long Tube Tri-y, Dyno comparison soon!

[TCASON]

We will be conducting our own test of our own two different designs to see if one firing order is better then the other.
There has been a debate on which firing order is best suited for the Ecotec motor.
This is an ideal test of the two since they are so similar in design except for the firing order.
If the firing order does make a difference, then we will go with that header. We are always looking to make a better product!

As a current bench mark, we have Gizmo's ( Solstice ) Dyno results compared with a stock Solstice that was run on the same Dyno. (Gizmo was the first recipient of our Long Tube Tri-y and High flow cat. )

Results:

Gizmo
RWHP 160.44
RWTQ 161.17

Stock-
RWHP 145 .69
RWTQ 149.19

Gizmo's gain
RWHP 14.75
RWTQ 11.98

Test was done at Charlotte, NC on a Dynojet with a PCMforless Tune

We have already decided to make a small change to our current header, if that remains to be the better header, as when we designed this latest header we were able to design it so that with either header, there will be no more gas welds on the primaries ( there are gas welds now in the "prototype", but none if it goes into production )

The only comparison left, would be of the competitors Tri-y header, since they have a different design to their header. ( shorter primaries, before they go into the first set of collectors )
A test between our header and the competitors (if the firing order of the headers is the same) would show the difference on how longer or shorter primaries effect the performance of the header design.


Here is a picture of the firing order swap:

Compared to the first design:

And here are some side by side comparisons:

Another view of how our collectors fit.