Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
Header collector size/Sharpe? >

Header collector size/Sharpe?

Notices

Header collector size/Sharpe?

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-24-2025 | 09:55 AM
  #1  
Thread Starter
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Likes: 176
From: Finland
Default Header collector size/Shape?

Why marine headers Have so large collector diameter? Just bought two pairs of stelling white steroids, primary tube id 2", collector id 3.8". What you guys think, Would smaller 3" collector work better on 502cid engine?

Last edited by JaniH; 12-24-2025 at 03:05 PM.
JaniH is offline  
Reply
Old 12-24-2025 | 01:28 PM
  #2  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,854
Likes: 786
From: St. Pete Beach, FL
Default

I think it has something to do with introducing water. But I’m not sure. It is an interesting difference to note.
hogie roll is offline  
Reply
Old 12-24-2025 | 03:01 PM
  #3  
Thread Starter
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Likes: 176
From: Finland
Default

Originally Posted by hogie roll
I think it has something to do with introducing water. But I’m not sure. It is an interesting difference to note.
That might Be The case, But isnt The stelling taill pipes usually dry?
JaniH is offline  
Reply
Old 01-09-2026 | 02:44 PM
  #4  
Thread Starter
Registered
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Likes: 176
From: Finland
Default

Unfortunately these stelling whites Are For TRS drive boats and The collector IS too far Back. How about The primary tube Inside diameter? IS 1.7/8" primary tube too small For 670hp BBC, looking at stelling greens, merc cmi, usually 1.7/8" headers.
JaniH is offline  
Reply
Old 01-09-2026 | 07:14 PM
  #5  
Rookie's Avatar
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,017
Likes: 1,519
From: Grand Rapids, MI
Default

Originally Posted by JaniH
Would smaller 3" collector work better on 502cid engine?
Choking down the exhaust is never the answer.
Rookie is offline  
Reply
Old 01-09-2026 | 07:20 PM
  #6  
SB
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 14,068
Likes: 3,668
From: On A Dirt Floor
Default

Originally Posted by Rookie
Choking down the exhaust is never the answer.
I respectfully disagree.
But i guess it depends on what you mean by ‘choking down’
SB is offline  
Reply
Old 01-09-2026 | 08:02 PM
  #7  
Registered
Community Builder
5 Year Member
 
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 1,201
Likes: 411
From: BC
Default

Originally Posted by SB
I respectfully disagree.
But i guess it depends on what you mean by ‘choking down’
Tuned header systems use exhaust energy to draw intake charge early in the int valve opening to get the intake charge mass moving earlier...so it can move more later on in the charge timing.

The exaust energy needs velocity and tuned length to achieve the desired harmonic at the desired rpm.

Conversely, a log style exhaust is more brute size and getting it into the exhauat tails. But it still can't be too large.

Header collectors are sized to effectively bring the 4 tubes together and merge the exh flow. It's sized a little smaller to increase velocity for the merging. Similar to how the intake valve throat (seat and shape/diameter) promotes flow around the valve head.

Theres a good thread on Speed-Talk about a NASCAR header design/fab guy dynos full tube headers vs log manifolds. They headers helped out..but not by much.

This assumes the engine is well setup and the parts complement the intended use. Generally, a bit smaller than optimal intake port CCs (CSAs) are better. It promotes port velocity, and marine BBCs don't spin up very high, demanding less of the port area.
Tartilla is offline  
Reply
Old 01-09-2026 | 08:36 PM
  #8  
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,854
Likes: 786
From: St. Pete Beach, FL
Default

Originally Posted by JaniH
Unfortunately these stelling whites Are For TRS drive boats and The collector IS too far Back. How about The primary tube Inside diameter? IS 1.7/8" primary tube too small For 670hp BBC, looking at stelling greens, merc cmi, usually 1.7/8" headers.
1 7/8” is perfect. 1 3/4 would maybe even be a little better but it would be close
hogie roll is offline  
Reply
Old 01-09-2026 | 10:55 PM
  #9  
Rookie's Avatar
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,017
Likes: 1,519
From: Grand Rapids, MI
Default

Originally Posted by SB
I respectfully disagree.
But i guess it depends on what you mean by ‘choking down’
Exactly what I said. Going from 3.8" to 3.0" choking it down. We can get into as much pipe tuning dynamics as we want. I have never seen any dyno or real world application where "backpressure" makes more power. I have seen hundreds of header and exhaust dyno's to prove other wise. Collector length yes, smaller collector never. 2 strokes and tuned pipe expansion chambers, yes. But a backyard mechanic such as myself erroring to smaller collector, no.
Rookie is offline  
Reply
Old 01-09-2026 | 11:14 PM
  #10  
Rookie's Avatar
Registered
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,017
Likes: 1,519
From: Grand Rapids, MI
Default

Originally Posted by Tartilla
It promotes port velocity, and marine BBCs don't spin up very high, demanding less of the port area.
Seriously?...
It makes more power throughout the power curve.
Rookie is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.