• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

New Header Available From KL Racing (2009-2022 bump)

At least the ridges are going the right way, Ken. Anyway, there's practically no flow along the wall of a pipe. The welds along the inside of a welded header are probably as detrimental as those, unless there's a substantial gap inside these and even then I wouldn't think it's much of a problem.

My issue is that the bell ends suggest that this is thinwall tubing, and if it were stainless I'd think it wouldn't get painted black like it is. I wouldn't trust mild steel thinwall tubing to hold up much of a turbo, myself. I do like overbuilt stuff, though...
 
My issue is that the bell ends suggest that this is thinwall tubing, and if it were stainless I'd think it wouldn't get painted black like it is. I wouldn't trust mild steel thinwall tubing to hold up much of a turbo, myself. I do like overbuilt stuff, though...

V8 guys do it ALL of the time with big heavy ass turbos with almost no issues. Only Time I have heard of it being an issue is with Mild steel stuff and EGT's getting to hight
 
At least the ridges are going the right way, Ken. Anyway, there's practically no flow along the wall of a pipe.

Maybe - but what you are saying is only true when flow is laminar - which will probably occur because the pipe cross section/velocity is consistent. But, the less effort you put into keeping the cross section consistent, the less this becomes true IMO, as flow becomes less laminar. Maybe it is not to a large degree, but IMO a major priority is to keep things smooth and consistent.


The welds along the inside of a welded header are probably as detrimental as those, unless there's a substantial gap inside these and even then I wouldn't think it's much of a problem.

Nah dude, maybe with MIG- I'll post a pic when I get home- when I weld thinwall with 100% penetration you can barely even feel the inside of the weld- I shoot for around 0.020" max weld reinforcement on the inside.

My issue is that the bell ends suggest that this is thinwall tubing, and if it were stainless I'd think it wouldn't get painted black like it is. I wouldn't trust mild steel thinwall tubing to hold up much of a turbo, myself. I do like overbuilt stuff, though...

Yeah- given that they're mandrel bent sections and not cast elbows, thinwall is probably a safe assumption. Mandrel bent tube in heavier gauges is pretty uncommon.

Whether or not a 16ga mild header will be durable will depend on a lot of factors I think, bracing being a major one. I would never expect a thinwall header to actually have to support the weight of a turbo, regardless of the material.
 
I doubt it matters one way or another, I don't forsee anyone picking one up any time soon :Shrug:
 
I'm sure someone will get one, bolt on a turbo, brace the hell out of it, weld in some gussets, figure out a drain line that works, deal with the lower rad hose BS and the brake pipe BS, add a divider for the collector, remote mount the oil filter, and swear that it was the best deal on the internet.

The prototype gets props for being equal length, pulse paired, divided outlet, divided wastegate, constant diameter, etc. The routing isn't what I'd do, but honestly I don't know what I'd do so what he's got is better what I've built. The execution of the production header is nowhere near the standard of the prototype, though the price DOES reflect it.
 
The bell piping means you can be extremely lazy in terms of joint fit, as there is no accuracy required for fitup - the pipe can be +/- 0.25" in length and there is no gap since it is slipped inside the other pipe- the end of the pipe can end up anywhere inside the slip joint.

It means every runner has a significant ridge internally at every weld point. Yay turbulence!:roll:

I can't see how anyone would think that's a good way to build a header heck at least stock cast manifolds are smooth inside.


while im always on the side of smooth is better , ive seen (on the dyno ) offsets in tubing upto 2mm that have no effect on power , the boundary layer is always present , you trip it up with a step(which is the offset) which reintroduces it again further down the pipe .

dont forget tho that while there is a step teh cross sectional area hasnt changed if that is the same internal diameter .
 
I doubt that there is laminar flow anywhere in any tube. A flow that is perfectly straight will rotate with turbulence the first time it hits a bend. A turbulent gas will flow more than a straight flow.

I believe that the best pressurized manifolds have the shortest runs.

Your beliefs might be different, but these are my opinions.
 
I was reading some of Jens Gustavsson's header musings on S?var and he said that after testing long and short headers, he couldn't find anything advantageous about going to shorter runners. He saw more gains by going to longer tuned length primaries.
 
Kinda off OT, but did anyone notice the drop in replacement IC's they have? Look pretty sweet, but $275 is a lil steep, i guess.



**** SON!!!!! They are really sweet! $275 is cheap, for a bolt in, high flow, intercooler that you can re-use your stock i/c plumbing and have it installed and rocking in like 30 min!
 
Ya, that's what I was thinkin, but most people would rather buy an Ebay IC and pipe kit and frankenstien it together, LOL. Or they could just be lame (read OCD) like me and be happy using the stocker because it fits well.
 
The thing is, you really need a proper merge collector to have a proper header, and that will require some runner length to do properly.

Start with a good collector and work backwards. The rest will be a matter of packaging as much as anything unless you are will to modify coachwork and/or motor mounts etc to acheive a certain length.


I would take a header with short runners, assuming they were long enough to allow for a good merge, over a header with long runners that had a POS merge collector any day.

I don't care what the computer program says or what you have "pulse tuned" it to- if you aren't directing the pulses into the turbine in an efficient manner, the manifold sucks.

Not that the manifold in the OP has a bad merge, I'm just saying there are other things that take priority IMO.
 
The thing is, you really need a proper merge collector to have a proper header, and that will require some runner length to do properly.

Start with a good collector and work backwards. The rest will be a matter of packaging as much as anything unless you are will to modify coachwork and/or motor mounts etc to acheive a certain length.


I would take a header with short runners, assuming they were long enough to allow for a good merge, over a header with long runners that had a POS merge collector any day.

I don't care what the computer program says or what you have "pulse tuned" it to- if you aren't directing the pulses into the turbine in an efficient manner, the manifold sucks.

Not that the manifold in the OP has a bad merge, I'm just saying there are other things that take priority IMO.

Playing devil's advocate here, but I don't think I've seen you build a header with anything more than a 3" collector, which I don't know if I would classify as a 'good merge'.
 
Playing devil's advocate here, but I don't think I've seen you build a header with anything more than a 3" collector, which I don't know if I would classify as a 'good merge'.


Since when are 15 degree merge collectors "not what you would classify as good"? :wtf: :doh:

The vast majority of hondas making 600hp+ on 2000cc's with sub 1 ebrs must be doing it wrong, like the 15 degree collector on that 700hp S2000 with the stock block. :-P

I'd like to see a maniflld that fits in a stock engine bay with a merge better than 15 degrees. I didn't see any one that savar thread. It's diminishing returns past that IMO, and 99% of people don't want a hole in their hood, Karl.
 
Back
Top