AVO Turbo kit, 1000 miles later.

[05whitelegacy]

i thought you and your father were swapping motors?

 

idk we went for a ride in the spec b the other day and my dad always wished he got into racing when he was younger and i wish he did to cause he handles a car like noone i have ever seen before i trust him at 150mph before i trust half my friends at 80 im not just saying it cause its my dad lol so dont get the wrong idea but he's been going threw alotta shit right now and i know driving that car makes him happy so were talking about building it threw the winter and having a sweet car for the spring haha ill keep you posted though

[twobit2354]

Got another MPG update. Had a lot of highway miles this time around, and stayed pretty tame with the throttle.

 

So mixed (mainly highway, aggressive on the throttle every so often) is usually ~ 24-25mpg

Last tank mainly highway ~ 26.55mpg

 

I can live with that

 

 

Wow really? Hmmmm this is pretty awesome. Are you getting 200hp at the wheels?

[1stick3pedals]

Wow really? Hmmmm this is pretty awesome. Are you getting 200hp at the wheels?

 

Yea, my dyno graph is on a previous page if you're curious on the curve.

[1stick3pedals]

Headers from Ralli Sport came in. And are now on. Sound pretty damn good.

 

I went with the metallic substrate cat, it's smaller so oil filter changes will be easier. It should help the engine breath for the turbo too. Sounds raspy, I'll have to catch a dyno day in the Spring to see what kind of power it puts down compared to my 6psi tune.

 

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/9703/dscn3159d.jpg

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9422/dscn3162n.jpg

http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/7745/dscn3163g.jpg

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/6434/dscn3165w.jpg

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/2025/dscn3167a.jpg

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/9611/dscn3172.jpg

http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/2199/dscn3171a.jpg

http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/3975/dscn3170j.jpg

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/4483/dscn3168i.jpg

 

VIDEO!!

http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/7201/83l.mp4

 

Let me know if that link works ^^ I have to brush up on my internet video skills.

[THE RZA]

this was a custom header for the turbo kit?

[Ethics]

1stick3pedals - How hard was it to replace the headers? I'll have mine coming soon and want to make sure I know what I'm doing before I go pulling off the old ones. Is there anything I should know before pulling them off?

 

Also what other exhaust components do you have? Are you currently running the AVO mufflers?

 

Thanks,

Mario

[soloz2]

sounds a bit loud for me... but the clearance for oil changes looks great! Also interested in what these run, what other exhaust components your running and how difficult is the install? lol

[naimouasta]

Thanks for the update!

 

I should unsubscribe from this thread before I buy this kit I keep telling myself my DD should only use regular fuel and get good gas mileage and that I should save the big bucks for an actual performance car (used Porsche 911...yes it'll take a long time to save lol).

 

i just went through this thread and i feel the same way. boost is very tempting.

 

i'm at 89k miles. i should be right around 105k miles late spring/early summer so i'm kind of looking for ideas for my timing belt/rebuild/clutch/tune up.

 

as of right now, motor is running strong, no oil burning issues, headgaskets are weeping, throwout bearing is making a little noise on very cold mornings, clutch also chatters a tiny bit then goes away.

 

like N.sane, this is my DD that i will keep for a really long time. has to be reliable, quiet, run on regular, and get decent gas mileage. so i was just going to get everything cleaned up, replace headgaskets, clutch, TOB, etc etc whatever. also thought about cams, headers, and tune just to add a little spice and efficiency.

 

but 1stick3pedals you're awesome and this thread is awesome, and at the back of my mind i want to be awesome LOL.

[fahr_side]

Headers from Ralli Sport came in. And are now on. Sound pretty damn good.

 

I went with the metallic substrate cat, it's smaller so oil filter changes will be easier. It should help the engine breath for the turbo too. Sounds raspy, I'll have to catch a dyno day in the Spring to see what kind of power it puts down compared to my 6psi tune.

 

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/9703/dscn3159d.jpg

 

Is this an n/a header? I can't imagine why anyone would make a turbo header with a cat in it. What advantage does this UEL design offer over using the stock EL header? Even the factory cast manifold design from the LGT offers a very short path from the passenger side head to the turbo to keep as much heat in the gas as possible. This new one has very long paths from both heads and then a cat to suck heat from the exhaust gas. Makes no sense to me, please explain.

