Headers
07-07-2012, 06:24 AM
#127
Guest
Posts: n/a
07-29-2012, 12:51 PM
#133
i didnt know DA had headers for us? True they can build anything--are you asking about a custom set?
under parts "13B Header for 6 Port Egnines"
07-29-2012, 06:43 PM
#136
[QUOTE]They do not have any pics of a 13b-MSP. If you look at headers for the Renesis you will this header will not work [/QUOTE0
Well they are made to order, and as far as I know, you can request a set for the MSP for that same price. I'm really interested to know, along with everyone else, if these long tubes will yield significant gains over a short header+exhaust.
Well they are made to order, and as far as I know, you can request a set for the MSP for that same price. I'm really interested to know, along with everyone else, if these long tubes will yield significant gains over a short header+exhaust.
07-29-2012, 11:24 PM
#138
Guest
Posts: n/a
[quote=AP2orDIE;4317548]
yes but if u get them u will need a custom midpipe,
thats why im waiting for bhr to release the long headers as they will release a MATCHING midpipe, and thats exactly what i want
They do not have any pics of a 13b-MSP. If you look at headers for the Renesis you will this header will not work [/QUOTE0
Well they are made to order, and as far as I know, you can request a set for the MSP for that same price. I'm really interested to know, along with everyone else, if these long tubes will yield significant gains over a short header+exhaust.
Well they are made to order, and as far as I know, you can request a set for the MSP for that same price. I'm really interested to know, along with everyone else, if these long tubes will yield significant gains over a short header+exhaust.
thats why im waiting for bhr to release the long headers as they will release a MATCHING midpipe, and thats exactly what i want
08-10-2012, 07:51 PM
#144
http://victorylibrary.com/graphics/4...ull-length.jpg
discuss concept.
this is a not an RX8 header--but the concept is interesting.http://victorylibrary.com/graphics/LCB-detail-2.jpg
discuss concept.
this is a not an RX8 header--but the concept is interesting.http://victorylibrary.com/graphics/LCB-detail-2.jpg
Last edited by olddragger; 08-10-2012 at 07:53 PM.
08-10-2012, 08:04 PM
#145
Legend In My Own Mind
4-2-1 headers have always had good results on Hondas. I guess collecting them like that on a Renesis is the same theory with the way the middle pipe already gathers 2 straight from the ports. Merging the 2 ends fairly soon may help scavenging. Not really sure. The sound would definitely change as the pulses bounce off of each other differently.Then you have to make it fit. I will say though that the best part of a 4-2-1 on a 4-cylinder is they were easy to make in 2 pieces and therefore easier to install.
08-10-2012, 08:04 PM
#146
Un-Registered User
http://victorylibrary.com/graphics/4...ull-length.jpg
discuss concept.
this is a not an RX8 header--but the concept is interesting.http://victorylibrary.com/graphics/LCB-detail-2.jpg
discuss concept.
this is a not an RX8 header--but the concept is interesting.http://victorylibrary.com/graphics/LCB-detail-2.jpg
08-11-2012, 07:57 AM
#147
why not Slidin 8?
The interesting thing to me ( and more specifically to my supercharged engine) is the treatment of the siamese port.
Now i am not an expert in header design and the following is just what I understand it to be. I may be wrong, but a good discussion is something in which everyone usually learns something. So feel free to shoot holes into any of these that I am posting.
The way I understand it is that the exhaust pulses on our engine are sharp. The ports close faster than a recips valves. So you have to move a lot of air in a very short period of time and there is a very abrupt closing of the port.
We have 2 exhaust pulses per one revolution of the e shaft. Basically that means 1 exhaust pulse per exhaust port per rpm?
The cross sectional area of the exhaust port is not that bad for the amount of air that the NA engine is using.
WE HAVE A ZERO OVERLAP ENGINE. So that means the usual "tuned" header will not give you the benefits as it does on an engine with overlap. Now in my case it is a good thing to not have any overlap. Superchargers do better without it--talking about a street driven engine--not a true dedicated competition engine. But I am moving more air--basically approx 115 hp per exhaust port.
So taking these things into consideration,
1-I do wonder if the center port exhaust pulses really have a strong effect on savaging the most out of the combustion chamber since we have no overlap?
2-Is that siamesed port something to really focus on? I really don't know. Logic tells me yes, but i have learned that logic can sometimes be wrong.
3- isnt it best to have a square match between header primary tube and the port for at least 3 inches? Or is it ok to do less?
4-Our exhaust is HOT which affects the speed of sound that influences the exhaust pulse, Doesnt that mean that we need a bigger primary tube ? Exhaust velocity is usually not a problem in a rotary engine unless there are restrictions in the exhaust system, so a bigger primary tube will not be a significant issue to the velocity?
5- we dont have to worry about reversion do we?
6- Which would be the best a venturi collector or a straight collector( merged).
7- transitions after the header are a no brainer to me--need to be smooth and equal diameter--right?
Presently I do not know of anyone that manufacturers a header for us that has an internal primary pipe diameter of 2 inches? The biggest I have seen is 43mm.
I am thinking that is the size that I need for my engine. I guess that would mean a custom fab job?
