Close

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 86
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    420.1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    the gain was only once Superchargerd right?
    Yes, I believe that's correct. But, switching brands of true, catless LT headers (both very good sets) to go from 600 whp to 640 whp (for example) sounds high IMHO.

    However, if that's true and repeatable, it's pretty amazing - ideally, would like to see others test it out on some independent, third-party dynos to confirm the results. Unfortunately, we probably won't see that, since swapping headers is a relatively expensive undertaking, just to be satisfying people's curiosity. Instead, guys will probably quote the result from BAD430BENZ's car, as if it were gospel, every time this subject comes up.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    137
    Rep Points
    293.1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    1 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    After reading a webpage about the difference between the 4-1 and the tri-y headers I can understand there might be a difference amplified with the supercharger. However, I don't know jack about headers and as smart as the article was I don't think I can assume anything.

    My question is what is the difference in torque between the two types of headers. From the article it said you will lose some torque with the larger diameter tubes. I remember back in the day when I had my Mustang that I lost toque with the 3 inch straight pipes and stock intake.

    Can someone help explain the differences between the two types of headers and the reason there might be different power curves?

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,379
    Rep Points
    32,773.6
    Mentioned
    2134 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by CaliBenzC63 Click here to enlarge
    After reading a webpage about the difference between the 4-1 and the tri-y headers I can understand there might be a difference amplified with the supercharger. However, I don't know jack about headers and as smart as the article was I don't think I can assume anything.

    My question is what is the difference in torque between the two types of headers. From the article it said you will lose some torque with the larger diameter tubes. I remember back in the day when I had my Mustang that I lost toque with the 3 inch straight pipes and stock intake.

    Can someone help explain the differences between the two types of headers and the reason there might be different power curves?
    I liked this article:

    When it comes to long-tube Honda headers-or headers in general for that matter-there are basically two primary designs: the tri-Y and the 4-into-1. As the name implies, the tri-Y refers to a group of three Y sections created by joining the primary tube of runner one with runner four and runner two with runner three. Once the four runners converge into two tubes these two eventually merge to form the final Y section to complete the tri-Y design. In the case of many tri-Y headers, like our test piece from Airmass, the final Y section merges to form a short collector. By contrast, 4-into-1 headers feature no such Y sections, instead merging its four runners into one short common collector. We've also seen short versions of the 4-into-1 design but the Airmass version features long primary runners to help enhance low-speed and midrange power production. The commonly accepted theory is that the 4-into-1 header offers more top end power, while the tri-Y header is designed to bolster midrange torque. Though there is a great deal more to the performance of a header than simply its overall design (4-into-1 versus tri-Y), our testing indicates that the basic layout makes for a strong indicator as to what to expect performance-wise-no matter what brand you might be considering.


    Click here to enlargeTesting centered upon the two most common header configurations: the tri-Y and the 4-into-


    Before we get to our test engine and comparison results we should take a closer look at additional header design criteria that might affect power output. A number of variables can be changed within both designs, most of which affects performance. With either the tri-Y or the 4-into-1, it's possible to change both primary and collector tubing diameters and with the tri-Y, add to that the secondary tubing's diameter, which can also be altered. In addition to tubing diameters, it's also possible to change the primary pipes' length, prior to their merging, to form the secondaries (or collector in the 4-into-1). The same is true of the secondary pipes' length and even the collector for that matter. Speaking of collectors, it isn't just lengths and diameters that can be tailored but also shapes. Collectors can be tapered, converging or even diverging at the exit. The exit diameter can be altered as well. By now the many great possibilities when it comes to header design should be obvious. Throw in the near infinite number of engine combinations, even within just one engine family-like the B-series, for instance-and it isn't hard to imagine how difficult (if not impossible) it is to build a header that works best for all applications. It is for this reason that many companies offer both tri-Y and 4-into-1 designs since both have their strengths and weaknesses, although a custom header designed specifically for any given engine combination (and operating rpm) will always provide the best performance.

    • Click here to enlargeThough impressive, even in stock form, not to mention the envy of many domestic manufactur
    • Click here to enlargeOne of the tri-Y design's benefits is its two-piece construction, which makes installation
    • Click here to enlargeNo doubt two-piece headers are easier to maneuver around accessories, fans and frame rails



    Click here to enlargeThe mounting flange used to join the upper and lower portions of the tri-Y design features


    What better way to demonstrate each design's tuning effect than to compare them on the same engine? To properly test not just the tri-Y and 4-into-1 header designs but also the stock exhaust manifold, we assembled a B16A test mule. The 1.6 liter was chosen for its availability because the B16A is obviously much more prevalent than any B18C mill. A healthy engine was in order. Something both powerful yet representative of what might be run on a typical street car. The short-block's modifications are minimal and consist of stock replacement, forged Probe Racing pistons and matching forged connecting rods. The rod and piston upgrade allows us plenty of latitude in terms of engine speed potential and even gives us the ability to add nitrous at a later date. Though the stock short-block will withstand plenty of abuse, we wanted the security of the forged internals during seemingly endless hours of dyno testing.
    Click here to enlargeBoth the tri-Y and the 4-into-1 headers feature a dedicated mating flange for connecting t


    The beefed up block was topped off with a hand-ported and slightly milled cylinder head, along with a set of Crane Stage 1 camshafts. The Stage 1s offer 242 degrees of intake duration and 230 degrees of exhaust duration. The lift values check in at .457 of an inch on the intake and .425 of an inch on the exhaust. These represent a healthy jump over the stock B16A pieces. The Crane cams are optimized using a set of the company's adjustable camshaft sprockets. A Holley 68mm throttle body is used to supply airflow to the B16A intake manifold while the fuel system is composed of a modified AEM fuel rail housing a set of 30 lb/hr injectors. An Aeromotive adjustable fuel pressure regulator is relied on to control the fuel pressure on the engine dyno and a Hondata programmable ECU is employed to dial in the air/fuel and timing curves. The dyno exhaust consists of a 2.5-inch section of tubing connected to a 3-inch, 90-degree elbow and finally out to a 6-inch evacuation tube. For testing purposes, each header, including the OEM exhaust manifold, were run through this same exhaust system.
    Click here to enlargeLike any good header, Airmass pieces feature precision-welded seams and flanges.


