Racing Beat Vs. Pacesetter Headers
03-30-2004, 11:44 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dover DE
Posts: 989
I just installed a pacesetter on a buddies 88 GXL and there is a noticeable amount of butt dyno power, the underhood temperatures have acctually gone down, and the exhaust has a much throatier note to it. The pacesetter fit fine, the only downfall to it, the paint was off in less that 10 minutes of idleing. I was impressed at the power increase, and the power band has changed as well. not to mention the weight savings of the cast iron bathtub they call an exhaust collector. the differenace is ltterally around 15 lbs. I have no experience with the RB header, but the pacesetter was worth the money for what we were doing with the car.
03-30-2004, 04:29 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Eastern PA
Posts: 1,801
The PS headers aren't bad from a HP standpoint but they do tend to rust out quick, especially on a rotary. I don't have dyno #'s but my trap speed was about 2 mph higher with the PS header on my 86 compared to my 88 with RB header, same other mods and basically the same weight and 60' time. PS usually takes other companies headers and makes their own jig to copy a design thats been dyno proven already. I don't know if this is the case with the RB but it is with other headers they make.
03-30-2004, 05:56 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dover DE
Posts: 989
Originally Posted by b_lloyd83' date='Mar 30 2004, 03:34 PM
how much hp did it show on the dyno after the pacesetter header, what was the increase?
03-30-2004, 07:15 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Jensen Beach, FL / Sylva, NC
Posts: 2,934
I have had the opportunity to lay a pacesetter (PS) next to a racing beat (RB) header.
The bend in the PC header from the flange on the engine down is a lot more drastic than the RB. The RB looks to me like it would flow better and cause less backpressure.
The engine flange (I am forgetting the name right now) is much thicker on the RB and the overall build quility of the RB is much better than the PC.
PC is good bang for buck. But, if you want a good quality header and possibly a tiny bit more HP I would spend the money and get the RB.
The bend in the PC header from the flange on the engine down is a lot more drastic than the RB. The RB looks to me like it would flow better and cause less backpressure.
The engine flange (I am forgetting the name right now) is much thicker on the RB and the overall build quility of the RB is much better than the PC.
PC is good bang for buck. But, if you want a good quality header and possibly a tiny bit more HP I would spend the money and get the RB.
03-30-2004, 07:38 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 172
There may be a couple of things you can do to determine if there is going to be a performance difference between a Racing Beat collected header, and a POS, err, Pacesetter header. Look at two things, tubing length and diameter. First the length. I can’t tell you what the optimal length of the primary tubes should be. Changing tube length affects the pressure wave, moving the peak HP to either a higher or lower RPM – something I’m not qualified to speak to. However, I can tell you that the tubes should be the exact same length. Ever hear of the term equal length headers? That’s what’s meant – the length of the primary tubes should be the same length. Using equal length tubes can help exhaust scavenging. I know of no instance where unequal length tubes helps anything. Take a look at a PS header. Are the tubes the same length? They are on my RB header.
According to their catalog, PS headers use a 2 inch header diameter. According to that same catalog, they have a 2.5 inch diameter collector. Is the catalog referring to inner diameter, or outer diameter? Does it matter? Well, the optimal inner diameter of the tubing for a non-ported normally aspirated 13b is between 1.7 and 1.8 inches. That means if PS lists the inner diameter, it’s too big. <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>“TOO BIG?”</span> you say! Yes, too big. Exhaust leaves the rotor housing in pulses. The trailing side of the exhaust pulse actually pulls the next exhaust pulse behind it. Aside from allowing the pipe to cool (and the hotter the pipe, the better) running oversized tubing interferes with the leading pulses ability to pull the following pulse, which results in a drop in air speed. That’s why there are different diameter header tubes for different engine sizes and configurations - different sized pulses. If the catalog refers to the outer diameter, then you’ll need to find out what the inner diameter is.
Lastly, peak HP is one way of determining the benefit of a particular header. However, unless you plan to drive at that RPM, HP across an RPM range may be a better indicator.
According to their catalog, PS headers use a 2 inch header diameter. According to that same catalog, they have a 2.5 inch diameter collector. Is the catalog referring to inner diameter, or outer diameter? Does it matter? Well, the optimal inner diameter of the tubing for a non-ported normally aspirated 13b is between 1.7 and 1.8 inches. That means if PS lists the inner diameter, it’s too big. <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>“TOO BIG?”</span> you say! Yes, too big. Exhaust leaves the rotor housing in pulses. The trailing side of the exhaust pulse actually pulls the next exhaust pulse behind it. Aside from allowing the pipe to cool (and the hotter the pipe, the better) running oversized tubing interferes with the leading pulses ability to pull the following pulse, which results in a drop in air speed. That’s why there are different diameter header tubes for different engine sizes and configurations - different sized pulses. If the catalog refers to the outer diameter, then you’ll need to find out what the inner diameter is.
Lastly, peak HP is one way of determining the benefit of a particular header. However, unless you plan to drive at that RPM, HP across an RPM range may be a better indicator.