I have spoken with Burns some and they will do one--it just gets really expensive really fast. They wouldnt do one unless 321 SS was used.
Thoughts?
The interesting thing to me ( and more specifically to my supercharged engine) is the treatment of the siamese port.
Now i am not an expert in header design and the following is just what I understand it to be. I may be wrong, but a good discussion is something in which everyone usually learns something. So feel free to shoot holes into any of these that I am posting.
The way I understand it is that the exhaust pulses on our engine are sharp. The ports close faster than a recips valves. So you have to move a lot of air in a very short period of time and there is a very abrupt closing of the port.
We have 2 exhaust pulses per one revolution of the e shaft. Basically that means 1 exhaust pulse per exhaust port per rpm?
The cross sectional area of the exhaust port is not that bad for the amount of air that the NA engine is using.
WE HAVE A ZERO OVERLAP ENGINE. So that means the usual "tuned" header will not give you the benefits as it does on an engine with overlap. Now in my case it is a good thing to not have any overlap. Superchargers do better without it--talking about a street driven engine--not a true dedicated competition engine. But I am moving more air--basically approx 115 hp per exhaust port.
So taking these things into consideration,
1-I do wonder if the center port exhaust pulses really have a strong effect on savaging the most out of the combustion chamber since we have no overlap?
2-Is that siamesed port something to really focus on? I really don't know. Logic tells me yes, but i have learned that logic can sometimes be wrong.
3- isnt it best to have a square match between header primary tube and the port for at least 3 inches? Or is it ok to do less?
4-Our exhaust is HOT which affects the speed of sound that influences the exhaust pulse, Doesnt that mean that we need a bigger primary tube ? Exhaust velocity is usually not a problem in a rotary engine unless there are restrictions in the exhaust system, so a bigger primary tube will not be a significant issue to the velocity?
5- we dont have to worry about reversion do we?
6- Which would be the best a venturi collector or a straight collector( merged).
7- transitions after the header are a no brainer to me--need to be smooth and equal diameter--right?
Presently I do not know of anyone that manufacturers a header for us that has an internal primary pipe diameter of 2 inches? The biggest I have seen is 43mm.
I am thinking that is the size that I need for my engine. I guess that would mean a custom fab job?
I have spoken with Burns some and they will do one--it just gets really expensive really fast. They wouldnt do one unless 321 SS was used.
Thoughts?
Last edited by olddragger; 08-11-2012 at 08:00 AM.
08-11-2012, 08:14 AM
#148
Un-Registered User
why not Slidin 8?
The interesting thing to me ( and more specifically to my supercharged engine) is the treatment of the siamese port.
Now i am not an expert in header design and the following is just what I understand it to be. I may be wrong, but a good discussion is something in which everyone usually learns something. So feel free to shoot holes into any of these that I am posting.
The way I understand it is that the exhaust pulses on our engine are sharp. The ports close faster than a recips valves. So you have to move a lot of air in a very short period of time and there is a very abrupt closing of the port.
We have 2 exhaust pulses per one revolution of the e shaft. Basically that means 1 exhaust pulse per exhaust port per rpm?
The cross sectional area of the exhaust port is not that bad for the amount of air that the NA engine is using.
WE HAVE A ZERO OVERLAP ENGINE. So that means the usual "tuned" header will not give you the benefits as it does on an engine with overlap. Now in my case it is a good thing to not have any overlap. Superchargers do better without it--talking about a street driven engine--not a true dedicated competition engine. But I am moving more air--basically approx 115 hp per exhaust port.
So taking these things into consideration,
1-I do wonder if the center port exhaust pulses really have a strong effect on savaging the most out of the combustion chamber since we have no overlap?
2-Is that siamesed port something to really focus on? I really don't know. Logic tells me yes, but i have learned that logic can sometimes be wrong.
3- isnt it best to have a square match between header primary tube and the port for at least 3 inches? Or is it ok to do less?
4-Our exhaust is HOT which affects the speed of sound that influences the exhaust pulse, Doesnt that mean that we need a bigger primary tube ? Exhaust velocity is usually not a problem in a rotary engine unless there are restrictions in the exhaust system, so a bigger primary tube will not be a significant issue to the velocity?
5- we dont have to worry about reversion do we?
6- Which would be the best a venturi collector or a straight collector( merged).
7- transitions after the header are a no brainer to me--need to be smooth and equal diameter--right?
Presently I do not know of anyone that manufacturers a header for us that has an internal primary pipe diameter of 2 inches? The biggest I have seen is 43mm.
I am thinking that is the size that I need for my engine. I guess that would mean a custom fab job?
I have spoken with Burns some and they will do one--it just gets really expensive really fast. They wouldnt do one unless 321 SS was used.
Thoughts?
The interesting thing to me ( and more specifically to my supercharged engine) is the treatment of the siamese port.
Now i am not an expert in header design and the following is just what I understand it to be. I may be wrong, but a good discussion is something in which everyone usually learns something. So feel free to shoot holes into any of these that I am posting.
