Supersprint Stepped vs stock Euro header Evolve review/dyno

[Obioban]

I'd like to see a comparison with the ARH headers. I've been strongly considering them for the sound alone.

Don't do it. ARH is not a good path to go down.

[9kracing]

Don't do it. ARH is not a good path to go down.

Why not?

[Obioban]

Why not?

Power is lacking compared to other options (include ebay options), tuning/street legality is a PITA because you only have one pre cat 02 sensor.

[M3dragon]

I tried a few headers, Stayed with the stepped ones, sound and felt the best. Euro I felt were the slowest of all the ones I did.

[9kracing]

Power is lacking compared to other options (include ebay options)

The design of the ARH is made to make power in the upper RPMs. It will lose midrange compared to a shorter header, but should make quite a bit more peak, depending on the supporting mods.

I'd love to see that header on a car with big cams and heavily modified intake revving to 9K. The only dynos I was able to find showed it on cars that shouldn't be running it.

[Obioban]

The design of the ARH is made to make power in the upper RPMs. It will lose midrange compared to a shorter header, but should make quite a bit more peak, depending on the supporting mods.

I'd love to see that header on a car with big cams and heavily modified intake revving to 9K. The only dynos I was able to find showed it on cars that shouldn't be running it.

No, they aren’t. ARH took their pickup truck header design, made it fit on the s54, changed nothing else, and listed them for sale.

Nothing about them is designed, much less for the s54/high rpm.

[digger]

The design of the ARH is made to make power in the upper RPMs. It will lose midrange compared to a shorter header, but should make quite a bit more peak, depending on the supporting mods.

I'd love to see that header on a car with big cams and heavily modified intake revving to 9K. The only dynos I was able to find showed it on cars that shouldn't be running it.

i am also interested to see if anyone has more data .

if you take away the 6into1 aspect and inherent differences due to this, other design features of the ARH seems sub optimal for the majority of engines so they probably missed an opportunity as looks simply like a fairly generic design. Atleast with SS they did a bunch of testing and R&D and quality to justify the astronomical prices whereas the ARH not so much

[Mike RT4]

On a road course - an E9X M3 is easily about 2 seconds faster per lap. More on a high speed course. When I tracked my E90 M3, the only E46's that were faster were racecars with aero. I will destroy just about any streetable E46 without aero in my E90.

Until you take weight out of the E46.....

Just look at the lap times around the Nurburgring for the E92 M3 compared to the M3 CSL (peak E46 ). You can't get much more of a high speed course than the Nurburgring:
CSL = 7:50s
E92 = 8:05s

That's identical tyres and same driver, you can't get more of an accurate comparison.

This is born out in my own experience. A friend has an aero equipped E92 M3 and I push him down the straights at Snetterton (a high speed track), having to lift several times.

[Obioban]

i am also interested to see if anyone has more data .

if you take away the 6into1 aspect and inherent differences due to this, other design features of the ARH seems sub optimal for the majority of engines so they probably missed an opportunity as looks simply like a fairly generic design. Atleast with SS they did a bunch of testing and R&D and quality to justify the astronomical prices whereas the ARH not so much

ARH's Land Cruiser inline 6 headers:
https://americanracingheaders.com/co...a-land-cruiser

ARH's e46 M3 headers:
https://americanracingheaders.com/co...m3-long-system

They used to have side profile photos of both that made it much more clear that they were COMPLETELY identical other than mounting flanges, but it seems they decided that wasn't great marketing (no longer have pictures up that make it as obvious).

Back when they released them, they couldn't show a single picture/evidence/dyno from any sort of development process. By contrast, SuperSprint was able to show me a (full) 3" thick binder of data and results just about e46 M3 development when I toured their offices.

ARH could not have put less effort (development) into this product.

[Slideways]

BMW has used the 3-1 dual bank exhaust on almost all, if not all, their inline 6 engines from the M50 all the way to the P54. Even their V12 stuff like the McF1 S70/2 has 4 banks of 3-1. There must be something optimal about using that design.

Stock, the M3 has a 2.36" dual exhaust going all the way back to the muffler.

ARH is using a 6-1 single bank, single collector that necks down to 3" before continuing on to 3.5" up to the section 1.

Supersprint basically maxed out the piping diameter that would fit under the E46 with their dual 2.5" setup that goes all the way to their section 2.

Now someone with a better understanding of exhaust flow, scavenging, piping diameter, etc. can explain why the dual 2.36" or 2.5" setup is the preferred design over the single 3"-3.5" setup.

