Mustang Evolution Forum banner

1 - 20 of 63 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
http://rpm-mustangs.com/temp/drivebyexhaustclip.wav
How it sounds on a 4.6!


can't say who it is yet, but he's good :D

This setup makes multiple torque peaks, adds a claimed
~40 RWTq to a V8 and ~20 RWHP. The HP gain is less
cuz most good existing exhaust setups give their big boost
in the upper ranges where HP is affected more, but this
system still exceeds those figures for a good conventional
setup!

Projected gains on a V6 should be 10-15 RWHP (or more, over stock)
and 20+ torque. Right now we are discussing V8-2.5" system
compatibility with those V6's that need 2.5" and I'm trying
to get him (the inventor) to make this in a 2.25" system for
the majority of V6'ers so it's still in R&D but I have a 2.5"
buyer who is gonna dyno it as compared to a really good
conventional 2.5" system with good shorties.

The pluses: This system uses stock headers or manifolds,
stock cats will work too, but the piping should be 2.25"
from the cats to the cat-back somehwere in between.
Aftermarket shorties are a good addition to this setup!
REASONABLE size pipes after the headers are best, too big
kills velocity and reduces the effectiveness of the system.

The drawbacks: Most LT's need mods to properly work
with this concept, but it is workable. No other known
drawbacks at this time, but it's still in development.



If we get some interest, I can convince this inventor to
make a 2.25" prototype and get it tested. He has altready
said he's had many V6 requests, so I think this might just
put it over the top :D :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
With those kinds of gains ... I would be interested as well :)

A little more detail would be helpful with this statement though:
"The drawbacks: Most LT's need mods to properly work
with this concept, but it is workable. No other known
drawbacks at this time, but it's still in development. "
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
941 Posts
I'm not understanding what R&D there is to make... the designs of h pipes, x pipes, and other setups have been done thousands of times and the size piping is just a calculation of what flow you need. Constantin mentioned this to me, but I'm waaay in the dark. Can you explain what R&D is being done and how it'll be any different from a gt take off, which is also 2.25" and easily mated to our cars?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Rellik said:
With those kinds of gains ... I would be interested as well :)

A little more detail would be helpful with this statement though:
"The drawbacks: Most LT's need mods to properly work
with this concept, but it is workable. No other known
drawbacks at this time, but it's still in development. "
Most LT's have primaries that are too big and non-merge collectors.
Some have too-large collectors, as well. Merge collectors can be
easily fabbed (as in JBA firecone type-inserts) and if made long
enough the collector size would be effectively reduced. 2.25"
for most NA 3.8's and 2.5" for strokers and SC cars but exceptions
will happen, mild torque 4.2's would use 2.25" system.

I will be grinding custom cam for this setup, proprietary specs
(that means secret specs) but very well matched. It's possible to
get huge torque increases from properly matching everything up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
V6PowerStang said:
I'm not understanding what R&D there is to make... the designs of h pipes, x pipes, and other setups have been done thousands of times and the size piping is just a calculation of what flow you need. Constantin mentioned this to me, but I'm waaay in the dark. Can you explain what R&D is being done and how it'll be any different from a gt take off, which is also 2.25" and easily mated to our cars?
This is more of an NA system, it works on SC cars but heavily boosted
defeats some of the benefits of the system. It would still work on
Centrifugal SC systems to some extent, and maybe some properly
cammed ROOTS setups, but the multiple torque peaks above the first
one are gonna be overshadowed by the blower. Centrifugal SC (which
does not make boost at lower RPM's in most street setups) could still
make great #'s with a setup, but the camming is opposite of what this
NA setup likes.

