can log target and actual positions so this could be ruled out.
An actual EGT log could be handy.

@arghx7 is the guy that mentioned the catalyst protection strategy. Also a really smart guy and any insight he could offer would be appreciated.

I can't speak in specifics, but yes. Manufacturers R&D with fully instrumented prototypes and test mules. When they move to production, it's a cost cutting game to see which sensors are REALLY necessary.

What you end up with is a pile of parameters. Some are estimated and some are sensed. The sensed parameters are more reliable and useful... but sensors cost money are eventually require maintenance. Cuts get made on a Scrooge McDuck scale.

Estimated parameters are built from functions and tables based on piles and piles of test data which (presumably) replicates all possible conditions the engine will ever see. Obviously, you can't predict all engine conditions... but you can try (hence the convertible spy shots in South Africa).

Estimation of parameters can be too simple and insufficient, or it can "over fit" the data and lose connection with the reality (aka process physics). The challenge comes in creating an estimate that's accurate enough of the time, and having a framework with checks-and-balances (with diagnostic routines and adaptive variables).

Finally, they look at computational power, sample rates, and CAN bus bandwidth as a cost (albeit smaller). Things get slowed down, filtered, and a "good enough" estimation algorithm is chosen.

Take it to the racing world. Computing power is "free." Sensors are "free." Road conditions are "simpler" (off-throttle and WOT acceleration only). Weight, power output, fuel economy, response time, and smoothness are now the top priorities. That's how racing teams can crank out 50% more horsepower on stock hardware. That, plus shorter maintenance schedules and fuel economy and emissions and a pile of other burdens lifted.


One common example, most turbo engines are outfitted with MAP and MAF (with included IAT) sensors in multiple places along the intake path. Typically engine load is a function of MAF, which is a function of MAP and IAT (among other things). The equations for this are well established, but tuning the coefficients and table values to be accurate requires some number crunching. End result is quite effective. You don't see many production vehicles that run both MAF and MAP (though it would help in some situations).

For EGT, you bet your booty they installed a thermocouple. They just built a function that estimates it, and developed an event trigger that changes your timings and mixture to cool down the catalyst. There are variables the indicate operational mode, and you'll see it oscillate when the headers start to glow. Those were the good ole days of freebie catalysts.

YES it's considered, YES you can still manage to break stuff, YES you should expect your tuner to have considered this and a billion other things before you trust them to "re-engineer" your car.

[XPR Small Block]

this is a bit off topic but i have to put my thought in about the header.. what if you were to join the primary tube a few inches earlier and joining the secondaries where the primaries join now, but doin this it should change the torque curve in a good way right??? i kinda made a very very rough drawing over this picture[/IMG]

[Skywgn1]

I would like to know how the ECU handled the header without the tune. Are there graphs and actual figures?

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by XPR Small Block

this is a bit off topic but i have to put my thought in about the header.. what if you were to join the primary tube a few inches earlier and joining the secondaries where the primaries join now, but doin this it should change the torque curve in a good way right??? i kinda made a very very rough drawing over this picture[/IMG]

That's pretty much what my 95 Legacy does.

[XPR Small Block]

i just know with v8s a "Shorty" header creates more lowend torque vs. a long tube header which makes more topend i would assume the same thing would apply here