    The first order of business was to run the B16A test engine equipped with the stock exhaust manifold. The factory B16A exhaust manifold consists of a cast-iron upper section bolted to a tubular lower section. Though cast iron, the stock exhaust manifold closely resembles a typical tri-Y header. Like many tri-Y headers, the stock manifold pairs runners one and four and runners two and three. The paired runners then merge into a single collector to form the final Y section. After tuning camshaft timing, the air/fuel mixture and ignition timing curves, the B16A produced 195 hp at 7,700 rpm and 139 lb-ft of torque at 7,200 rpm. Thanks in part to the torque-producing nature of the tri-Y design, the little B16A produced over 130 lb-ft of torque from 5,200 rpm (our VTEC engagement point) to 7,900 rpm. Our mildly modified 1.6L B16A was pumping out as much power as a 1.8L ITR engine, and with the stock exhaust no less. We could hardly wait to get the Airmass piece on because we just knew we would break the 200hp barrier.

    • Click here to enlargeThe 4-into-1 header features stepped primary tubing. The tubing exiting the port measures
    • Click here to enlargeIn addition to offering improved flow potential and true scavenging, the Airmass headers a
    • Click here to enlargeSome header applications include oxygen sensor relocating provisions. For those that don't



    Click here to enlargeWe needed a suitable test mule to properly conduct our testing. We built an otherwise stoc


    First up was Airmass' tri-Y design. The first thing we noticed about the Airmass header was its significantly lighter weight when compared to the stock manifold. Our handy dandy shipping scale told us that we just saved 15 pounds by replacing the bulky cast-iron piece with the lighter Airmass tri-Y header. After comparing the stock manifold to the tri-Y we began to wonder how much power the header had to offer, after all, the two designs were so similar. Our fears were soon put to rest after the first pull showed power readings exceeding 200 hp. Equipped with the tri-Y the B16A produced 201 hp at 7,700 rpm and 141 lb-ft of torque at 7,200 rpm. Note that both the stock manifold and the tri-Y header produced horsepower and torque peaks at equal engine speeds, 7,700 rpm and 7,200 rpm respectively. Though camshaft timing and intake design play a major part in shaping the overall power curve, identical peak power engine speeds demonstrate, at the very least, consistency in exhaust design. The similarity in design didn't stop Airmass' tri-Y from bettering Honda's setup though, especially once engine speeds reached 6,000 rpm. From 7,500 rpm to 8,100 rpm, the Airmass one-upped Honda by a good 5 to 7 hp. It's also worth noting that nowhere in the rev range did the tri-Y lose out to the stock exhaust manifold.
    Click here to enlargeOur fuel system consists of an AEM fuel rail, 30 lb/hr injectors and an Aeromotive adjusta


    After seeing the gains offered by the tri-Y, we were anxious to see how well the 4-into-1 header would perform. Performing a header swap is no big deal, even installing a single piece 4-into-1 header is not terribly difficult. A skilled enthusiast with only two thumbs should be able to knock it out in roughly an hour. On the engine dyno, a header swap takes all of five minutes or so, which is why we chose to conduct testing on such a dyno in the first place. The 4-into-1 header was well worth the time it took to install because it posted the highest peak power figures of the afternoon. Our 4-into-1-fitted B16A produced 204 hp at 7,700 rpm and 143 lb-ft of torque at 7,200 rpm. The 4-into-1 was good for 10 hp compared to the stock exhaust manifold but this additional peak power came at a price, a slight penalty near our 5,200rpm VTEC engagement point. The 4-into-1 design was down roughly 3 to 4 hp across a 600rpm spread (between 5,300-5,900 rpm) when compared to the stock exhaust manifold but, by 6,000 rpm, things quickly turned around and, by 7,000 rpm, the 4-into-1 pulled away with a vengeance.
    Frankly, the fact that the 4-into-1 got the best of the tri-Y up top didn't surprise us but how close the tri-Y followed in the 4-into-1's footsteps-even at the top end-and bettering it by 1 or 2 hp down low, as well as supplying more peak torque, did. This alone should be enough to knock the textbooks out of at least one or two bench racer's hands.

    • Click here to enlargeAll three headers were run through this dyno exhaust system. The system consists of a 2.5-
    • Click here to enlargeEquipped with the stock exhaust manifold, the B16A produced 194 hp and 139 lb-ft of torque
    • Click here to enlargeAfter installing the tri-Y, peak power jumped to 201 hp. Since the majority of power gains



    Click here to enlargeAs expected, the 4-into-1 header offered the highest peak power, measuring in at 204 hp. I


    Dyno Data: Stock vs. Tri-Y
    4-Into-1 (Horsepower)
    RPM STOCK TRI-Y 4:1
    4,000 84 84 85
    4,500 101 101 101
    5,000 115 116 114
    5,500 137 138 134
    6,000 150 151 150
    6,500 165 167 167
    7,000 181 184 185
    7,200 191 193 196
    7,500 194 199 202
    7,700 195 201 204
    8,000 191 196 198
    8,500 186 192 193



    Read more: http://www.hondatuningmagazine.com/t...#ixzz23YlrpdNk
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,379
    Rep Points
    32,773.6
    Mentioned
    2134 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by CaliBenzC63 Click here to enlarge
    After reading a webpage about the difference between the 4-1 and the tri-y headers I can understand there might be a difference amplified with the supercharger. However, I don't know jack about headers and as smart as the article was I don't think I can assume anything.

