Which Long Tube Headers...help

[Voodooo]

I guess you're the only person who 'gets it'. There seems to be a ton of delusional fanboys on this thread who don't. I really don't care which brand is better, I just care about proper comparisons and test procedures. So far there is only 1 Kooks data point and a bunch of ARH that show a greater power increase, even when analyzed properly. Pointing out the fact that all ARH's so far have made more than Kooks, and Voodoo's own test conditions were the most consistent thus-far (reason for wanting to see a proper comparison) makes me anti-ARH? :headbonk:

But you can't:

-Compare SAE to STD (especially with the SAE as a baseline)
-Compare a stock tune base line vs. optimized tune for the header (there's a 18hp ARH increase from a optimized JLT intake tune and tuned ARH which is a proper A-B).
-Compare different octanes of fuel.

Voodoos car made 30hp from the headers when comparing an SAE baseline to STD post-header. That's going to be a ~20hp increase when using the same correction factors. Changing octane and optimizing the tune will net 10-20hp i'd guess, and it would be far from correct to claim a 40-50hp increase "From the headers alone" based on an SAE baseline on 93 to a STD post-header 100 octane run tuned for that fuel. But at this rate, I wouldn't be surprised if he makes those claims in the future.

Have ARH's made 30hp? YES. 2 of them. Voodoo probably didn't. All facts.

There's really not much more to say and I think i'm done with this thread.

And since you pointed out the facts of std and sae on my pulls I know 100% of what you said. And as I told you a million times I didn't realize it until you pointed it out but you keep going on and on and on. I can't give you what I do not have. When I asked nick to provide a dyno sheet with overlay which he did you still keep beating a dead horse. We all know the difference between sae and std. But you also never mention the inaccurate pulls on the kooks system with a 16 degree advantage. If you want accurate testing then convert my dyno pulls which have the closest temps, humidity, same fuel, same dyno, same car, same tune, same mufflers. But converting them on a calculator isn't accurate either. You can not simply take a dyno pull number and use .96 and say this is how much power you now have, theirs more to it then that. When I asked Nick to provide his dyno sheet that's also on the same car, same dyno, same fuel, ARH long tubes, cats, stock mufflers with a gain of 29hp and you still dispute it. On kooks car they used their long tubes with the green cats and stock mufflers and made 15 hp. Same fuel? No idea. But it had the advantage of being 16 degrees cooler in ambient temps. And from seeing other dyno test on these cars the dyno pulls are effective by ambient temps. So how much power did the kooks car gain by the 16 degree temps? you never mention this. All you keep saying is my pulls are std sae. Well all know that now. If all you care about is how much the cars make with a stock tune on long tubes then by your own inaccurate math that you keep throwing around saying I made 20hp additional that's still 5 more then kooks and that answers the original post question. ARH. But in reality who is going to run a stock tune on these cars with long tubes no matter what headers they choose. I at this point do not care what adds what in power. As long as my goal is met, then I'm happy. If I can reach 540-550 sae rwhp then that's good for me. I think that with the long tubes and exhaust with a good tune with E85 or race fuel that can be achieved.

Sponsored

 

[Stuntman]

"Correction Factors" take temperature & humidity and "correct" for the differences. You see the true impact by looking at the "Uncorrected" numbers -which you can get in winpep as well.

I've said all along your numbers are more favorable than Kooks, even though both SAE & STD "correct" for these differences.

:doh:

 

[Voodooo]

Good God I know this. Look I contacted john at Watson and trying to get the results in sae for you.

 

[Myshelby3425]

I guess you're the only person who 'gets it'. There seems to be a ton of delusional fanboys on this thread who don't. I really don't care which brand is better, I just care about proper comparisons and test procedures. So far there is only 1 Kooks data point and a bunch of ARH that show a greater power increase, even when analyzed properly. Pointing out the fact that all ARH's so far have made more than Kooks, and Voodoo's own test conditions were the most consistent thus-far (reason for wanting to see a proper comparison) makes me anti-ARH? :headbonk:

But you can't:

-Compare SAE to STD (especially with the SAE as a baseline)
-Compare a stock tune base line vs. optimized tune for the header (there's a 18hp ARH increase from a optimized JLT intake tune and tuned ARH which is a proper A-B).
-Compare different octanes of fuel.

