What header was tested first? Is it possible that it was a "bad" header? any dents or bumps on it? how can it be so bad? it looks and have the same primarys as the type one! or did anyone notice i would like to see a pic of the Type One and the JUN side by side.


[Modified by caliItr, 9:14 AM 12/20/2001]

 

I just talked to Todd today (pres. of JUN) The JUN header is specifically tuned for their type 3 cams. It could have been anything with the test though. We are talking 3-4 differences between most of these headers. I have tested my car and then ran it again 20 minutes later, and lost 3 hp. It is very hard to tell, but I am sure these guys did exactly the same things for each header being tested.

 

Well, that does it then if i have to keep my car, im going to put jun 3s on..hell i paid 550 for the header already. unless someone wants to buy it from me?

 

I don't think so. All other header makes good power just the matter fact how you tune it to work

 

Actually,

Every time I've dyno'd my R the last run is typically the strongest for some reason. We let the car cool down somewhat between runs so that the numbers are not skewed due to heat soak, but somehow the last run always posts the strongest numbers with no tuning changes from run to run.

Is this true of any of your experiences? If so, some of the first headers tested on the great header test might have produced slightly lower numbers than the headers tested last. I don't know why this happens, just speaking from personal experience.

 

Aren't 4-2-1 headers built for mid range power and 4-1 built for top end? The JUN 3s are top end power makes, so why put a 4-2-1 header on your car if you want to gain top end? I thought about purchasing the JUN header (super great quality), but I already had a 4-1 Mugen.

Peace...

 

I think the header test gave the JUN header some bad press, as it did some others.. but this should not be taken the wrong way. It just shows that fr a STOCK motor.. the JUN header may not be the best choice.

But think about it.. not many of us are stock anymore. Most of us have done internal engine work.

I think combined with the cams and the right tuning, the JUN header will do just as good as the Spoon, Type One or Mugen..

 

I agree with this. If the header is "tuned" for a motor that flows more air - then I don't think that it will greatly affect the performance of the stock motor. Is this wrong to assume this?

 

so Ill raise the point.. why was the test even done? seems like a big waste of time and money. Only people it really helped was those who have a stock motor and are looking for a header as there first mod. And even so the results from the best and most expensive header to the least were only a couple horsepower. And all of the results come in within and allowable margin of error so If I did the same test somewere else all the numbers could come out backwards. I dont really see why every1 is going nuts over the thing in the first place.

 

Well, in hindsight, it may seem like it was a waste of time and money because no one header outshined all the others. But without the test, you wouldn't be able to formulate the current opinion you have about the test. Nobody knew what the results were going to be but now we have an idea what these headers do on a Type R w/basic bolt-ons. I think it helped a lot of people actually. People that know they won't be doing internal work to the car will go with the cheaper alternative. That my friend, is a potential savings of $500 for those who thought about buying a high-end header for their strictly bolt-on only car.


[Modified by CPR, 12:13 PM 12/20/2001]

 

Exactly!!!

Very well stated CPR. Before the test just about everyone with or without a header felt they knew the answer to which one was the best or yielded the best results.

So all opinions aside, now you have to look at the numbers and form your own reasoning and figure out what and where you want to go with the results and what header to buy.

If for anything at least we now have some truely unbiased numbers with which to analyze and peruse before spending our hard earned money on something that may or may not perform to our expectations.

I dunno about you but $1000. is a bunch of cash, I'm just glad my $1000. was spent well.

SPOON!

A.

 

I think, the most important thing is, that we know now:
Every header had a good gain, isn`t it ?

I think that every header which worked great on a stock R, will work also great on an R with hot cams. But then it`s a question of tuning of course...

The biggest surprise for me is the 2,25`` comptech 4-2-1. Performend great in my eyes though it`s collector size.

 

No.. actually that assumption can not be made.

 

Why would it be so surprising that Comptech's header performed so great on a stock motor. I would hope that comptech did some R&D before they put out on the market. Now if it can keep up with a modded motor putting over 200 whp then I will be surprised.

CB

 

It's more than a question of tuning when it comes to hotter cams. As you know, more aggressive cams essentially allows more air flow at a given point in time when compared to stock cams. The headers with bigger primaries, secondaries, and collectors will be able to handle this increased air flow better than the headers with smaller tubes. So if the header test was done on a car with aftermarket cams, I believe you'll see bigger gaps between the dyno curves of each header.


[Modified by CPR, 12:54 PM 12/20/2001]

 

You know that the comptech is not built for 200whp.. With that power the 2,25 `` header/exhaust should be replaced with a 2,5``.

I was surprised, because it performed almost like the other headers with bigger collectors.

I`m sure that every header which works great on a stock R works also great on a modded R as long as the whp stays up to 190.

