Hoffman900 wrote: ↑30 Sep 2024, 15:08
For example; we had a header built that was the same exact length, same collector, but focus on packaging and nice big bend radii. ... Even with the same length, it made 10-12% more power everywhere and much better in the transients. This exercise was all about managing flow losses which opens up your ability to use diameters the engine actually wants and makes sense for the use.
That's a good anecdote!
It seems to match up with ~950hp F1 V10s, which presumably moved a similar flow rate of air to ~950hp NASCAR small block V8s. Big bend radii etc:
But should one not be cautious trying to compare 5.7L 1000hp small block crossplane V8s to typical 3L 500hp Formula 3000 flatplane V8s? As seen on the previous page, the Formula 3000 header systems are
very long and have
lots of bends, no? So the thinking there seems more like as suggested by Tommy Cookers and leblanc?
Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑29 Sep 2024, 17:27
length equality of 'headers' is much more important than curvatures
leblanc wrote: ↑30 Sep 2024, 03:16
Especially with naturally aspirated engines, tuned, equal-length headers have the greatest advantage.
The Formula 3000 header is
very different to a Formula 1 header after all!
Even older F1 headers, when the rpm and power output were lower, are
more like the Formula 3000 header. [Unless that's just outdated 1990's thinking?
]
Early 90's V10:
Late 00's V8:
Also:
timing belts on a racing engine?! What possessed Renault/Mecachrome to not use gears?