[GEE-OTTO]

Is this an n/a header? I can't imagine why anyone would make a turbo header with a cat in it. What advantage does this UEL design offer over using the stock EL header? Even the factory cast manifold design from the LGT offers a very short path from the passenger side head to the turbo to keep as much heat in the gas as possible. This new one has very long paths from both heads and then a cat to suck heat from the exhaust gas. Makes no sense to me, please explain.

 

 

Seeing as how there aren't ANY stock boosteed 2.5i N/A cars we never designed this to be ran with the AVO kit. We designed this a year ahead of the kit for STOCK 2.5i vehicles. Thence the cat, you know to pass emissions:lol: he may find that a UEL like my (modified LGT manifold) will work better but only the dyno will tell.

 

This UEL is the same length as the stock EL as far as primaries are concerned in fact this UEL is shorter. This is the first time this header has even been on a Turbo'd 2.5i so ill be tuned in for the official dyno results. The catless option is on the table as many folks would like to see it so this may push that into production

[GEE-OTTO]

sounds a bit loud for me... but the clearance for oil changes looks great! Also interested in what these run, what other exhaust components your running and how difficult is the install? lol

 

Two reason for the loud factor one he has a SPT V2 Exhaust second no resonator in the DP and we dont have a MP like the Ej255 boys from the factory as that was replaced with the Turbo kit. If he installed a resonator in the Y -pipe (Vibrant super quiet) OR replaced his SPT with the AVO 2.5i Resonated CBE (Sexy exhaust btw ) you wouldn't hear the rasp up top either option is great the SPT is sexy I installed on on a fellow member car recently and as he drove away (2007 LGT) i tear fell from my brow lol

[fahr_side]

Seeing as how there aren't ANY stock boosteed 2.5i N/A cars we never designed this to be ran with the AVO kit. We designed this a year ahead of the kit for STOCK 2.5i vehicles.

OK, this makes a bit more sense... that the header wasn't designed for this sort of application.

This UEL is the same length as the stock EL as far as primaries are concerned in fact this UEL is shorter. This is the first time this header has even been on a Turbo'd 2.5i so ill be tuned in for the official dyno results.

Um, it doesn't look like that to me from the photo above. The driver side primaries look about the same as the stock EL header but not the passenger side... Both primaries and the total length to reach the turbine is much, much longer than stock. There are reasons to go with longer primaries on an n/a setup, but the only reason you'd ever do anything but the shortest route in a turbo header is to equalize the length of the primaries, which is certainly not being done here. As the designer, perhaps you'd like to enlighten me as to why the driver side primaries are dragged all the way over to the passenger side of the car, away from the turbo, just to turn around and come back?

I'd be most interested to see the dyno results because from the look of it the only benefit in this case is the high-flow cat. I imagine he'd have been better off keeping the stock header, gutting its cat, and fitting a cat in the downpipe which is the normal location on a turbo car.

[GEE-OTTO]

1stick3pedals - How hard was it to replace the headers? I'll have mine coming soon and want to make sure I know what I'm doing before I go pulling off the old ones. Is there anything I should know before pulling them off?

 

Also what other exhaust components do you have? Are you currently running the AVO mufflers?

 

Thanks,

Mario

 

First things first one day, before you tackle this project just get down and look under your car just to get a good visual. You will note 9 connections 3 nuts for the drive side head, 3 nuts for the passenger side head and 3 nuts for the stock mid-pipe.

 

Prep:

Once you get your header first thing you do is spay all nine connections with liquid wrench or similar loosening agent. Let that soak in while you: disconnect the positive terminal from the battery and disconnect both O2 sensors from the front passenger side of your engine. They are attached to a bracket and should come loose with a little wiggling Put you car on stands or ramps or a lift if you have access to one.