    My question is what is the difference in torque between the two types of headers. From the article it said you will lose some torque with the larger diameter tubes. I remember back in the day when I had my Mustang that I lost toque with the 3 inch straight pipes and stock intake.

    Can someone help explain the differences between the two types of headers and the reason there might be different power curves?
    Also, take a look at this: http://www.benzboost.com/showthread....hlight=headers
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    137
    Rep Points
    293.1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Thank you Sticky! This is the kind of stuff I like to read in the forums. Sure we can play MHP vs MBH all day long, but both have shown strong numbers and I actually think there is room for improvement based on what I've read. As tuners become more experienced and play around more, there certainly is the opportunity for one to outshine the other (maybe by 40 hp or 2-3 mph trap speeds), but in the end it is up to us to push our cars to the next level and share our knowledge with other car enthusiasts.

    That will keep me coming back to these boards day in and day out.Click here to enlarge

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,379
    Rep Points
    32,773.6
    Mentioned
    2134 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by CaliBenzC63 Click here to enlarge
    Thank you Sticky! This is the kind of stuff I like to read in the forums. Sure we can play MHP vs MBH all day long, but both have shown strong numbers and I actually think there is room for improvement based on what I've read. As tuners become more experienced and play around more, there certainly is the opportunity for one to outshine the other (maybe by 40 hp or 2-3 mph trap speeds), but in the end it is up to us to push our cars to the next level and share our knowledge with other car enthusiasts.

    That will keep me coming back to these boards day in and day out.Click here to enlarge
    No prob, we're all here to learn and talk cars.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,070
    Rep Points
    0.5
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    No prob, we're all here to learn and talk cars.

    Do you have any torque data versus RPM?
    World Fastest (NA) SLS AMG in a Standing 1/2 Mile
    Trap Speed 254.81 Km/hr

    Qatar Mile- NOV, 30th 2013
    Click here to enlarge

  8. #58
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,032
    Rep Points
    57.3
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    @Sticky. The table you posted is an excellent analysis. However, I belive its diffrent from motor to motor. wouldnt you agree?

    I do the believe the MBH headers make more power than the 4-1 headers like the MHP headers, especially for supercharged applications. In the end they both make huge power and even if the MBH headers made more power it wouldnt be a big margin.

    You see. when some clown comes up and sais things like "I switched my MHP headers to MBH and gaind 40 rwhp" without providing dynosheets and detailed proof of that ridicoulous figure, its pathetic. I truly belive MBH headers will make more power at the end. I personally have them equipped on my supercharged M156. I mean we are talking maybe 5-10 Hp in NA engines and maybe 10-15 with supercharged engines.

    Its no magic. The hardware is there and no way you can come up with a 40rwhp gain from switching headers on a supercharged engine. when I heard about it, I was like holy $#@!, did they swap the M156 with a V12 engine, lol.
    Weistec Supercharged SL63 AMG
    Click here to enlarge
    Fastest Overall Mercedes SL Class VBOX 60-130, 6.86-
    Dragtimes.com, FEB 16 2013







  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,379
    Rep Points
    32,773.6
    Mentioned
    2134 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jacob502 Click here to enlarge
    The table you posted is an excellent analysis. However, I belive its diffrent from motor to motor. wouldnt you agree?
    Of course.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jacob502 Click here to enlarge
    You see. when some clown comes up and sais things like "I switched my MHP headers to MBH and gaind 40 rwhp" without providing dynosheets and detailed proof of that ridicoulous figure, its pathetic. I truly belive MBH headers will make more power at the end. I personally have them equipped on my supercharged M156. I mean we are talking maybe 5-10 Hp in NA engines and maybe 10-15 with supercharged engines.

    Its no magic. The hardware is there and no way you can come up with a 40rwhp gain from switching headers on a supercharged engine. when I heard about it, I was like holy $#@!, did they swap the M156 with a V12 engine, lol.
    I mean, you can gain 40 whp just likely not from going from one aftermarket header to another. I really would like to do the test myself. I believe he said something about having a graph posted I just haven't seen it.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,379
    Rep Points
    32,773.6
    Mentioned
    2134 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SLS AMG Click here to enlarge
    Do you have any torque data versus RPM?
    Nope, just what was posted.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jacob502 Click here to enlarge
    @Sticky . The table you posted is an excellent analysis. However, I belive its diffrent from motor to motor. wouldnt you agree?

    I do the believe the MBH headers make more power than the 4-1 headers like the MHP headers, especially for supercharged applications. In the end they both make huge power and even if the MBH headers made more power it wouldnt be a big margin.

    You see. when some clown comes up and sais things like "I switched my MHP headers to MBH and gaind 40 rwhp" without providing dynosheets and detailed proof of that ridicoulous figure, its pathetic. I truly belive MBH headers will make more power at the end. I personally have them equipped on my supercharged M156. I mean we are talking maybe 5-10 Hp in NA engines and maybe 10-15 with supercharged engines.

    Its no magic. The hardware is there and no way you can come up with a 40rwhp gain from switching headers on a supercharged engine. when I heard about it, I was like holy $#@!, did they swap the M156 with a V12 engine, lol.

