After making 170 sets of the original design heat exchangers I have moved to a mirrored setup. This will make the product sustainable and include a much improved collector design. This is the same design Burns uses and I have been making these collectors for 15 years now and they are awesome.. I will actually be doing a test with one heat exchanger and one header on my car to see what kind of heat I can produce that way. Pete had mentioned that idea in another thread and he maybe right.

Regardless I will be moving to this platform moving forward. I am happy with v 2.0 what does everyone think? Click to view attachment

Just makes one more reason I want a six!

Very nice work.

Beautiful.
What material ?
Standard 2 bolt muffler flange ?

304 stainless and yes standard flange

Another great product

Just amazing work! I can't wait to get a set on the 2.5 6 cylinder.
Matt

Wow, very nice.

Well that means I'll need a set for my 3.4. Guess I better get that thing together now.
I'll pm you with my engine details to figure out the pipe size. Any idea if the new collector will change the exhaust tone and where would the O2 bung go?

O2 bung will be approx same location as before.. I dont expect any tone changes but will know in a week or so.

There's no such thing as a 1 inch O2 bung, I think some Americans just incorrectly call it "one inch", really it's an M18 thread.
O2 sensors were invented by Bosch, both 4.2 and 4.9 LSU's are M18.

Lookin good Ben, what is the ID of the pipes? I will be getting in line soon.
Thanks for the update

So tubing is how ALL exhaust is measured is from OD. So I offer a 1.5 to 1.625 stepped header for smaller engines and 1.625 larger so both are improvements over stock which are 1.5" with an ID of 1.375.

My comment follows advice from INNOVATE who supplies an O2 censoring system with two Bosch LSU 4.9 sensors (one for each header) feeding signals to a single gauge (mounted in the dash in my case). I have had several of these sensor's fail while using i/2' long bungs. Following trouble shooting discussions with INNOVATE technical staff in which they recommended extending the bungs to 1" long (they supplied me a 1" long bung which I cut in half and had each half welded onto the installed 1/2' bungs, thus making the bungs 1' long). I have had no further sensors failing. This change in bung length removes the sensor tip from "in" the exhaust gas stream to just next to the stream. My system now works well.

^ Very cool. Curious to know about power/tone/etc.

Also curious to see how one exchanger might work in terms of heat/cost/weight. For me, the thought was I can almost get away without heat—and people seem to rave about the heat output of your HEs vs, say, the B&B stuff.

All I need is enough to defrost the windshield and keep my feet warm on cold days with the top on, but I guess there is a question of do you want a system powerful enough to use on a cold day with the top off. Would I drive the car more often that way with two HEs vs one? I don't know, and suspect it's something that would have to be experimented with. Weight and cost advantages may also provide clarity for different customers, but it might be nice to have the option. Not sure which side is better if only one HE? Maybe passenger side given weight of driver + oil tank vs battery only on the right?

So the hiccup is the driver side is in essence unchanged from the original design so I will be doing testing on heat just from that side. I am actually thinking of making a cross over to the passenger side and feeding both sides with 1 heat exchanger. If I were to offer 1 side heat exchanger it would be driver side only as it would need the least re development of fixtures etc. I would expect a 1 heat exchanger setup could be 7-800 off of retail .. that is a huge savings for big gains. We will see . I hope to get it installed in my car over the next few weeks and see what it does.

Got it, and makes sense.

Can't imagine the box is major weight? Any idea, even roughly?

About 1.5 lbs

Driving a 914 in the winter with the top off is a lot of fun.

Even less than I would have thought, and inconsequential.



Yes, and maybe that's reason enough to want both HEs.

But I can see where some might be happy with one—especially given how effective Ben's HEs seem to be vs other HEs.

Driving a 914 in the fall filled to the brim with leaves is even more fun . . . gets some funny looks . . . wish I had picuture of that . . . it was hell to clean up afterwards.

another fine product Ben

looks great!

Would be cool to have a non Heat header option as well.

Ben offers regular headers without the heat exchanger envelope. They look great on a car and save quite a bit of money.

Went back and re-read the first post, which prompted me to look up Burns collectors…

Wow.

https://frontstreet.media/2018/07/13/does-3...lm-really-work/

Aren't these a new design?

Yup done non heat headers for 4 years now

Yes these are the new design being mirrored and burns style collector

Would like to see this new mirrored with Burns collector design in non heat version.

Umm that what I have pictured.. I will post better pictures this week

Umm. I learned a lot about 3M spray on chip protector for the front of my car, but not a darn thing about Burns collectors. @horizontally-opposed

And a final product.Click to view attachment

Early, early in the mornings with the top off. Heat fully on (capped J tubes).

Ah, apologies. Tricksy internets.

Hopefully this works?

https://frontstreet.media/2018/07/16/the-sc...urns-stainless/

Very cool.

Seem to recall that Jerry Woods and/or Bruce Anderson said moving the collector as far back on a 914-6 header offered a clear improvement on the dyno, to the point that they would cut them off and extend the three pipes going back to the flange before adding the (traditional flat) collector more or less at the flange.

Now very curious to see the HE design for these…

The heat exchanger in essence is unchanged from v 1.0

Sign me up for one

I would be in for the header non heat version as shown for a 2.2 !