Custom exhaust any interest?

-
roccodart440 said:
Over rated, extra work, to gain what? A few hundreths? A tenth? We bracket race anyhow. Want to go faster with less effort? Take the passenger seat out and the back seat. Takes 5 min tops and will yield you a tenth or so. Run cutouts or just make it run well through the pipes. The fact that you think it will run better after dropping the exhaust says that it's 1. too fat 2. too small of a diameter 3. not a high flow muffler and 4. the car is too heavy.
Click to expand...

Also makes it pretty easy to adapt from one header to another. Just change the design of the collector extension.
 
Mean416 said:
Also makes it pretty easy to adapt from one header to another. Just change the design of the collector extension.
Click to expand...
That seems like the best way to actually market this. If you built a standard exhaust in two sizes, and then three or 4 collector extensions that fit the most produced header designs, it seems like it would fit a lot of cars. Not sure how else you’d make a true bolt in exhaust. In my experience, off the shelf exhausts nearly always need modification to fit right. I guess every car is different.
 
I like the idea of creating a new product that doesn't exist.

I'd like to see a 3.5" exhaust

A 3.5 to H or X pipe to 3"

An exhaust for mini tubbed cars

A stainless system

a system with electric cutouts
 
roccodart440 said:
I like the idea of creating a new product that doesn't exist.

I'd like to see a 3.5" exhaust

A 3.5 to H or X pipe to 3"

An exhaust for mini tubbed cars

A stainless system

a system with electric cutouts
Click to expand...
Good ideas...

Would mini tubbed system fit non mini tubbed cars also I wonder?

I think the big thing wiia lot of this will be sticker shock. Stainless is expensive, so are cutouts.

If I did a cutout it would be configured differently from all the cutouts I've seen. The straight through path would be the cutout opening and the muffler side would split to the side.
 
Mean416 said:
Good ideas...

Would mini tubbed system fit non mini tubbed cars also I wonder?

I think the big thing wiia lot of this will be sticker shock. Stainless is expensive, so are cutouts.

If I did a cutout it would be configured differently from all the cutouts I've seen. The straight through path would be the cutout opening and the muffler side would split to the side.
Click to expand...

There are 3 options for mini tub cars:

-Side exit, such as a T/A -- AAR style
- Stock exhaust route with straight tail sections (requires a fuel cell narrower than the stock tank drop mounted OR fuel cell in trunk)
- tail pipes where the exhaust snakes through the rear section of the leaf spring. This requires a car that uses 2.5" pipes OR sits a touch high

I just bought a polished stainless system for my dads el camino. If they can make stainless systems for chevy cars that aren't crazy priced they can make them for ours.
 
roccodart440 said:
There are 3 options for mini tub cars:

-Side exit, such as a T/A -- AAR style
- Stock exhaust route with straight tail sections (requires a fuel cell narrower than the stock tank drop mounted OR fuel cell in trunk)
- tail pipes where the exhaust snakes through the rear section of the leaf spring. This requires a car that uses 2.5" pipes OR sits a touch high

I just bought a polished stainless system for my dads el camino. If they can make stainless systems for chevy cars that aren't crazy priced they can make them for ours.
Click to expand...

Those options seem not so great to me. If I had access to a decent mini tubbed car I might be able to figure something out. Anyhow you'd need a pretty serious car to really need 3.5" tailpipes right?

The name of the manufacturing game is volumes. My price will be directly correlated to how many I run at a time. I imagine the Chevy platform would be a lot more common.

The suggestions about the cutout does have me thinking though...
 
mopowers said:
How about long tube headers for a big block early A body???
Click to expand...

I would love to painstakingly develop a superior product and then have customers curse the day I was born due to whatever random fitment issue they have. I basically enjoy self destruction so sure why not? :D
 
Tell me why you'd step the exhaust down from the collector diameter other than space/clearance.
 
roccodart440 said:
Tell me why you'd step the exhaust down from the collector diameter other than space/clearance.
Click to expand...
This is totally open for debate and I don't claim to be the expert here. I would like to actually dyno this to see what happens. But the reasoning is thus.

1. Our V8 engines at WOT, in the lower rpm ranges, (say 3000-6000) seem to make a lot more torque with collector extensions than without. The only testing I've been able to find on this is with open exhaust.
2. Using collector extensions is a wave/scavenging effect, not a flow rate thing.
3. The wave tuning will happen when there are significant/abrupt changes in diameter
4. Since it's a wave tuning property it stands to reason that it MIGHT also hold true even with an exhaust system connected
5. (Unrelated to power but very important for cost control) Having a collector extension connection allows easy hookup to different header collector diameters and locations.
 
Mean416 said:
This is totally open for debate and I don't claim to be the expert here. I would like to actually dyno this to see what happens. But the reasoning is thus.

1. Our V8 engines at WOT, in the lower rpm ranges, (say 3000-6000) seem to make a lot more torque with collector extensions than without. The only testing I've been able to find on this is with open exhaust.
2. Using collector extensions is a wave/scavenging effect, not a flow rate thing.
3. The wave tuning will happen when there are significant/abrupt changes in diameter
4. Since it's a wave tuning property it stands to reason that it MIGHT also hold true even with an exhaust system connected
5. (Unrelated to power but very important for cost control) Having a collector extension connection allows easy hookup to different header collector diameters and locations.
Click to expand...

Collector extensions do make more power (if they are the correct length) but they are typically the same diameter of the existing collector or a 1/2 inch step. So again, if you kept the whole system the size of the collector, in a perfect world, that would be better than a step down or multiple step downs. I.e. 3.5" collectors to a 2.5" system.
 
roccodart440 said:
Collector extensions do make more power (if they are the correct length) but they are typically the same diameter of the existing collector or a 1/2 inch step. So again, if you kept the whole system the size of the collector, in a perfect world, that would be better than a step down or multiple step downs. I.e. 3.5" collectors to a 2.5" system.
Click to expand...
I guess I'll just have to test it out. I generally agree a full length 3.5" system would be freer flowing, but dual 3.5" is way more than I need. You really have to be putting down some serious power levels to even need dual 3". That's 4 digit power territory there. This is why I'm sticking with 2.5. my combo as is will do very good to go north of 475 at the crank.
 
Ironracer said:
Could he take a framing square and a degree tool ( speed square) and give you dimensions/ angles of °?
Click to expand...
He could but my main limitations are bend radius for a given tube diameter and minimum distance between bends. So I just have to make this as compact as possible with the given tooling limits.
 
Mean416 said:
I guess I'll just have to test it out. I generally agree a full length 3.5" system would be freer flowing, but dual 3.5" is way more than I need. You really have to be putting down some serious power levels to even need dual 3". That's 4 digit power territory there. This is why I'm sticking with 2.5. my combo as is will do very good to go north of 475 at the crank.
Click to expand...

At 500hp+ you'll see a loss going to 3" dual from larger. Dyno proven.

If your header collectors are bigger than your exhaust system, by your logic, the headers are too big for the engine, which isn't the case necessarily.
 
Mean416 said:
I guess I'll just have to test it out. I generally agree a full length 3.5" system would be freer flowing, but dual 3.5" is way more than I need. You really have to be putting down some serious power levels to even need dual 3". That's 4 digit power territory there. This is why I'm sticking with 2.5. my combo as is will do very good to go north of 475 at the crank.
Click to expand...
I am currently running a 3 1/2 system to the back bumper. Pieced together with straight pipe and mandrel bends. Huge mufflers! It's probably too big for this 500hp 440... but it was built for the next combo, 522" nitrous motor.
But heck, I ran a 3 1/2 system on a small block too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top