    This coming from the guy who said the only way the SLS BS could make 650 hp is with a V12TT LOL. Didn't you also just say that you spoke to Simon at Evosport and they have been able to get well over 600hp from the M156 normally aspirated ?? Even though the "hardware is there" and there's no way around it ? LOL.

    Another rock solid post Jacob....keep up the good work.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,032
    Rep Points
    57.3
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LZH Click here to enlarge
    This coming from the guy who said the only way the SLS BS could make 650 hp is with a V12TT LOL. Didn't you also just say that you spoke to Simon at Evosport and they have been able to get well over 600hp from the M156 normally aspirated ?? Even though the "hardware is there" and there's no way around it ? LOL.

    Another rock solid post Jacob....keep up the good work.
    Hey welcome back. I thought you were ashamed to post in this forum. what brought you back?

    Evosport CLK BS is a diffrent issue. The 600HP is a crank figure and has been achieved with custom engine tuning, race exhust and race gas. Its not something weird.

    Evosport did not swap headers and saw a gain of 40rwhp. looool. Secondly, The headers in the CLK BS is a try-yi headers from Evosport, you can see a video of it in the second page. Its not 4-1 nor is it like the MBH try-yi's with 2 inch primaries. Again, I dont see any comparison

    I dont know what is the point of bringing up the Evosport CLK? please explain....

    I really dont know what has this got to do with you?

    yeah my posts are stupid and idiotic, yet you come up and qoute them with your insults.

    so please show me something postive by showing me proof of a supercharged M156 making 40RWHP more with MBH headers than the MHP headers with the Wesitec superchargerClick here to enlarge

    You seem to know everything. I'll take your word for it. I promise, deal?Click here to enlarge
    Weistec Supercharged SL63 AMG
    Click here to enlarge
    Fastest Overall Mercedes SL Class VBOX 60-130, 6.86-
    Dragtimes.com, FEB 16 2013







  13. #63
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Abu Dhabi, UAE
    Posts
    368
    Rep Points
    127.5
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jacob502 Click here to enlarge
    Hey welcome back. I thought you were ashamed to post in this forum. what brought you back?

    Evosport CLK BS is a diffrent issue. The 600HP is a crank figure and has been achieved with custom engine tuning, race exhust and race gas. Its not something weird.

    Evosport did not swap headers and saw a gain of 40rwhp. looool. Secondly, The headers in the CLK BS is a try-yi headers from Evosport, you can see a video of it in the second page. Its not 4-1 nor is it like the MBH try-yi's with 2 inch primaries. Again, I dont see any comparison

    I dont know what is the point of bringing up the Evosport CLK? please explain....

    I really dont know what has this got to do with you?

    yeah my posts are stupid and idiotic, yet you come up and qoute them with your insults.

    so please show me something postive by showing me proof of a supercharged M156 making 40RWHP more with MBH headers than the MHP headers with the Wesitec superchargerClick here to enlarge

    You seem to know everything. I'll take your word for it. I promise, deal?Click here to enlarge
    He can't tune his car, how do you want him to know then about M156 superchargers and their gains ?
    Fastest Mercedes in the Gulf & the Middle East
    Powered By WEISTEC
    2009 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG Weistec Supercharged: 10.576 @ 133.562 MPH

    Click here to enlarge

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    137
    Rep Points
    293.1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/t...s/viewall.html

    I found the following article interesting. Towards the bottom they show the differences between the peak horsepower and the collector diameter.

    Ok, we've done header tests in the past, comparing various styles and sizes on moderate to high-powered street-style mills. In the case of the big-block Mopar, the default favorite tube size has long been a 1 7/8-inch primary pipe diameter with a 3-inch collector. This size has become the most popular choice in a high-powered street application for one reason-it has been found to work. Moving up the power ladder, say to the level of a well executed "bracket" or sportsman racing engine, or the upper realm of high-performance "street" engines, we had to wonder if there is just a little more power to be had. Would such an engine benefit by upping the ante on header tube diameter? After all, what works best on an engine in the 450-500hp range may leave some power on the table when dealing with engines in the 600-650hp class.

    There are theoretical formulas dealing with the subject of pipe diameter as it relates to exhaust port flow. Use the equation (square root (cfm x .0159)), and the numbers often come in pretty close to what experience has shown necessary. Consider exhaust flow in the area of 200 cfm at 28 inches typical for a well-ported production cylinder head. Working the math shows a 1 7/8-inch pipe diameter is near optimal. Upping the exhaust-port flow into the 250-cfm range, the formula predicts a larger pipe diameter is optimal, calling for something in the range of 2 through 2 1/8 inch. just as you would expect, a higher flowing exhaust port favors a larger primary pipe diameter.
    Dyno Test Headers Mopar Big Block Engnie

    While looking at exhaust flow may help to provide a ballpark estimate of required pipe diameter, there are other significant factors that can affect the optimal tube diameter. Using port flow as the basis for sizing does have its drawbacks. Ultimately, the volume of exhaust flow will not necessarily be determined by the peak flow rate of the port. Other factors can make a critical difference in the required header tube diameter, most of which are related to the flow and mechanical efficiencies of the engine combination. Other formulas of varying complexity have been worked out to provide a basis for making a calculation of optimal pipe diameter. With these formulas, the primary variable is changed from the exhaust port flow (as used in the above example) to include factors, such as peak torque rpm, peak horsepower output, cubic displacement, and/or cam timing.

