[s-cars] Is 3" enough?

[Postupack, Jeff]

Historical information. I'm writing this from memory in an airport, and later can supply component parts numbers to clarify what's what. I think this is ture below.
 
 
I'll refer to the original Stromung built, TAP sold system as Gen 0.
(Stromung is now at Gen 4)
Gen 0 had no resonator, and the muffler was Magnaflow. IT did have a Cat. But was freakin' loud. 
 
Gen 1, was the first time I stepped in to organize the GP's circa 2001.
 
Stromung simply inserted a tubular resonator, which did nothing for sound attenuation.
This piped into the same MAgnaflow muffler as Gen 0, and I believe this was a 2.5" OD muffler inlet.
THe stainless piped necked down to that OD. Since this was so loud, Ralph P's kids labeled it the Boom Car, and Stromung gave us free magnaflow resonators to quiet the beast.
 
Not good. 
Gen 2 added the Magnaflow resonator standard, did not change the muffler so now (circa early 2002) I think Mike's observation remains true at the muffler inlet.
 
Gen 3 changed a lot of things: (Circa Fall 2002) 
We had to make it quiet, because it woke the babies living next to the Don. 
The rear muffler was made custom and large as the cavity could accommodate, and Stromung made that muffler inlet 3" OD. They also imporved the straight shot flow from downpipe exit to tail. Plus they used this new resonator that was larger and provided more clearance. 

I think Gen 3 and Gen 4 now are 3" OD, from the 2.5 inch to 3 inch transition point at the downpipe. 

Gen 4: Goal to improve the DP.
Stromung found the labor high to make a full 3" from the turbo flange, all the way back. 
The owner also talked to Corky Bell, who advised contrary to our wisdom.
COrky told Stromung that the turbo exhaust gases depart like a twisted rope, and his experience showed a DP built with an (motocorss term) expansion zone would allow it to escape quickly and unwind. There 2 points biased the design of the RSS DP.
 
Gen 4 Stromung  moved the wastegate tube entry downstream, and added stainless flanges at the roadside. Added a 2nd bung for EGT. Turbo flange remained cold steel.
 
I think the actual vehicle testing MP did with a 3.5 inch DP does prove a lot more useful than all this theory.

Jeff Posto 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Trevor wrote: 
 
 would be interesting to see if the size of the tubing was the
culprit, or if a high back pressure muffler was the real issue.  Maybe a
combination of both?  Seems like larger tubing near the turbo would be
beneficial, because the temperatures are so high, so the volume of gas
is high, further back I suspect that tubing size is less important as
the gas cools, You may be able to get away with smaller tubing.  But I
don't really know. 

Good data points though. 

-----Original Message-----
From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com <http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list> 
[mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com <http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list> ] On Behalf Of mlp5
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 10:10 PM
To: S-CAR-List at audifans.com <http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list> 
Subject: [s-cars] Is 3" enough?

No, Pizzo this is not another trick prom date question.

FWIW I've put a 3.5" exhaust on the Green Garbage can.  Before deciding
to
do the 3.5" I had the down pipe taped for a pressure fitting and spent
several days trying to get a feel for back pressure in an otherwise
stock 3"
Stromrung system.  Two things of note. 

One, and perhaps it is already either already generally known (and
discounted) by the list, or may be it is a "unique" feature to the
Stromrung
taken off the car, but the Stromrung, at least the one on my car, is not
in
fact, a full 3" (& that's OD BTW) diameter system all the way back.  The
rear muffler that came with the Stromrung system seems to be a 2.5" OD
inlet.

Second, while limited to @ 18 - 19 psi by the current AVC-R settings,
and
using a moderately high resolution Dwyer Magnahelic 0 - 80" H2O pressure
gauge, I found the current turbo / intercooler system on the Green car
would
"peg" the exhaust back pressure gauge, i.e. 80"+ H2O (80/27.7276 = 2.88
psi+) beginning @ 6,000 rpm at @18 psi of manifold pressure.  With the
3.5"
resonator & muffler, back pressure at 6,000 to redline today (slightly
colder) @ 20psi, barely reached 40" of H2O on the Dwyer pressure gauge.
I
didn't have a fitting to see how far past 80" (2.88 psi) the motor
would/could push back pressure in the system.  I am aware of some
anecdotal
evidence on another, similar vehicle set to run considerably more intake
pressure, i.e. 25 psi+, that exhaust back pressure on a similar
Stromrung
appeared to have exceeded 5 psi on several dyno pulls. 

So, all other things being equal, stepping up to the 3.5" from the down
pipe
back seems to be of some benefit, maybe as much as a 2 to 3 psi
reduction in
back pressure, once one starts pushing, and holding 18psi+ past 6,000
rpm.

OTOH, at least so far, jumping up the resonator & muffler diameter to
3.5"
has increased the noise level both inside & outside the car.  I'll leave
it
to the list to speculate on, and quantify the imaginary benefits of an
overall 2 to 3 psi pressure drop on the exhaust side of the turbo once
engine speed begins to exceed 5,500 - 6,000 rpm.

mike



_______________________________________________
S-CAR-List mailing list
S-CAR-List at audifans.com <http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list> 
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list

=======
Notice: This e-mail message, together with any attachments, contains
information of Symyx Technologies, Inc. that may be confidential,
proprietary, copyrighted, privileged and/or protected work product,
and is meant solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the
intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please
contact the sender immediately, permanently delete the original and
any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.