Voodoos car made 30hp from the headers when comparing an SAE baseline to STD post-header. That's going to be a ~20hp increase when using the same correction factors. Changing octane and optimizing the tune will net 10-20hp i'd guess, and it would be far from correct to claim a 40-50hp increase "From the headers alone" based on an SAE baseline on 93 to a STD post-header 100 octane run tuned for that fuel. But at this rate, I wouldn't be surprised if he makes those claims in the future.

Have ARH's made 30hp? YES. 2 of them. Voodoo probably didn't. All facts.

There's really not much more to say and I think i'm done with this thread.

You keep bringing up the SAE vs STD which everyone understood on your first post. Move along bc no one is arguing that.

So far we all know that the ARH has made more power than the kooks without looking as Voodoos results. Once more kooks headers are installed we can have better comparisons. Also, not all tuners are equal and everyone's conditions are usually different.

 

[stanglife]

The "first" ARH comparison between stock and ARH installed had a huge swing in humidity, as well. If you look close enough, it's easy to find dozens of variables. I still maintain that they are both quality headers and the difference will be very little.

At this point, fit would be more of an interest to me than the immeasurable amount of peak HP difference.

 

[Voodooo]

The "first" ARH comparison between stock and ARH installed had a huge swing in humidity, as well. If you look close enough, it's easy to find dozens of variables. I still maintain that they are both quality headers and the difference will be very little.

At this point, fit would be more of an interest to me than the immeasurable amount of peak HP difference.

Where do you see a "huge" swing?
1st pull Stock exhaust was 73.71F / 29.42 in hg / 9%
1st pull ARH exhaust was 75.44F / 29.45 in hg / 9%

I don't see a huge swing.
I agree on the quality of both.

 

[Stuntman]

You keep bringing up the SAE vs STD which everyone understood on your first post. Move along bc no one is arguing that.

Did you read this thread?

Post #23:

I just realized out that Voodoo compared an SAE baseline to an STD header & tune pull, which is VERY inaccurate:

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1209701&postcount=206

So the ARH did NOT make 30whp over their stock baseline. FWIW, the Kooks pull would be ~13whp higher if looking at their pull using the STD correction factor (494whp STD).

Post #35:

Well what's more impressive is the ARH made more then kooks either way. Kooks are a 1.75-1.875 step header, ARH are straight 1.875.
You keep saying my gains are 20hp. Which I believe it's 30hp and with a richer tune would result more and it will. But I don't ever see you stating kooks 16 degree cooler temps having anything to do with their 15hp gain. These motors are temp sensitive. Let's see your gt350 dyno results with 15 degree cooler temps.

:doh:

Ill take it a step further. Consider this: deleting the cats is worth 10whp untuned:

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42675

A proper comparison to determine the gains of the HEADERS alone would be:

-Stock car/stock tune/stock cats VS headers/stock tune/stock cats

-Stock tune/off-road cat delete VS stock tune/catless headers

-Tuned car (stock cats/HFC/no cats) VS Tuned car w.headers (and corresponding stock cats/HFC/no cats)

So far we've only seen stock cars/cats vs headers & HFC or no cats from both Kooks & ARH, so we really don't even know what the true gains of the headers are & what is from the cat delete or HFC are.

Comparing a stock car to one tuned with headers is not a fair assessment of the increase of the headers alone. It's even more erroneous to compare a stock car/tune on 93oct to a cat-less header with an intake and tune optimized for 100oct and claim that increase was "from the headers alone".

Yes Kooks' weather was advantageous to Voodoo's consistent weather and despite the correction factors there may be a small inherent/false increase but it's a bit hard to quantify. There is a lot of certainty of the SAE to STD differences at that power level, especially with consistent weather conditions.

..I probably just opened up a can of worms..:frusty:

 

[Myshelby3425]

Did you read this thread?

Post #23:



Post #35:


:doh:

Ill take it a step further. Consider this: deleting the cats is worth 10whp untuned:

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42675

A proper comparison to determine the gains of the HEADERS alone would be:

-Stock car/stock tune/stock cats VS headers/stock tune/stock cats

-Stock tune/off-road cat delete VS stock tune/catless headers

-Tuned car (stock cats/HFC/no cats) VS Tuned car w.headers (and corresponding stock cats/HFC/no cats)

So far we've only seen stock cars/cats vs headers & HFC or no cats from both Kooks & ARH, so we really don't even know what the true gains of the headers are & what is from the cat delete or HFC are.

Comparing a stock car to one tuned with headers is not a fair assessment of the increase of the headers alone. It's even more erroneous to compare a stock car/tune on 93oct to a cat-less header with an intake and tune optimized for 100oct and claim that increase was "from the headers alone".