    Even at that, there is a great deal of variability in what works best in a given combination. While formulas can be useful in making predictions, no formula will take into account the specifics of a header's designed layout. Significant factors here include the layout of the tubes, the radius and number of bends, collector design and size, as well as the departure radius and direction from the port exit. The only way to know for sure which headers will work best, is to try them and see. We gathered a handful of popular headers aiming to cover the most commonly used pipe diameters on big-block Mopar engines. The range included header primary pipe diameters of 1 3/4, 1 7/8, 2, and 2-2 1/8-inch step headers. Since our primary aim was to see how a higher horsepower engine would respond to the larger primary pipe diameter of the bigger headers, we dusted off our "Iron Headed Air Hammer" test engine (see Sidebar: the Mill), an engine capable of well over 600 hp.
    Dyno Test Headers Iron Headed Air Hammer

    We wanted to look at peak numbers, but were just as interested in how these varied header designs affected the entire curve. To summarize the results, we calculated the average outputs over the rpm range tested, from 3,000-6,600 rpm. While the overall averages give an indication of the area under the entire power curve, we also broke down the results to include average torque production above and below 5,000 rpm. Header changes will sometimes take power away at below-peak-torque rpm, but show added power at above-peak-torque rpm. We chose 5,000 rpm because it was roughly the rpm point at which this engine peaked in torque output. In a pure race application, output at peak-torque rpm and above is the most relevant range, since this is basically the operating range the engine will see on the track. In a dual-purpose application, torque output lower down becomes much more of a consideration. Here's what we found.

    The Mill:Our Iron Headed Air Hammer
    The mule for our test wasn't your ordinary street mill, but rather a stout 440 combo. The short-block features a reground stock-stroke forged-crank, swinging Eagle H-beam rods, and 12.5:1 Arias piston with Total Seal Slant Gap Gapless rings. With a stock 3.75-inch stroke and a .060-inch overbore, the final displacement is 452 ci. The piston domes were massaged to smooth the sharp edges, and the spark plug reliefs were radiused, which helps flame travel with high-domed pistons and the big wedge's distant plug position. The final compression ratio calculated to 12.66:1 with a -.005-inch piston deck clearance, and Milodon's copper .040-inch gasket. Milodon studs were used to secure the crank and heads, along with their deep sump pan, tray, oil pump, 1/2-inch pickup tube, and gear drive. The block's oil feed passages to the oil pump were massaged with a carbide bit.
    Dyno Test Headers 915 Casting

    The heads are production 915 castings, selected for their closed quench chamber configuration. The ports have been seriously reworked with a max-effort (no welding or epoxy) porting job, and fitted with custom Manley 2.25-inch intake valves and 1.81-inch exhaust valves. To minimize shrouding with the large valves, the chamber was plunge cut adjacent to the valve, well beyond the sealing surface of a stock gasket. Milodon copper gaskets were modified to match the chamber, and the bores were notched for a smooth transition from the chamber to the cylinder. Flow was improved to the tune of 25 percent more under the entire flow curve (as opposed to just an increase in peak flow) on both the intakes and exhaust, with peak flow figures up by 34 percent. Working the valves is a full Competition Cams cam-and-valvetrain package, including a custom Comp roller camshaft, with their NC-Series 4149 intake lobe, and High Tech .420-inch exhaust lobe. It works out to 260/258 at .050, and over .650-inch lift after lash with Comp's 1.6:1 aluminum roller rockers.

    To handle the induction duties we used an 1150 annular discharge-booster Holley Dominator 4500 Series carburetor, and it performed flawlessly mounted to a ported Weiand Team G intake manifold. Getting over 630 hp from a single four-barrel, all iron 440 without any juice, spray, or squeeze just doesn't happen by accident. What it takes is a working balance of flow, valve action, and compression.
    Dyno Test Headers Headman Hedders

    Hedman Hedder's
    Aimed primarily at moderate street engines, the 1 3/4-inch Hedman headers were definitely a misapplication on this high-compression, substantially cammed 440. We were interested in seeing how our engine would react to running such a header, and the effects on output. We found the results surprising. At the low end of the pull, the small-tube headers were down considerably in torque, in fact, a staggering 70 lb-ft., from 3,000-3,400 rpm. At 3,400 rpm, they began to recover, and between 4,000-4,500 rpm, they provided the highest torque output of all the headers tested by a slight margin. As expected, above 5,000 rpm, the output dropped rapidly compared to the larger-tube headers. Conventional wisdom predicts that a small-tube header will provide the best low-end torque. In this case, the low-end torque was crippled.

    Our test engine has a fairly aggressive solid roller camshaft, on a fairly tight lobe separation angle. That means lots of overlap. The ports had been substantially enlarged, and the induction was comprised of a large plenum single-plane intake manifold, topped with an 1150 Holley Dominator carb. These two factors conspire to make the exhaust system highly communicative with the induction tract, particularly at lower rpm at low induction gas speeds. We suspect that the small header was allowing significant reversion to occur until the dynamic velocity of the induction system reached a critical point, allowing the airflow to "clean-up". Looking at the dyno readout of air consumption, airflow through the engine was down with the decline of output at the low rpm range. Simply put, the header was terribly wrong for this combination at low rpm. We have run this header in tests on engines with outputs more suited to its intended application, in the 400-475hp range and found the results very satisfactory.