The way I understand it is that the exhaust pulses on our engine are sharp. The ports close faster than a recips valves. So you have to move a lot of air in a very short period of time and there is a very abrupt closing of the port.
We have 2 exhaust pulses per one revolution of the e shaft. Basically that means 1 exhaust pulse per exhaust port per rpm?
The cross sectional area of the exhaust port is not that bad for the amount of air that the NA engine is using.
WE HAVE A ZERO OVERLAP ENGINE. So that means the usual "tuned" header will not give you the benefits as it does on an engine with overlap. Now in my case it is a good thing to not have any overlap. Superchargers do better without it--talking about a street driven engine--not a true dedicated competition engine. But I am moving more air--basically approx 115 hp per exhaust port.
So taking these things into consideration,
1-I do wonder if the center port exhaust pulses really have a strong effect on savaging the most out of the combustion chamber since we have no overlap?
2-Is that siamesed port something to really focus on? I really don't know. Logic tells me yes, but i have learned that logic can sometimes be wrong.
3- isnt it best to have a square match between header primary tube and the port for at least 3 inches? Or is it ok to do less?
4-Our exhaust is HOT which affects the speed of sound that influences the exhaust pulse, Doesnt that mean that we need a bigger primary tube ? Exhaust velocity is usually not a problem in a rotary engine unless there are restrictions in the exhaust system, so a bigger primary tube will not be a significant issue to the velocity?
5- we dont have to worry about reversion do we?
6- Which would be the best a venturi collector or a straight collector( merged).
7- transitions after the header are a no brainer to me--need to be smooth and equal diameter--right?
Presently I do not know of anyone that manufacturers a header for us that has an internal primary pipe diameter of 2 inches? The biggest I have seen is 43mm.
I am thinking that is the size that I need for my engine. I guess that would mean a custom fab job?
I have spoken with Burns some and they will do one--it just gets really expensive really fast. They wouldnt do one unless 321 SS was used.
Thoughts?
I don't think id be comfortable with 1 pipe trying to flow 2 ports worth of exhaust gasses
I just don't see how this can be better than the standard 3 to 1 header, i mean if it was, wouldn't all the big names be doing it?
Plus i don't see how it would be physically possible to do in a short header format.
However i could be completely wrong lol
It is an interesting concept however
08-12-2012, 08:34 AM
#149
thanks for the feedback Ray. I think the last line in your post, for me, is very true.
My thoughts on the siamesed port is that since the front/rear exhaust ports are seeing 2 per rpm, the center port has to be seeing 4 per rpm. If that is correct, then the siamese port exhaust pulses, in theory, would need to be handled differently? Maybe a slightly bigger diameter pipe for it? Maybe a stepped primary?
Again I really dont know.
My thoughts on the siamesed port is that since the front/rear exhaust ports are seeing 2 per rpm, the center port has to be seeing 4 per rpm. If that is correct, then the siamese port exhaust pulses, in theory, would need to be handled differently? Maybe a slightly bigger diameter pipe for it? Maybe a stepped primary?
Again I really dont know.
08-12-2012, 10:07 AM
#150
i am leaving my earlier post as a lesson of how one can overthink. The siamese port needs the same size pipe as the others. This came from someone much smarter than I.
Explained like this--the center port exhaust velocity is higher because of the smaller port, thats true. But that port also doesnt flow as much volume and volume is the most important thing to think about.
So the center port exhaust gas flow is faster than the other ports and if you loose that speed, as a result of using a bigger primary pipe , then you hurt overall volume. So by keeping the velocity compared with the other ports then that is the best. I was told to concentrate in using all the room available to keep the primary straight for as long as you can, before the first bend, to use an excellent merge collector (this is an area in which individual tuning .he suspects, will have the biggest affect in the FI'ed engine), and keep the transitions smooth, equal and straight.
He thinks also a longer tubed header than what is being currently offered on the commercial market
will have good affect. He also advised against wrapping any header and he wasnt sure about coatings--but he suspects that the exhaust ports need as much cooling as possible and he can see that a thermal coating may actually impede that to a small degree. He advises just a good heat shield.
Sounds like BHR is on the right tract with its product. It may be worth the wait for me as it would probably be less expensive than a custom build.
Explained like this--the center port exhaust velocity is higher because of the smaller port, thats true. But that port also doesnt flow as much volume and volume is the most important thing to think about.
So the center port exhaust gas flow is faster than the other ports and if you loose that speed, as a result of using a bigger primary pipe , then you hurt overall volume. So by keeping the velocity compared with the other ports then that is the best. I was told to concentrate in using all the room available to keep the primary straight for as long as you can, before the first bend, to use an excellent merge collector (this is an area in which individual tuning .he suspects, will have the biggest affect in the FI'ed engine), and keep the transitions smooth, equal and straight.
He thinks also a longer tubed header than what is being currently offered on the commercial market
will have good affect. He also advised against wrapping any header and he wasnt sure about coatings--but he suspects that the exhaust ports need as much cooling as possible and he can see that a thermal coating may actually impede that to a small degree. He advises just a good heat shield.
Sounds like BHR is on the right tract with its product. It may be worth the wait for me as it would probably be less expensive than a custom build.