Header recommendations

User avatar
mike93hatch
Posts: 2869
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:42 am

Header recommendations

Post by mike93hatch »

youre willing to spend $400 on a damn header? jeez... you do know you can get a really nice good used turbo and cast manifold for that much.
User avatar
Waffles
Posts: 6876
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:45 am

Header recommendations

Post by Waffles »

mike93hatch;108393 wrote:youre willing to spend $400 on a damn header? jeez... you do know you can get a really nice good used turbo and cast manifold for that much.
i was expecting your normal post of "One with a turbo attached" but this is just as good.
Image
User avatar
99SilverCX
Posts: 932
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:45 pm

Header recommendations

Post by 99SilverCX »

mike93hatch;108393 wrote:youre willing to spend $400 on a damn header? jeez... you do know you can get a really nice good used turbo and cast manifold for that much.
Hmm, is that all I need to run boosted? lol
This is my DD, I'd rather just stay NA, that's why I'd like a 4-2-1 header for more midrange power, unlike the 4-1 itr replica I have that is for high-end power.
Image
Image
User avatar
N2HIFI
Posts: 3349
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:22 am

Header recommendations

Post by N2HIFI »

99SilverCX;108423 wrote:Hmm, is that all I need to run boosted? lol
This is my DD, I'd rather just stay NA, that's why I'd like a 4-2-1 header for more midrange power, unlike the 4-1 itr replica I have that is for high-end power.
not to be a pain in the ass BUT you do know that there is only a 3-8 hp/tq difference in the power bands between the two styles of headers.

if you have a high reving motor then a 4-1 is better but if your using a low reving ls then the 4-2-1 is better ,, you have a high reving b16 which does not make dick for power till after 5600 WHY would you even care about midrange because it is non existent.


also just for reference some tuner mag just did a test on 4-1 vs 4-2-1 headers and the proof is in the dyno. (their results show a minimal difference between the two) but a 4-2-1 would give you more ground clearance
-Chris
Image
'Cause Internet Hating IS Serious Business
http://gmrn2hifi.wordpress.com/
http://www.garagement-racing.com/
User avatar
99SilverCX
Posts: 932
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:45 pm

Header recommendations

Post by 99SilverCX »

N2HIFI;108466 wrote:not to be a pain in the ass BUT you do know that there is only a 3-8 hp/tq difference in the power bands between the two styles of headers.

if you have a high reving motor then a 4-1 is better but if your using a low reving ls then the 4-2-1 is better ,, you have a high reving b16 which does not make dick for power till after 5600 WHY would you even care about midrange because it is non existent.


also just for reference some tuner mag just did a test on 4-1 vs 4-2-1 headers and the proof is in the dyno. (their results show a minimal difference between the two) but a 4-2-1 would give you more ground clearance
ground clearance is definitely a benefit for me because right now the megan racing 4-1 is only a mere 1.5' off the ground, well it used to, but the header is so beat up that it's 2' off the ground now...
Image
Image
User avatar
Midori
Posts: 2877
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 5:28 am

Header recommendations

Post by Midori »

FEET? lower your car!

i believe the inches sign is "
Feet = '
-'11 Taffeta White CR-V
-'09 Crystal Black Pearl Fit sport
User avatar
99SilverCX
Posts: 932
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:45 pm

Header recommendations

Post by 99SilverCX »

MidoriMiller;108598 wrote:FEET? lower your car!

i believe the inches sign is "
Feet = '
my bad, I'm from Europe, still getting used to this retarded measuring system, but since I drive a honda, at least I don't have to get wrenches and sockets that are in some weird ass fractions like 15/32", you know you could make so much money if you found some stupid reason to make bolts in like 70/128" or like 100/256" people would have to buy wrenches and sockets to go with them LOL
Image
Image