    The Pipe Hedman Hedders' Elite 1 3/4 inch
    Typical application Street perfomance
    Primary diameter 1 3/4 inch
    Collector diameter 3 inch
    Primary length unequal length
    Peak hp 603 hp @ 6,500 rpm
    Peak torque 563.9 lb-ft @ 4,800 rpm
    Average hp 3,000-6,600 rpm 475 hp
    Average torque 3,000-6,600 rpm 515.2 lb-ft
    Average torque 3,000-5,000 rpm 508 lb-ft
    Average torque 5,000-6,600 rpm 526.9 lb-ft

    Dyno Test Headers Headman Hedder Headers

    Hedman Hedder's
    A proven favorite for Mopar fans, the 1 7/8-inch header typically works very well on a wide range of engine combos, in applications ranging from performance street to fairly serious. With the 1 7/8-inch headers bolted up, the hole at the bottom of the power curve went away. In fact, the 1 7/8-inch tubes had the best output at the bottom of our test range, and held a minor torque advantage over the larger tubes up 5,000 rpm. At about 5,600 rpm, the added flow of the larger tubes made its presence known, but the 1 7/8-inch pipes did carry a significant advantage in this higher range when compared to the 1 3/4-inch tubes. The averages moved up substantially compared to the smaller pipes, indicating the 1 7/8-inch pipes are unquestionably the better choice when dealing in the higher output levels.
    Dyno Test Headers Hooker 2 Inch Headers

    When the 1 7/8-inch headers were compared to the larger tubes tested later, the overall average output was about the same. however, these headers clearly favored output below peak torque rpm, while the big pipes proved superior higher up. For general purpose, high-performance use in the 475-575hp range, the 1 7/8-inch header is the size to get.

    The Pipes tti 1 7/8 inch
    Typical application Dual purpose/Race
    Primary diameter 1 7/8 inch
    Collector diameter 3 inch
    Primary length unequal length
    Peak hp 616 hp @ 6,500 rpm
    Peak torque 570.5 lb-ft @ 4,800 rpm
    Average hp 3,000-6,600 rpm 488 hp
    Average torque 3,000-6,600 rpm 533.1 lb-ft
    Average torque 3,000-5,000 rpm 532.2 lb-ft
    Average torque 5,000-6,600 rpm 536 lb-ft

    Dyno Test Headers Hooker Headers

    Hooker 2-Inch Super Competition
    Moving to the larger 2-inch Hooker Super Comps, the engine responded with a significant increase in top-end horsepower, upping the output by 18 hp. Looking at the averages, however, the gain came at a price. The averages over our entire test range were within 1 hp and 1lb-ft of the 1 7/8-inch header, indicating that as far as overall output over the engine's test range was concerned, it was almost a dead heat.

    The difference between the 1 7/8 and 2-inch headers was simply where the power comes in. The torque averages above and below 5,000 rpm (approximately peak torque rpm) shows that the larger tubes added to output up top, while subtracting a similar amount down low. Essentially, the larger tubes tilted the torque curve around peak torque, with more up high, and less down low, for nearly identical averages. Interestingly, peak torque rpm moved up 500 rpm, a significant amount. The larger 3 1/2-inch collector diameter likely had a large part to play in that change.

    The Pipes Hooker 2-inch Super Competion
    Typical application Dual purpose/Race
    Primary diameter 2 inch
    Collector diameter 3.5 inch
    Primary length 32 inch
    Peak hp 634 hp @ 6,400 rpm
    Peak torque 568.4 lb-ft @ 5,300 rpm
    Average hp 3,000-6,600 rpm 489 hp
    Average torque 3,000-6,600 rpm 531.4 lb-ft
    Average torque 3,000-5,000 rpm 521.7 lb-ft
    Average torque 5,000-6,600 rpm 545.4 lb-ft

    Dyno Test Headers Hooker 2 Inch Headers

    Hooker 2-Inch Super Competition
    The tti step header is different compared to all of the other headers tested. The tube diameter "steps", or increases in size, at about 5.5 inches from the header flange. The increase in diameter down the pipe allows for gas expansion, and provides a benefit in reducing reversion tendencies as compared to a straight pipe of a larger diameter pipe, especially in the critical area of the exhaust port exit. The upshot is the ability to run a large pipe diameter while minimizing the potential for a decrease in torque lower in the rpm range, thus providing a broader torque range.

    Step headers have become popular in all-out drag racing classes, and they are proven to work. Theories abound about the mechanics of why this is true, including the notion that the step presents a cross-sectional area change, sufficient to reflect a low-pressure wave to improving the scavenging effect. Considering the tuned length of the short section of pipe to the first step, this seems unlikely. However, one thing that we have found conclusively, is that a larger pipe diameter can be employed while minimizing the torque penalty lower in the operating range.
    Dyno Test Headers Hooker 2 Inch Super Comp Headers

    The tti step header, at 2 1/8 inches for the majority of the primary pipe length is, by most formulas, on the large side for an engine at the performance level of our test 440. Had we been testing straight 2 1/8-inch headers, we would fully expect to see a drop in torque production below-peak-torque rpm, and very little, if any, gain higher up as compared to a 2-inch tube. With the stepped design, we actually posted a slightly-higher average torque number than with the 2-inch headers, and the highest peak horsepower of any of the headers tested. The edge was slight, but the numbers were up in every category, though the power curves followed those of the 2-inch header very closely. It is worth noting that the tti stepped headers we tried were nickel-chrome-plated steel. All of the other headers in our test were metallic ceramic coated, a coating which is claimed to provide a power enhancement, although we have never verified this directly or compared to chrome headers.

    This tti seems to be well suited for high-output applications, and we have used them in big-block Mopars to well over 750 hp. The step makes them a flexible design, allowing the tti "steps" to be used successfully on engines with considerably less horsepower than this, while providing enough header capacity for the combination to grow as the engine is enhanced. With an engine combination like our 630hp test mule, we could use the bigger header now, and still be satisfied the header will be adequate if we moved up to serious race heads and moved the peak power upwards of 100 hp.