Yes Kooks' weather was advantageous to Voodoo's consistent weather and despite the correction factors there may be a small inherent/false increase but it's a bit hard to quantify. There is a lot of certainty of the SAE to STD differences at that power level, especially with consistent weather conditions.

..I probably just opened up a can of worms..:frusty:

Yes I read.. You pointed that out already like 12 times.

Everyone has been having different results with the catless midpipes. Member on here or SVT tuned by rev auto made 0-5whp tuned when the catless midpipe was added.

 

[nastang87xx]

Zoomies.

 

[Stuntman]

Yes I read.. You pointed that out already like 12 times.

Everyone has been having different results with the catless midpipes. Member on here or SVT tuned by rev auto made 0-5whp tuned when the catless midpipe was added.

Then let it go...

Did he dyno post pipe/pre tune as well? Bad tune?

 

[Voodooo]

Ok

Did you read this thread?

Post #23:



Post #35:


:doh:

Ill take it a step further. Consider this: deleting the cats is worth 10whp untuned:

Ok so now your saying I made 10rwhp with the headers and 10rwhp Without cats. But others like Nick have made 29 rwhp with cats on the stock tune. Wow now the cats added hp in Nicks case.

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42675

A proper comparison to determine the gains of the HEADERS alone would be:

-Stock car/stock tune/stock cats VS headers/stock tune/stock cats

-Stock tune/off-road cat delete VS stock tune/catless headers

You can not run factory cats on long tubes :headbonk:

-Tuned car (stock cats/HFC/no cats) VS Tuned car w.headers (and corresponding stock cats/HFC/no cats)

We need a engine dyno to test header dyno pulls I agree. But do you have a voodoo laying around?

So far we've only seen stock cars/cats vs headers & HFC or no cats from both Kooks & ARH, so we really don't even know what the true gains of the headers are & what is from the cat delete or HFC are.

Comparing a stock car to one tuned with headers is not a fair assessment of the increase of the headers alone. It's even more erroneous to compare a stock car/tune on 93oct to a cat-less header with an intake and tune optimized for 100oct and claim that increase was "from the headers alone".

Ok listen. I have made dyno pulls on the ARH long tubes with off road pipes, stock tune, stock CAI, stock mufflers. On a stock ford tune with the same tank of 93 on every single dyno pull. On my car even the stock tune was lean with the ARH dyno pulls. Yes we pulled it to 8000 rpm but it was still lean.

After those dyno pulls we "tried 3 times" to load the Lund tune and after getting it to finally load that lund tune was also lean and we later found out that the vendor informed John Lund that it was a tune for stock exhaust. John Lund himself contacted me after seeing my data logs and said the vendor has made a very mistaken order and the vendor doesn't know the difference between the tune of a 5.0 and 5.2 flat plane tune. he apologized for it. I have since done more data logging and he has added more fuel and more timing. The ass dyno shows this and it pulls stronger then ever.

Yes Kooks' weather was advantageous to Voodoo's consistent weather and despite the correction factors there may be a small inherent/false increase but it's a bit hard to quantify. There is a lot of certainty of the SAE to STD differences at that power level, especially with consistent weather conditions.

..I probably just opened up a can of worms..:frusty:

I don't know what I did wrong in responding but you can read it all here.

 

[Stuntman]

Is it safe to assume you measured AFRs with a tail-pipe sniffer? Those tend to read ~3/4 of a percent leaner than reality.

Ideally AFRs should be measured in an O2 bung close to the collector for proper measurement and tuning. But most shops and tuners obviously don't do this.

 

[Voodooo]

Is it safe to assume you measured AFRs with a tail-pipe sniffer? Those tend to read ~3/4 of a percent leaner than reality.

Ideally AFRs should be measured in an O2 bung close to the collector for proper measurement and tuning. But most shops and tuners obviously don't do this.

Even data logging shown the lean tune. I've done literally 9 data logs for Lund.

 

[Stuntman]

....logging off the tailpipe is still off of an artificially lean tailpipe.

 

[Voodooo]

....logging off the tailpipe is still off of an artificially lean tailpipe.

I'm aware of this. I'm not sure you comprehend sometimes. We data logged while on the dyno and the o2 stated its lean. As did off dyno data logging. Lund does dyno tuning over the phone with adjustments being made via email. But none of that was done while I was on watsons dyno for time reason.

Sponsored