 

**Optional you can remove the 14mm hanger bolt and push the mid pipe up and over and off of the hanger to give yourself some play when dropping the manifold. It can be done with out it but if it is your first time i would suggest it****

 

Tools:

8mm wrench for battery

14mm socket in 1/2" drive (or 3/8" ) **14mm wrench optional **

4" and 8" extensions

An O2 wrench or a adjustable wrench

** I have also found a big set of channel lock pliers to work well **

New set of exhaust port gaskets and a stock 2.25" three hole manifold to mid-pipe gasket (you can reuse this one if it is in good shape)

Anti seize for insurance against future work

**floor jack to help with lowering manifold if you can't do it one handed or dont have a extra set of hands to hold it while loosening bolts**

 

Process:

 

Take your 14mm socket and 4 or 6 inch extension and loosen the 3 midpipe to header nuts. ( you will have to work around the O2 sensors) Loosen two of the nuts from both driver and passenger side exhaust ports. Now if you have a floor jack place it in the middle of the manifold jack it up to support it and loosen the last two nuts then lower the floor jack and it should drop down. If you don't have a jack, get a friend to support the manifold while you loosen the nuts then lower it or you can do it yourself if you are that dexterous.

 

Once off use the adjustable wrench to remove both O2 sensors.

 

Move the two sensors to the header, coat the studs on the exhaust ports and the midpipe connection with anti-seize. Before installing the header put the new gaskets in place then simply reverse the above procedure.

 

 

Make sure you plug your O2's back in to the harnesses and reconnect the positive wire.

[GEE-OTTO]

OK, this makes a bit more sense... that the header wasn't designed for this sort of application.

 

Um, it doesn't look like that to me from the photo above. The driver side primaries look about the same as the stock EL header but not the passenger side... Both primaries and the total length to reach the turbine is much, much longer than stock. There are reasons to go with longer primaries on an n/a setup, but the only reason you'd ever do anything but the shortest route in a turbo header is to equalize the length of the primaries, which is certainly not being done here. As the designer, perhaps you'd like to enlighten me as to why the driver side primaries are dragged all the way over to the passenger side of the car, away from the turbo, just to turn around and come back?

I'd be most interested to see the dyno results because from the look of it the only benefit in this case is the high-flow cat. I imagine he'd have been better off keeping the stock header, gutting its cat, and fitting a cat in the downpipe which is the normal location on a turbo car.

 

You answered this question as it wasn't made for a Turbo'd 2.5i. There isn't much else to say However there could a version made but seeing as there are only 20 of these in existence and AVO is working on their own header project for this application there isn't a need to optimize it for these folks (not that they aren't coveted ). He is the first turbo'd guy to install this:redface: the other 99.5% are all stock N/A guys.

 

Curios to see dyno numbers and maybe the stocker is better for a boosted 2.5i but it also has 84" of total primary length (19,19, 21, 25) add to that the twisted path and tight substrate design i don't think it flows better than the UEL.

[GEE-OTTO]

I'd be most interested to see the dyno results because from the look of it the only benefit in this case is the high-flow cat. I imagine he'd have been better off keeping the stock header, gutting its cat, and fitting a cat in the downpipe which is the normal location on a turbo car.

 

Well i would say skip all the gutting b/c that presents a potential turbo shredder IF done wrong That UEL is Stock 2.5i inspired and designed. So lets remove that from this mini convo I think the best setup for a boosted 2.5i just might be my setup:

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r182/GEE-OTTO/ge_hdr1.jpg

 

OR

 

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a383/Kostamojen/header2.jpg

 

That is what the 2.0i folks get instead our spider like manifold.

 

Given the two above setups and the top end of the Ej253 that might be most optimal

[fahr_side]

Yes, well... I can agree that gutting a cat isn't easy to do 100%, especially once it's around a bend like that. But still, except for the better cat I don't see this header as being better than the stock one, even on an n/a car. Yes, the 2.0i header does look better with respect to the cat position, and it would probably be the best for a 2.5i with a turbo kit, especially if the primaries are a little smaller in diameter.

The stock LGT manifolds... well let's just say they are designed to do one thing; keep as much heat in the exhaust gas as possible so it has as much energy as possible left when it finally gets to meet the turbine. It does that in two ways. One is the cast-iron construction which holds heat in very well. The other is that it finds about the shortest route possible, even if that does mean some undesirable side-effects like the pulses arriving at odd times and basically every cylinder seeing a different amount of back-pressure at the exhaust port. The only way to fix those issues is to go EL, which means making two of the primaries longer again... Aside from this it's a pretty awful design, especially when applied to an n/a car.

 

Anyway, OT. Carry on.