    The Pipe tti 2-2 1/8 inch Step Header
    Typical application High output street/Race
    Primary diameter 2 inch, stepping up to 2 1/8 at 5.5-inches from flange
    Collector diameter 3 1/2 inch
    Primary length unequal length
    Peak hp 636 hp @ 6,400 rpm
    Peak torque 567.7 lb-ft @ 4,800 rpm
    Average hp 3,000-6,600 rpm 490 hp
    Average torque 3,000-6,600 rpm 532.7 lb-ft
    Average torque 3,000-5,000 rpm 523.4 lb-ft
    Average torque 5,000-6,600 rpm 548.8 lb-ft

    Read more: http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/t...#ixzz23cyB1qbu

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    137
    Rep Points
    293.1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    I also read something interesting about the effect of the collector diameter when using nitrous.

    "Since nitrous injection is so popular, it's worth throwing in the changes needed to optimize with the nitrous on. For a typical race V-8 the area of the primary pipe needs to increase about 6-7 percent for every 50hp worth of nitrous injected. For street applications, where mileage and performance when the nitrous is not in use is the most important, pipe size should not be changed to suit the nitrous."

    I'd be curious if Dad's C63has tested thisat all since he is the only one I have heard of that has used nitrous on the C63.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sirex63 Click here to enlarge
    He can't tune his car, how do you want him to know then about M156 superchargers and their gains ?
    Can't and won't are two different things.

    Are you suggesting that the only people who have knowledge about tuning and superchargers are the ones who have modified their car??
    Last edited by LZH; 08-15-2012 at 11:47 AM.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jacob502 Click here to enlarge
    Hey welcome back. I thought you were ashamed to post in this forum. what brought you back?

    Evosport CLK BS is a diffrent issue. The 600HP is a crank figure and has been achieved with custom engine tuning, race exhust and race gas. Its not something weird.

    Evosport did not swap headers and saw a gain of 40rwhp. looool. Secondly, The headers in the CLK BS is a try-yi headers from Evosport, you can see a video of it in the second page. Its not 4-1 nor is it like the MBH try-yi's with 2 inch primaries. Again, I dont see any comparison

    I dont know what is the point of bringing up the Evosport CLK? please explain....

    I really dont know what has this got to do with you?

    yeah my posts are stupid and idiotic, yet you come up and qoute them with your insults.

    so please show me something postive by showing me proof of a supercharged M156 making 40RWHP more with MBH headers than the MHP headers with the Wesitec superchargerClick here to enlarge

    You seem to know everything. I'll take your word for it. I promise, deal?Click here to enlarge
    In a previous thread you said that the SLS BS would need the V12 to make 650hp. As you know the SLS has the M159 which is a variant of the M156. And it's clear from the Evosport race car that with (as you stated), hardware alone, they have been able to get well over 600hp with the M156. So It should only stand to reason that the M157 would be able to do the same thing with some minor tweaks. In other words, you proved my point for me.

    The point is, Jacob, that when looking at engines making this much hp, a 40whp difference is possible since it's such a low figure percentage wise of the total hp. Different dyno, different day, conditions, slightly better tune for different headers and it's not at all unlikely to see a 40whp difference.

    And I haven't insulted you unless you feel sarcasm is an insult.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,032
    Rep Points
    57.3
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LZH Click here to enlarge
    In a previous thread you said that the SLS BS would need the V12 to make 650hp. As you know the SLS has the M159 which is a variant of the M156. And it's clear from the Evosport race car that with (as you stated), hardware alone, they have been able to get well over 600hp with the M156. So It should only stand to reason that the M157 would be able to do the same thing with some minor tweaks. In other words, you proved my point for me.

    The point is, Jacob, that when looking at engines making this much hp, a 40whp difference is possible since it's such a low figure percentage wise of the total hp. Different dyno, different day, conditions, slightly better tune for different headers and it's not at all unlikely to see a 40whp difference.

    And I haven't insulted you unless you feel sarcasm is an insult.
    That is true, I dont disagree. But you are talking about two diffrent things. It is possoble to gain 40rwhp from diffrent tuning, custom tune, etc...


    But is it possible to gain an extra 40rwhp from switching to another aftermarket headers on an M156?.....here is where I have a HUGE question mark.


    We have seen both headers making 40-45 rwhp gains from the restrective log manifolds. I just dont see how one can make an extra 40rwhp ouf of the other just by simply having a slightly larger primary tubing (1 7/8 vs 2inch). what do you think?
    Weistec Supercharged SL63 AMG
    Click here to enlarge
    Fastest Overall Mercedes SL Class VBOX 60-130, 6.86-
    Dragtimes.com, FEB 16 2013







  19. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    137
    Rep Points
    293.1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jacob502 Click here to enlarge
    We have seen both headers making 40-45 rwhp gains from the restrective log manifolds. I just dont see how one can make an extra 40rwhp ouf of the other just by simply having a slightly larger primary tubing (1 7/8 vs 2inch). what do you think?
    It's useless arguing over this since there is no research to back it up. If you read the article you'll see

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by HoozyerdaddyC63 Click here to enlarge
    When the 1 7/8-inch headers were compared to the larger tubes tested later, the overall average output was about the same. however, these headers clearly favored output below peak torque rpm, while the big pipes proved superior higher up. For general purpose, high-performance use in the 475-575hp range, the 1 7/8-inch header is the size to get.
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by HoozyerdaddyC63 Click here to enlarge
    After all, what works best on an engine in the 450-500hp range may leave some power on the table when dealing with engines in the 600-650hp class.
    This leads me to believe that there is an opportunity to pull more power when switching over. Unless you can prove for a fact that it is not possible then you can't really argue against it.