[discoelk]

The land cruiser header being the same as the S54 header is a great new piece of misinformation regarding the ARH stuff. Guessing y'all have never seen a 1FZ in real life. The bore spacing is at least 1/4in larger and the engine is enormous. 100mm bore compared to 87mm. Even in the pictures that were posted, the tube layouts are completely different.

I could only find a few dyno plots of the ARH but they seem to make just as much or more than the SS stuff at the expense of torque below 4000rpm.

If I had to guess, the 3-1 setup that is used in BMW OE applications is more about precise lamda control for emissions and catalyst life. There may be durability issues from an OEM perspective that prevents a 6-1 and part throttle driveability may be effected slightly as well. A lot of considerations are made and outright power is not always the primary goal.

I don't have a dog in this fight nor am I a buyer for $2000+ headers.

[digger]

Now someone with a better understanding of exhaust flow, scavenging, piping diameter, etc. can explain why the dual 2.36" or 2.5" setup is the preferred design over the single 3"-3.5" setup.

It's not the pipe diameter it's two (2) main issues
1) grouping of primary pipes that are spaced at a firing interval of 120 degrees vs 240 degrees (ideally you want more seperaton of pulses).
2) having a large area change from the primary to the bigger merge could provide better benefits at some rpm due to a stronger reflected wave but when the exhaust is at an rpm out of tune the negative reversion effects also become worse

Basically both of these promote reversion at various rpm in the powerband when the header is out of tune. Ive not seen an advantage to the 6-1 at topend, though the peak power should be similar and really its a function of pipe size and length and both 6-1 and 6-2 could be designed to be equivalent in that aspect.

i cant really see the 6-1 competing with 6-1 for a broad power band unless one setup was more optimal for a particular engine from a sizing perspective

[Slideways]

It's not the pipe diameter it's two (2) main issues
1) grouping of primary pipes that are spaced at a firing interval of 120 degrees vs 240 degrees (ideally you want more seperaton of pulses).
2) having a large area change from the primary to the bigger merge could provide better benefits at some rpm due to a stronger reflected wave but when the exhaust is at an rpm out of tune the negative reversion effects also become worse

Basically both of these promote reversion at various rpm in the powerband when the header is out of tune. Ive not seen an advantage to the 6-1 at topend, though the peak power should be similar and really its a function of pipe size and length and both 6-1 and 6-2 could be designed to be equivalent in that aspect.

i cant really see the 6-1 competing with 6-1 for a broad power band unless one setup was more optimal for a particular engine from a sizing perspective

Here is the reasoning for the 3-1 from the design document -

"The exhaust gas flow from the exhaust ports to the collector pipes is in six individual primary pipes of identical length. A succession of pressure and induction waves in the exhaust pipe correctly phased to the valve timing is the precondition for good gas exchange. Exhaust from cylinders or primary pipes is therefore only led to common collector pipes if the relevant exhaust valve opening times do not overlap at all or only slightly. Because of the engine’s firing order (1-5-3-6-2-4), the three cylinders 1-2-3 and 4-5-6, respectively, were therefore led to a common collector pipe."

[digger]

The land cruiser header being the same as the S54 header is a great new piece of misinformation regarding the ARH stuff. Guessing y'all have never seen a 1FZ in real life. The bore spacing is at least 1/4in larger and the engine is enormous. 100mm bore compared to 87mm. Even in the pictures that were posted, the tube layouts are completely different.

I could only find a few dyno plots of the ARH but they seem to make just as much or more than the SS stuff at the expense of torque below 4000rpm.

If I had to guess, the 3-1 setup that is used in BMW OE applications is more about precise lamda control for emissions and catalyst life. There may be durability issues from an OEM perspective that prevents a 6-1 and part throttle driveability may be effected slightly as well. A lot of considerations are made and outright power is not always the primary goal.

I don't have a dog in this fight nor am I a buyer for $2000+ headers.

yeah the toyota and bmw heaer are not anywhere close to identical other than being a 6-1 thus are going to look kinda similar to another 6-1 from different engine inherently. they are generic in pipe size though like 1-3/4" pipe size on both like really alsmost doesnt seem to matter what engine lets make it the same lol?

[discoelk]

Would the header be more appealing if it were 1 5/8? What about 1 1/2? Interestingly, the 1FZ header has options for different sizes.

I don't have any calculations or data to back any design versus another but it seems like half the members ragging on these are astroturfing for Supersprint.