[GEE-OTTO]

Yes, well... I can agree that gutting a cat isn't easy to do 100%, especially once it's around a bend like that. But still, except for the better cat I don't see this header as being better than the stock one, even on an n/a car. Yes, the 2.0i header does look better with respect to the cat position, and it would probably be the best for a 2.5i with a turbo kit, especially if the primaries are a little smaller in diameter.

The stock LGT manifolds... well let's just say they are designed to do one thing; keep as much heat in the exhaust gas as possible so it has as much energy as possible left when it finally gets to meet the turbine. It does that in two ways. One is the cast-iron construction which holds heat in very well. The other is that it finds about the shortest route possible, even if that does mean some undesirable side-effects like the pulses arriving at odd times and basically every cylinder seeing a different amount of back-pressure at the exhaust port. The only way to fix those issues is to go EL, which means making two of the primaries longer again... Aside from this it's a pretty awful design, especially when applied to an n/a car.

 

Anyway, OT. Carry on.

 

 

Yeah I hear you but the back pressure isnt the issue on the N/A only the Turbo and more specifically that number 4 cylinder but on the dyno there isn't much difference as all equipped (N/As) with UELs have a increase in HP and TQ (obviously shifted on the graph over stock but gains) but the long tube EL's (think LaChute's design) are always at the top ( more room under the graph throughout the RPM ranges vs a defined "sweet spot" ). It really is a preference call at the end of the day. I liken it to Recirc vs VTA us N/A guys dont have as much to deal with so it is tough to disregard principles applied to the Turbo world when in N/A land.

[fahr_side]

Yeah I hear you but the back pressure isnt the issue on the N/A only the Turbo and more specifically that number 4 cylinder but on the dyno there isn't much difference as all equipped (N/As) with UELs have a increase in HP and TQ (obviously shifted on the graph over stock but gains) but the long tube EL's (think LaChute's design) are always at the top ( more room under the graph throughout the RPM ranges vs a defined "sweet spot" ). It really is a preference call at the end of the day. I liken it to Recirc vs VTA us N/A guys dont have as much to deal with so it is tough to disregard principles applied to the Turbo world when in N/A land.

It's a bit hard to answer you if you go into these run-on sentences but I'll do my best to answer these points as far as I can decipher them.

 

Backpressure in a turbo manifold is a measure of efficiency and tuned lengths which in an n/a manifold is definitely important. An UEL n/a has a different rpm range over which it scavenges efficiently that means you have differing amounts of residual gas remaining in the four cylinders. Since we don't have per-cylinder fueling, at least not with the stock ECU, that isn't something you compensate for on the intake side...

 

I don't know where you get this data from that UEL headers make more torque and horsepower than EL designs. Please post some links so I can analyze this.

 

Not sure what connection there is between BPV/BOV differences when those only affect off-throttle AFR on turbo engines with MAF-based fueling and UEL/EL header design most certainly applies to both turbo and n/a setups. Obviously with turbo systems and a layout like we have, turbo far from equidistant to exhaust ports, an UEL design offers higher average gas temperature and energy to the turbine at the expense of other considerations, and therefore advantages in spool. In an n/a system no such advantage exists, and there isn't much data to support the idea that an UEL widens the torque curve by offering up to four different tuned lengths for the individual cylinders. This is especially problematic when, as mentioned, the individual cylinders cannot have their fuel or timing curves altered individually to match the different VE curves created by said differences in tuned exhaust length.

[Ethics]

GEE-OTTO - Thanks for the detailed installation description. I can't wait for mine to arrive so I could put it to use

 

One other question, has your car thrown a CEL? If so what process did you go through to remove it?

 

Just trying to get prepared for when it arrives so I have all angles covered.

 

Thanks,

Mario

[GEE-OTTO]

GEE-OTTO - Thanks for the detailed installation description. I can't wait for mine to arrive so I could put it to use

 

One other question, has your car thrown a CEL? If so what process did you go through to remove it?

 

Just trying to get prepared for when it arrives so I have all angles covered.

 

Thanks,

Mario

 

 

No problem

 

No CELs one year after install and over 15K miles on my LGT modified setup.

 

A few all stock 2.5i owner have had a CEL show up while the temps dipped into the lower 20's the CEL went off after driving it but it was pulled and confirmed to be the P0420. This was due to the cold temps ad the same owners never had an issue in the warmer months and owners in less fridgid environments dont have issues.

 

With your turbo setup you don't really have to worry as much b/c you can tune for the header. If you see constant temps below 25F i would suggest simply wrapping them to aide in "cat light off".

[fahr_side]

Spare us the long winded responses just PM one of us No one is attacking you or trying to make you appear dense btw so no need to throw insults

Mmm. I don't feel like anyone is attacking me, or that I appear dense, or that I've thrown any insults. The smilies are as far as I'm concerned adding more confusion than clarity here, so how about you express yourself with English instead of little animations?

Excuse my ignorance, but who is this 'us' to which you allude, and why should I PM anyone with these points rather than put them out in the open?

[fahr_side]

If you have an issue PM myself or any other of the respondents of this thread. No one cares to read paragraphs about design trade offs and why turbo back pressue, graphs, torque curves blah blah blah. You are beating a dead horse.

 

Or

 

Take your rants elsewhere, you are beating a dead horse

 

You pick whichever is more clear for your understanding.

Oh sorry. I didn't realize this was a private discussion for you and your pals, those who have given you the right to speak for them, and that things got a little too technical for you to follow. I thought perhaps, since you designed this header, you might want to share a bit about the goals and how things worked out, especially since it's being used in an application (turbo) that wasn't it's original purpose. If your target was simply that it fits the car and (subjectively) sounds good (to your ear) than you could just have said so.

[RSR]

Yes, well... I can agree that gutting a cat isn't easy to do 100%, especially once it's around a bend like that. But still, except for the better cat I don't see this header as being better than the stock one, even on an n/a car. Yes, the 2.0i header does look better with respect to the cat position, and it would probably be the best for a 2.5i with a turbo kit, especially if the primaries are a little smaller in diameter.

The stock LGT manifolds... well let's just say they are designed to do one thing; keep as much heat in the exhaust gas as possible so it has as much energy as possible left when it finally gets to meet the turbine. It does that in two ways. One is the cast-iron construction which holds heat in very well. The other is that it finds about the shortest route possible, even if that does mean some undesirable side-effects like the pulses arriving at odd times and basically every cylinder seeing a different amount of back-pressure at the exhaust port. The only way to fix those issues is to go EL, which means making two of the primaries longer again... Aside from this it's a pretty awful design, especially when applied to an n/a car.

 

Anyway, OT. Carry on.

 

This is a case of a very simple misunderstanding, which I am going to clear up right now, so this awesome thread can get back on track.

 

These are my headers. I designed them, I make them. These are a purpose built UEL header meant to be a direct bolt on solution to achieve boxer rumble on the 06+ 2.5i As of now, this is the only header on planet earth that does so. I know how to make a header designed for power, this is NOT my attempt at such. I'll repeat that: This is meant as a sound mod, NOT as a performance mod. I'll take a zero loss in power as a victory and if it makes a couple more ponies, all the better.

 

Now, you may be scratching your head wondering why the hell anyone would pay over five hundred dollars to purposely go from a EL design to a UEL design just for sound. Well, that is a debate that has been going on for years and is a very polarizing subject. I'll tell you this much, there is a huge demand for such a thing. What it boils down to is personal preference.

[CDN 2.5i]

This is a case of a very simple misunderstanding, which I am going to clear up right now, so this awesome thread can get back on track.

 

These are my headers. I designed them, I make them. These are a purpose built UEL header meant to be a direct bolt on solution to achieve boxer rumble on the 06+ 2.5i As of now, this is the only header on planet earth that does so.

 

 

Need to update your website with a product listing for the new header

[fahr_side]

These are my headers. I designed them, I make them. These are a purpose built UEL header meant to be a direct bolt on solution to achieve boxer rumble on the 06+ 2.5i ... This is meant as a sound mod, NOT as a performance mod. I'll take a zero loss in power as a victory and if it makes a couple more ponies, all the better.

Thank you for your very clear and unemotional statement. It's good to be talking to the engineer on this topic. As you put it, for someone to put down $500 for a part that changes sound without power benefits must be quite emotionally attached to that outcome.

I asked the initial question unaware that the header was designed for n/a cars wishing to emulate the turbo boxer sound, but that question was about its application on a car with an aftermarket turbo kit. As the designer, how do you think the header will effect the car given it has been turbocharged?