    The only way we would truly know is if it happened and it would be better to understand why it happened. Were the dyno results ever posted for the hp increase?

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by HoozyerdaddyC63 Click here to enlarge
    It's useless arguing over this since there is no research to back it up. If you read the article you'll see





    This leads me to believe that there is an opportunity to pull more power when switching over. Unless you can prove for a fact that it is not possible then you can't really argue against it.

    The only way we would truly know is if it happened and it would be better to understand why it happened. Were the dyno results ever posted for the hp increase?
    Exactly my point. Saying it can't be done just because you don't believe it is ignorant.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,032
    Rep Points
    57.3
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LZH Click here to enlarge
    Exactly my point. Saying it can't be done just because you don't believe it is ignorant.

    Thats fine. I just like to see it. The article isnt about acomparison of a supercharged M156 with two diffrent headers
    Weistec Supercharged SL63 AMG
    Click here to enlarge
    Fastest Overall Mercedes SL Class VBOX 60-130, 6.86-
    Dragtimes.com, FEB 16 2013







  22. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    137
    Rep Points
    293.1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jacob502 Click here to enlarge
    Thats fine. I just like to see it. The article isnt about acomparison of a supercharged M156 with two diffrent headers
    You're right. I wish I could fine one that was, but I doubt it exists. The article is an example of how the different headers work and what effect the diameter size might have on the horsepower.

    If you want to compare the delta it comes down to the differences between the two types of headers. The question is what are all the differences between the two types of headers that would have an impact on the horsepower.

    1) Collector diameter
    2) Length of tubes
    3) ECU tune

    Those are three that we know are variables that need to be considered in the debate.

    What would be really interesting is if the original tune was better for 600+ hp and the tri-y headers without Andy knowing it. How many of us are actually in that category of power? Very few and that is probably why the 4-1's are "superior" on the track for most cars.

    However, and I quote MBH "With the large 2 inch primary tubes at a slightly shorter length. We can take advantage of the larger diameter needs of the 63 M156 engine. While not over using the 2 inch primary tube that could cause the C63 AMG to leave some power on the table. The result is a Tri-Y header that make huge power through out the entire RPM range.", they are doing exactly what they say they are doing and has been proven before. They are increasing the power over the entire RPM range vs the increase on the top end like MHP's.

    I would be more than happy to give up my car for a couple months while a reputable, insured shop (preferably in the Chicagoland area) performs the tests. Click here to enlarge

    Let's not forget that this is not about MBH vs MHP as most make it out to be. It's about two superior products for the M156 engine that have different designs.

    Now stop the bickering on this thread. Click here to enlarge

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,792
    Rep Points
    258.1
    Mentioned
    142 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by HoozyerdaddyC63 Click here to enlarge
    You're right. I wish I could fine one that was, but I doubt it exists. The article is an example of how the different headers work and what effect the diameter size might have on the horsepower.

    If you want to compare the delta it comes down to the differences between the two types of headers. The question is what are all the differences between the two types of headers that would have an impact on the horsepower.

    1) Collector diameter
    2) Length of tubes
    3) ECU tune

    Those are three that we know are variables that need to be considered in the debate.

    What would be really interesting is if the original tune was better for 600+ hp and the tri-y headers without Andy knowing it. How many of us are actually in that category of power? Very few and that is probably why the 4-1's are "superior" on the track for most cars.

    However, and I quote MBH "With the large 2 inch primary tubes at a slightly shorter length. We can take advantage of the larger diameter needs of the 63 M156 engine. While not over using the 2 inch primary tube that could cause the C63 AMG to leave some power on the table. The result is a Tri-Y header that make huge power through out the entire RPM range.", they are doing exactly what they say they are doing and has been proven before. They are increasing the power over the entire RPM range vs the increase on the top end like MHP's.

    I would be more than happy to give up my car for a couple months while a reputable, insured shop (preferably in the Chicagoland area) performs the tests. Click here to enlarge

    Let's not forget that this is not about MBH vs MHP as most make it out to be. It's about two superior products for the M156 engine that have different designs.

    Now stop the bickering on this thread. Click here to enlarge
    Weistec has done comparisons of different header designs with their superchargers.
    Click here to enlarge

    1000+WHP WEISTEC 2008 CLK63 Black Series
    790WHP WEISTEC 2012 C63 Black Series
    725WHP WEISTEC 2014 SLS Black Series

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    137
    Rep Points
    293.1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JRCART Click here to enlarge
    Weistec has done comparisons of different header designs with their superchargers.
    I wonder if they would share their research. I've been reading more about the twin screw supercharger to see if I can find anything that digs into comparisons on headers, but have fallen short.

    I figure there has to be something out there and I am determined to find it. Click here to enlarge

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    403
    Rep Points
    611.6
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by HoozyerdaddyC63 Click here to enlarge
    I wonder if they would share their research. I've been reading more about the twin screw supercharger to see if I can find anything that digs into comparisons on headers, but have fallen short.

    I figure there has to be something out there and I am determined to find it. Click here to enlarge
    i'm sure you could probably get some sort of answer from Weistec about comparisons but i can tell you for a fact that Steve is not out to bash any individual company and will not post anything that says whos parts work better . most of the answers on this subject would have to come from Weistec customers .

    you better hope than an independent shop somewhere wants the same questions answered or you might not ever get the answers you are looking for .

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •