Finally got my EKT headers!

[kc95sc400]

I am glad you fixed the misalignment of the exhaust system to the header flanges. When people force the pipes to fit and tighten bolts tension is created which leads to cracking and failure. I do not know if the misalignment will be a problem with every set of these headers but the whole idea of a direct bolt in was a big selling point.

What a pig of a job, my god. I will never do it again if I can help it.

Not only were the flanges misaligned, after forcing them over, they were not flat with each other. Huge exhaust leak on both sides.

In my mind, even if there wasn't an exhaust leak, the problem had to be properlly fixed. I also modified the bracket that connects the the headers to the transmission, this in my mind also was a must to keep any flex in the exhaust system downstream and not on the head flanges.

I am not digging the downpipes or the H pipe. It looks like the H pipe (which you had added previously) joins the stock pipes 50mm (1.97")with dual 2.00" pipes, those go to resonators and then MAYBE 2.25" pipes to your 2.25" Magnaflows. This is all OK although crush bent piping. What I don't like is the position of the H section. It is where the pipes are bent toward each other and this will allow the inertial energy to charge back up the opposite pipe. I would located it a couple inches past that area where the pipes are parallel or use a Y or X design instead. Caution: all Y and X designs are NOT equal. I am not a fan of the Magnaflow X. I send people to the Burns Stainless site to see a PROPER design.

I don't like the header back exhaust either. All of the rest of the exhaust was done before I had even thought about supercharging. Although, I'm fairly sure that all the piping back to the resonators (except the small section of stock piping that is left of course) is 2.25 inch and from the resonators to the mufflers (dynomax super turbos BTW) is 2.5 inch. I'm not sure why the guy used 2.5 inch in the back since the mufflers are 2.25 in / out. I will eventually get it redone.

So your reffering to these? http://www.burnsstainless.com/Crossovers/crossovers.html

I will eventually go with an x pipe or a y to y.

On the downpipes It looks like your exhaust guy used 2.25" pipes from the header collectors (collector diameter 2.50"?) and those pipes slip OVER your stock 50mm pipes. This creates 2 separate negative transitions. First is outlet from collectors to 2.25 which is a step and then the 2.25 to 50mm which is another sharp step.

I didn't think to measure the collectors on the headers but I think it's actually 2.4 inch. I may be getting the EKT y-pipe from Chase and he had said that it was 2.4 inch piping.

Now, I know you want to go straight 2.5" pipes. This would eliminate the steps. With your supercharger you may do fine with 2.5" pipes although it will take a complete re-do of your system and may hurt your low end response and power.

My system needs a complete redo...LOL. Need to find someone who knows what they're doing as well.

Since the headers are installed and I still have plenty of low end, I'm not really afraid to go 2.5 inch. I think I actually have more low end now than I did with the stock manifolds. The only thing I have noticed is a slight lack of response when accelorating lightly in 4th gear. This is the only time I've ever noticed it, respone everywhere else has seemed to improve.

I do have a question though, would you consider crush bent 2.5 inch piping a good comprimise between 2.25 and 2.5 inch piping? Assuming of course that the bends are not too bad.

Thanks for the input. BTW, I plan on going to the track tomorrow night and I'll be sure to post ets and mph's. It's only an 1/8 mile track but it's the best I can do for now.

KC

 

[JBrady]

I'm fairly sure that all the piping back to the resonators (except the small section of stock piping that is left of course) is 2.25 inch and from the resonators to the mufflers (dynomax super turbos BTW) is 2.5 inch. I'm not sure why the guy used 2.5 inch in the back since the mufflers are 2.25 in / out. I will eventually get it redone.

Of course all I can go on is your pictures but when looking at the connection between your stock 1.97" downpipes to the fabricated H pipe the new pipes had to be expanded to fit over the stock pipes. This would not be required if he had used 2.25" as the stock pipes would easily fit inside those pipes just like the header to stock pipes he added recently.

So your reffering to these? http://www.burnsstainless.com/Crossovers/crossovers.html

I will eventually go with an x pipe or a y to y.

Yes the Burns X pipe maintains velocity where the Magnaflow style is much more prone to turbulence.

Burns

The Magnaflow X on a 2.5" system is OK but the Magnaflow Y pipe kills velocity.

I didn't think to measure the collectors on the headers but I think it's actually 2.4 inch. I may be getting the EKT y-pipe from Chase and he had said that it was 2.4 inch piping.

That is interesting. 2.4" is probably 2.36" which = 60mm
I would like to know the primary tube size on those headers they may be metric as well. 1.5" = 38mm, 1.625 = 41mm, 1.75 = 44.5mm

Dual 2.36" pipes would probably work best with a 3.0" or 75mm center pipe

I do have a question though, would you consider crush bent 2.5 inch piping a good comprimise between 2.25 and 2.5 inch piping? Assuming of course that the bends are not too bad.

Crush bent pipe obviously works. However the crush is at the bends so on top of the direction change you get a volume change this increases velocity in the turn BUT the energy to change the velocity has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is increased resistance to flow ie backpressure. After the bend the velocity drops creating higher pressure (venturi effect). Avoiding volume changes reduces pumping loss. That said sometimes the net effect can be a net gain as in an X or Y pipe or even H pipe. You can always buy an assortment of pre-bent mandrel pipe from JC Whitney ($100 or so for several) or find a shop with a mandrel bender (pricey)

Another option would be to buy a "grab bag" of 10 odd bend cuts from Stainless Works for $150 add some straight pipe and you have the material to build a stainless mandrel system.
http://www.stainlessworks.net/cart/product_info.php?cPath=95_109_490&products_id=1532

 

[kc95sc400]

Couple of other things I thought of.....

JBrady, feel free to move this thread into the exhaust section. It does belong there and I'm sorry I put it in the FI section.

Of all the things that could go wrong with an aftermarket header install, misalignment of the flanges is not the worst thing that can happen. I do agree that this is / was a big selling point for these headers versus the SS or the Rush headers since they (the Rush and SS) definately need header back exhaust work to fit an SC.

I have to wonder what the EKT y pipe is aligned to. To the stock manifolds or to where the headers sit? Would be interesting if the EKT headers don't line up with the EKT y pipe.

Yes the Burns X pipe maintains velocity where the Magnaflow style is much more prone to turbulence.

Not really knowing as much as I should about exhaust, I can see that the Magnaflow y pipe is a very poor design. I have to wonder if there is actually piping inside of it?

I don't think the x looks horrible. Looks like its biggest flaw compared to the Burns units is that it has allot less area where the pipes meet each other. Probably doesn't "crossflow" nearly as much as the Burns unit does.

That is interesting. 2.4" is probably 2.36" which = 60mm
I would like to know the primary tube size on those headers they may be metric as well. 1.5" = 38mm, 1.625 = 41mm, 1.75 = 44.5mm

Dual 2.36" pipes would probably work best with a 3.0" or 75mm center pipe

I intended to measure the primaries and never did, sorry. If you contact CanYouSeeMe on this forum he was / is expecting his set. He was part of the original GB. If he hasn't installed them yet he would likely be willing to take some measurements for you.

It seems to be pretty standard to add half an inch to a center pipe in a y to y.

Pipe sizing aside, what do you prefer? X or Y to Y?

Crush bent pipe obviously works. However the crush is at the bends so on top of the direction change you get a volume change this increases velocity in the turn BUT the energy to change the velocity has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is increased resistance to flow ie backpressure. After the bend the velocity drops creating higher pressure (venturi effect). Avoiding volume changes reduces pumping loss. That said sometimes the net effect can be a net gain as in an X or Y pipe or even H pipe. You can always buy an assortment of pre-bent mandrel pipe from JC Whitney ($100 or so for several) or find a shop with a mandrel bender (pricey)

Another option would be to buy a "grab bag" of 10 odd bend cuts from
Stainless Works for $150 add some straight pipe and you have the material to build a stainless mandrel system.
http://www.stainlessworks.net/cart/p...oducts_id=1532

Well said, I now have a much better understanding of why crush bent is bad. I hadn't considerd the volume and velocity changes. I have it in my head that an exhaust system is only as good as its smallest path. Example, if you have 3 inch piping with a section of 2 inch piping somewhere in the system, the exhaust system will only be as good as a 2 inch system.

I have actually been considering the option of buying individual bends. I think it would be far cheaper than taking it to a shop with a mandrel bender. Not only do they charge a premium for using the bender, I imagine any shop with a mandrel bender charges a steeper labor rate.

After all the info you've provided me so far, I'm kind of thinking that my current exhaust is probably worse off than the completely stock exhaust. DOH!

Fixing the exhaust is very high up on my priority list. Regardless of whether I go with 2.25 or 2.5, I imagine I have quite a few ponies waiting to be unleashed.

KC

 

[kc95sc400]

Ok, went to the track tonight, 1/8 mile.

For reference, I've been to three different tracks. Mooresville, NC (1/8) ; Rockingham, NC (1/4) ; and Darlington, SC (1/4). My best run (Rockingham) before the headers was:

RT .027
60 1.967
330 5.687
1/8 8.686
1/8 mph 82.15
1000 11.306
1/4 13.498
mph 102.14

Before tonight, the last track I was at was Darlington. I was not running very good there at all. As far as 1/8 mile stats go I was in the 8.7's to 8.9's and only had one run that the 1/8 mph was over 82 mph.

My best time at Mooresville, before tonight, was 8.795 at 82 something mph.

All of the times listed above were with my current setup minus the headers. I have not made any changes since the above runs and tonight except for the headers.

Ambient temps tonight were very close to 90 degrees, about the same as the last few times I've been to any of the tracks, including the above listed runs.

TO THE POINT.

My best run tonight at Mooresville:

RT .127
60ft 1.950
330 5.632
ET 8.569
MPH 84.035

This time is .226 seconds faster than I have ever run at this track and .117 seconds faster than my prev best 1/8 mile time ever, which was at Rockingham. This is also almost a full 2 mph faster than my best time at Rockingham. If you averaged all my 1/8 mile trap speeds, I am now 2 to 2.5 mph faster. This is quite significant. This should put me around AT LEAST a 13.3 in the quarter. I'd be willing to bet I'd be closer to a 13.2. The standard formula to calculate 1/4 time based on 1/8 time is 1/8 time multiplied by 1.55. On average based on my past 1/4 runs, my car does around 1.54 to 1.545.

I am very happy. I was only hoping for a flat 8.6!

Some other notes.

I am actually shifting to third before I get to the 1/8 mile mark.

Between the three tracks that I've been to, I've probably done 50+ runs. Out of those 50+ runs I've had only 4-5 runs with sub 2 second 60ft times. I had 5 runs tonight with sub 2 second 60fts. 1 or 2 of these was with wheel spin!

My traction problems are much worse now. Before the headers, I was able to stomp the gas (no brake boosting at all) and take off without any spin. Tonight, I had to feather the throttle to wide open or I'd spin.

I am very happy. I also think that with a few more back to back runs, I'd go faster.

KC

 

[kc95sc400]

JBrady,

Just wondering if you had any other comments, suggestions.

I know you have pretty limited info but, if this was your car, what would you do?

Have you by any chance ever heard of Calvin Elston?

KC

 

[kc95sc400]

Hey guys, have installed my exhaust. I know I'm lazy but go here for more info. http://clublexus.com/forums/showthread.php?t=377422

Down to an 8.443 on the 1/8 mile track!

KC

 

[cjsupra90]

KC, Just looked at the link... Pretty good job there for being your first time welding.....

I noticed that you camera is having an issue. I dont know if will work for you, but mine had done that same thing a year or so ago and I took the batt. out of it for a few hours and it seemed to fix the issue. Its a long shot but if you haven't tried that yet, give it a try.... The other thing is call manufacture tech support, they might know a fix for it or a reset or something.....


Oh, please like any video's or sound clips here too once you get them.

 

[kc95sc400]

cjsupra90,

Hey man sorry, just realized I never responded to your post.

I did try formatting the camera, removing the battery and a few other things, no luck. There's something wrong with the switch, it's stock in auto mode. It won't change to any other mode. I did try taking it apart at one point but it has these stupid tamper proof screws on it. Blah..

Thanks for the welding compliment. It does look like crap, don't lie, but I'm pretty sure there's no leaks which is the most important thing.

I still have not been able to take any new vids, hopefully I'll be able to figure out something soon....

KC

 

[cjsupra90]

KC, sorry to hear that the camera is messed.....

As for the welds, you might think they look like crap when compaired to other welds in which case, yeah they are but for your first time welding, they are not bad at all. I've seen a lot worse that that for someones first time. Hell for that matter, (although I wouldn't really want to fully admit to this being a professional welder lol ) my first welds were just as bad, if not worse.

Laying down good beads take practice, lots and lots of practice.....

Hope you can work out something and get some vids or sound files up soon.