!.6L header

i'm_rich · Post by **i'm_rich** » February 13th, 2006, 4:52 pm

hey

does anyone have or know of a header for a 95 mx-3 with a 1.6L DOHC?

Limegreen mx-3 · Post by **Limegreen mx-3** » February 14th, 2006, 1:28 pm

http://corksport.com/store/large/oodo/m ... eader.html

how about this

nicksmx3 · Post by **nicksmx3** » February 14th, 2006, 4:32 pm

sweet rih, how about a 1.6sohc?

Joey's mx · Post by **Joey's mx** » February 14th, 2006, 5:23 pm

use a 2.0L probe header!!!

i'm_rich · Post by **i'm_rich** » February 14th, 2006, 6:21 pm

Hey Limegreen mx-3
thanks for the link...that's perfect.

Hey nick try this...it's from Limegreen mx-3.

http://corksport.com/store/category/53f ... ntake.html

Limegreen mx-3 · Post by **Limegreen mx-3** » February 14th, 2006, 7:58 pm

[quote="nicksmx3"]sweet rih, how about a 1.6sohc?[/quote

http://corksport.com/store/large/oodp/m ... eader.html

hope this helps

Limegreen mx-3 · Post by **Limegreen mx-3** » February 14th, 2006, 8:04 pm

i'm_rich wrote:Hey Limegreen mx-3
thanks for the link...that's perfect.

Hey nick try this...it's from Limegreen mx-3.

http://corksport.com/store/category/53f ... ntake.html

No problem man

monty73741 · Post by **monty73741** » February 15th, 2006, 4:52 pm

Joey's mx wrote:use a 2.0L probe header!!!

i dont mean to knock you but has anyone even dyno'd the stock 1.6ldohc with the 2.0l header

Yoda · Post by **Yoda** » February 18th, 2006, 10:42 am

Running a few numbers I would suspect that the 2.0L headers on a 1.6 is going to be a step backwards. for the displacement of the 1.6 and the rpm peak torque and hp are made at the inside diameter of the primary pipe doesn't have to be any bigger that about 7/8" and ever if the engine were to make 200hp the optimum diameter only increase to 1 to 1 1/8". Checking my collection of catalogs the Bosal 2.0L headers are approx. 1 1/2" ID going to a large diameter pipe basically shifts the peak torque numbers up to a higher rpm. Since peak torque and rpms determine your peak HP your Hp also increases. But since the 1.6 make peak torque at a relatively high rpm shifting the torque curve up the scale also increase the peak hp to a higher rpm the only problem with this is that the stock cams duration, valve lift, and fuel map which limits where the engine can make power so what you get is the peak HP rpm higher that the mechanical limits of engine to process air and fuel. This means you have just lower up low to mid rpm torque when makes your car slower accelerating and you have clipped the hp curve below the peak HP rpm. You are probably saying I feel a difference. Yes you are feeling a difference but is is just the shift in torque curve that you are feeling and the mental justification for having a smaller bank account .

The Genie headers aren't that great either. Looking at the dyno number on one of the 323 groups a few years ago his baseline was almost identical to one of my cars. Just test a theory and my flex joint was in need of replacement I made a better flow replacement flexpipe. ( BTW the OE flex pipe in the MX-3 is the same P/N# for the B3,5,6 & BP SOHC and DOHC in the 323 and EGT) Ran a new baseline was with in a hp of his. Change the pipe and did several runs throwing out the highest and lowest and averaging the others I still had more of a HP gain and more importantly a torque gain in the lower RPMs. Which indicated a $50 replacement pipe actually did more that the headers. Since them I have tried several other pipe designs and extracted a bit more power. It may not have the bling of a header but at least I do have more power at near stock rpms.

Josh · Post by **Josh** » February 18th, 2006, 11:58 am

monty73741 wrote:
Joey's mx wrote:use a 2.0L probe header!!!
i dont mean to knock you but has anyone even dyno'd the stock 1.6ldohc with the 2.0l header

They are all cheep headers, so it really doesent matter at all. their was no thought into building them other than to make them fit the car. the 2.0L probe header is probably the best bang for the buck, and looks way better. honestly on an N/A engine a properly tuned header is all you need, the rest of the exhaust doesent even matter, if you can make or get a header tuned for maximum velocity (because its not backpressure you want). generally if you go alittle bigger on your ID of the runners you want to do longer runners with a 4-1.

i would still get the probe header

Yoda · Post by **Yoda** » February 18th, 2006, 10:26 pm

Josh wrote:
monty73741 wrote:
Joey's mx wrote:use a 2.0L probe header!!!
i dont mean to knock you but has anyone even dyno'd the stock 1.6ldohc with the 2.0l header
They are all cheep headers, so it really doesent matter at all. their was no thought into building them other than to make them fit the car. the 2.0L probe header is probably the best bang for the buck, and looks way better. honestly on an N/A engine a properly tuned header is all you need, the rest of the exhaust doesent even matter, if you can make or get a header tuned for maximum velocity (because its not backpressure you want). generally if you go alittle bigger on your ID of the runners you want to do longer runners with a 4-1.

i would still get the probe header

Glad to see you agree that the 2.0L only look good on the 1.6L. As you have point out bigger diameter tubes decrease exhaust velocity by slowing the exhaust pulse waves exiting the exhaust ports which increases engine blowdown (where the engine has to force the exhaust gasses out of the cylinder and contaminates the intake charge) rather than increasing the scavanging effect where the pulse waves create a vacuum behind it as they travel away from the cylinder which increase the efficiently of air to fill the cylinders. One point you made about the rest of the exhaust not mattering after the exhaust manifold (header) is not 100% correct. If done correctly you can create a natural supercharging effect by allowing exhaust gasses to expand and and cool as it passes through the exhaust system. This is one reason a good chambered muffler is better that a large straight through glasspack muffler for making power and reducing sonic energy but this is a whole another topic that has been done before.

BTW I wouldn't say the no thought went into the existing headers on the market. I have worked with Bosal on a MX-3 project the died on the drawing board and they do make calculations and test several protoype before product goes to market for the headers they make and I have met with the technical people from Genie back in about 1996 at tech seminar I was invited to. They also don't just start welding tubes together to fit the available space. There is a little compromise between the pre conseved idea in the consumers head and what actually works and to allow of a range of modifications. A header for the 1.6 could have easily been made with the over the optimum 1" diameter say 1.125"but no matter how much power they made one one would buy it because in their heads bigger is better and no matter what facts are presented to them otherwise the consumer has been programmed almost from birth that bigger is better and that is all the see. So it comes down to a battle between marketing and engineering. I work in both these worlds have a goos idea what tricks are used to get people to buy a product.