 

I think the test was excellent. Sure, for a completely scientifically valid test more runs should have been done and repeated over several days etc. However, the test gave some very good data points.

What the test really showed to me is that a lot of people have opinions on the effectiveness of certain products and brands that are based on little or no evidence.

I was not all that surprised at the Comptech result. Most dyno results I have seen for this header (for example, at the Integra Dyno Center) have been reasonably impressive. For some reason, Comptech appears to have a poor reputation among some people. I have read numerous posts over the past few years in which people complain that the Comptech header is pointless and is barely better than stock. Oddly, I can't recall a single post where any evidence was supplied for this assertion.

 

Posted by TUAN at SHO:

"if you base it on overall area under the hp vs rpm curve from 3000-8400 rpm, the Spoon long primaries 4-2-1 won the test."

"if you base it on area under curve from 6500-8400 rpm then the SMSP won the test."

Remember the test is the BASE information. TRUE tuning is the key and a differenmt cam setup may yield different results altogether. BUT, it was billed as an NA header test without major tuning.

Good luck guys,

A.

PS Nothing for nothing but, Just seeing these posts and intelligent debates with important data is such a breathe of fresh air compared to the regular rehash of old information and topics

 

The only thing I get out of the headers test is that I wouldn't waste money on those expensive header if I don't plan to take my ITR any further than I/H/E. Just go get the JDM DC or JDM ITR or even the Comptech header and save yourself $3-600.

This test didn't tell a damn thing about which header is the best for ITR with bigger cams. So I would say get the JUN header if you have JUN cams, TODA header for TODA cams, and Spoon header for Spoon cams. So, until someone did a test and prove that TODA or Spoon header would do better than JUN header on JUN cams equipped ITR, I wouldn't worry about that the JUN header would hurt the performance of your car!!

 

this test provided some insights but by no means is the result an end-it-all statement. if anything it just raised a lot of questions.

some cam gear tuning could've easily dramatically altered the dyno results. also if the rpm was raised to 9000 or even 9500 rpm you would've seen more differences.

some of the differences in the test are pretty darn small. to me most of the headers practically came out of the same in this particular test configuration. the only notable info I get out of this test is, 1. JDM ITR 4-1 is good and pretty cheap and looks stock. 2. JDM DC 4-1 is good, and the best deal out there. Everything else can be argued.

you change more test variables (bigger cams, cam gear tuning, higher rev limit), and it's a whole new ball game.



[Modified by frank@b16a.com, 12:11 PM 12/20/2001]

 

This thread got me thinking about special situations such as when only a Jun intake cam is installed. Which header would be suitable then? I mean your'e half Jun half OEM Honda. Let's suppose I had a Jun 3 intake cam and ITR exhaust cam.

 

Well, let me say this. I used to have the DC JDM 4-1 on my G2/ITR hybrid with Toda B cams and pretty much built up, and it was decent. My main reason for wanting a different header is that the DC 4-1 sits WAY too low to the ground. I scraped it up pretty bad. I was able to get a steal of a deal on a JUN 4-2-1 (straight trade for my DC plus some car work), and I must say that I do notice more torque, although top end did not seem to change at all. Mind you this is what I felt. But regardless of the dyno numbers, the quality of the JUN header is amazing....and I love the fact that I have over 1.5" more ground clearance than the DC. That means no more cringing every time I go over a "medium sized" bump. I would post some pictures of the JUN, but stupid photopoint is down.

 

We should not forget that we are talking of 3whp difference in most cases. There are a lot of other things which can make a similar differnce in real life... Different fuel, different oil, temperature, less or more oxygen in the air....

Every aftermarket header had a better result than stock so we can say that swapping the header results in performance. That`s the primary idea I`ve got when I saw the results... Combine it with the fact (if this is true..) that 4-1 is better for peak power and 4-2-1 better for low end and midrange and find out how much money you will spend. Than you should know what to do...
or what to not.

I`ve chosen dc 421 because my setup performs under 190whp and for me I need midrange power.. imho not a too bad choice when I think of the relatively low price.

 

how low was your car? I was planning to get the dc jdm 4-1 headers but if its going to be bottoming out, i might just go with jdm 4-1 instead..

 

My car sits with approximately a 2" drop. The G2 sits a bit lower than the G3 if I am not mistaken. I know that the JDM ITR 4-1 sits about .5" higher than the DC JDM 4-1. Even raising my car to 1.8" drop, I still had scraping problems. And I drive my car VERY carefully. I have speed bump paranoia....hehehe. I have pics of my ground clearance with the DC on my photopoint account as well, but as I said before, photopoint is still down. If you e-mail me at g2guru@hotmail.com , I'll send you the pic of my ground clearance when I get home. I'm at work now and don't have it here. The bottom of the JUN header sits pretty close to flush with the bottom of my oil pan.