Oh, to answer your Q, the system for a V8 (2.5") WILL work!
No changes needed... but cams will help, and the sizing is
crucial, I would not put this 2.5" system on a street NA 3.8
at all. It needs 2.25" and tha can be made, the inventor
told me he can make it in any size we need. I do not know the
whole setup of the system, but it uses 2 X-Pipes in some way
to really boost torque at 3 RPM ranges (and everywhere else)
Typical V8 ranges aer 2K, 4K and 6K but on a V6 it boosts
torque at a 25% higher peak due to the fewer firings per rotation.
The peaks are at ~2500 RPM, 5K and 7500 which fits nicely
with current intake manifolding filling in the upper 2 ranges, and
the Exhaust and intake coinciding on the low RPM range! (Single port)
Split port is a bit off from that but I suspect it will work even better
singe SPI has a very broad torque curve from 2500-6000 and it peaks
around 3500 and hardly tapers off up to 6K :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
941 Posts
2 x pipe like things fused together? that sounds hokey. can i see pics or can the guy post them here? i'm not "hatin", it just sounds wierd you have to admit. i've never heard of more than one crossover tube, be it x, y, or h.

i would think any s/c v6, be it centrif or roots would still benefit more from 2.5" dual exhaust, or at least a GT catback as such, if not the whole length being 2.5". how will two crossovers in 2.25" piping help the flow that would be needed badly by a 300rwhp+ blown car? ... am i missing something? :-?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
V6PowerStang said:
2 x pipe like things fused together? that sounds hokey. can i see pics or can the guy post them here? i'm not "hatin", it just sounds wierd you have to admit. i've never heard of more than one crossover tube, be it x, y, or h.

i would think any s/c v6, be it centrif or roots would still benefit more from 2.5" dual exhaust, or at least a GT catback as such, if not the whole length being 2.5". how will two crossovers in 2.25" piping help the flow that would be needed badly by a 300rwhp+ blown car? ... am i missing something? :-?
You're missing ALOT! 2.25" is NA, 2.5" is SC and big NA strokers.
The mfg. won't reveal his design, afraid of copies, and I do not blame
him! I believe there might be some kind of chamber between the
2 X-Pipes, but I don't care as long as it works. The theory is sound,
it basically increases thermal efficiency of an engine. The cam grinds
will be secret too, because the specs will look quite different.
Who cares what it looks like if it works? I don't know the exact design
of the exhaust system, but I have a pretty good idea, and the science
is quite sound. It is a very logical extension of the SPI camming theory
I started a couple of years ago, you know, the one that gets better
HP and torque from a cam change than anyone else was getting from
HCI swaps fully ported and all the boltons :)

2.5" is for the bigger c.i. engines and the boosted ones. Basically
stuff over 300 BHP, under that is the 2.25" crowd. About 250-260
RWHP with a 5 speed, NA. The V8's are using a 2.5" for a 4.6 and
a 5.0, and 3" is available for Windsors and stroker V8's... It would
be a wild big-inch V6 stroker SC'ed that would need more than a
2.5" setup IMO. This system "acts" a bit bigger than it is, the velocity
makes it work because speed is everything, it takes time to work
and a high(er) velocity makes is work better than a lower velocity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
PS: the newest Cobra or FR500 or whatever it was has 2 crossovers,
an "H" in front and an "X" by the axle.
This V6 system I'm talking about is quite different, though.
It's all in 1 box, with twin outlets on each side, side exit :D
Only difference in a V8 setup is size, 2.5" dual inlets.
The V6 will have 2.25" dual inlets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
For the price you posted on V6P I'd wait to see some actual dyno results. 10/20 gains are kinda out-there for an exhaust system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
stangin99 said:
For the price you posted on V6P I'd wait to see some actual dyno results. 10/20 gains are kinda out-there for an exhaust system.
http://rpm-mustangs.com/temp/drivebyexhaustclip.wav
How it sounds on a 4.6!


Sure! I would too. I believe Jose is buying one, the worst
case price for a V8 system now is under $600 but the
best is $499 + shipping I believe... hey, here is a link,
I can tell you guys now, I told Dr. Campbell I would.

But first the tech info you all seek :)


Campbell X-PipeTM Acoustic Super ChargerTM what is it?
How does it work?

Please take a moment to understand why the Acoustic Super ChargerTM powered Campbell X-Pipe TM is such a powerful and profitable invention. The Campbell X-PipeTM is the most cost effective and simplest way to make real horsepower on any engine.


Background. To better understand the Campbell X-PipeTM, first look at the extremely successful 4into1. The 1940 era 4into1 was "tuned" (timed) by joining multiple equal length head pipes into a single, larger diameter collector to communicate and maintain momentarily, a periodically produced scavenge (suction) pulse generated by the high velocity exhaust gasses alternately exiting each head pipe. The collector allows this scavenge to 1. reduce atmospheric pressure in the non-exiting pipes, and 2. exist slightly longer within the exiting pipe to help extract residual exhaust gasses from that cylinder. When introduced, the 4into1 was a remarkable improvement over the log manifold used on the poor flowing flat head engines of the day.

However, 4into1 limitations became apparent over the years as engines, but not 4into1s, evolved;

1. 4into1 tuning is static and limited. Modern engines lose low rpm torque. The fixed head pipe length creates a minimum rpm torque range because atmospheric air has time to push hot exhaust gasses back into the head pipe between exhaust pulses, filling the cylinder and even the intake manifold, reducing power.

2. The power band drops off at high rpm. Exhaust pulses are slowed down and stack up as they enter the larger collector cross sectional area, creating excessive back pressure. (As a result of these constraints (1 & 2), a highly tuned 4into1 will usually have a very narrow power band.)

3. As engine cylinder head design improves air flow, scavenge becomes over-scavenge (as unburned air/fuel from the intake manifold can more easily loop through intake and exhaust valves during overlap, to be sucked out the tail pipe as unburned air/fuel; HC emissions).

4. Air/fuel mixture varies radically depending upon rpm; at low and high rpm, the mixture has full strength, but at the tuned rpm over-scavenge removes unburned air/fuel, weakening the mixture and reducing dynamic cylinder pressure.

5. *High compression pistons are used to improve reduced dynamic cylinder pressures at tuned rpms.


6. *High octane fuel is used to prevent detonation during un-tuned periods of normal dynamic cylinder pressure.

7. Special cam shafts are used to improve the high rpm power. Long duration exhaust cams open the exhaust valves earlier, cutting into the power stroke, to dump additional combustion energy into the head pipes (robbing combustion energy from the power stroke) to increase exhaust gas pressure to overcome top end back pressure. Because the power stroke event duration is decreased, the engine loses thermodynamic efficiency.


Enter the Campbell X-PipeTM! It changes everything. 1. Tuning is not based upon head pipe length and can be dynamic. 2. The power band is much broader because scavenge is not lost at low rpm and back pressure is not produced at high rpm. 3. A high performance engine will not be over-scavenged because the Campbell X-PipeTM Acoustic Super ChargerTM does not need to create and maintain suction to work. 4. Without over-scavenge, engine mixture does not vary between too rich and too lean and back to too rich as rpm increases. 5. High compression pistons are not needed because dynamic cylinder pressure is not lost. 6. High octane fuel is not needed because high compression pistons are not needed. 7. Special 4into1 cam shafts are not needed because additional exhaust duration is unneeded and wasteful.

(* #5 & 6 Although not needed, these items can be added to the Campbell X-PipeTM for improved performance.)


So, where does the HP come from, with the Campbell X-PipeTM? The engine is more thermodynamically efficient (it generates a greater dynamic cylinder pressure while using a longer, more efficient power stroke), it is more fuel efficient (due to reduced over-scavenge) and it works with fewer engine modifications. As a bonus, since the Campbell X-PipeTM can work with a short duration exhaust cam (allowing a longer power stroke) exhaust gas temperatures (EGTs) are cooler. Cooler EGTs can allow the tuner to lean the mixture to make even more power, on less fuel!


The Campbell X-PipeTM is not a something for nothing device. Rather, it gives you what you thought your 4into1 promised: More Power, Everywhere! In addition, the Campbell X-PipeTM gives you a broader power band and greater fuel economy.


http://www.xpipe.org/index.html

We are gonna get some test data and then I am going to grind some
special cam(s) for this system. There is so much more to it than the
website mentions, Monty (Dr. Campbell) told me the actual concepts
that govern the system and how to take advantage of the concept
with camshaft specifications. It gets more exhaust flow from the same
cam duration, and opening the exhaust valve later keeps the power
stroke doing its work and the chamber still gets fully evacuated due
to the superior ASC tuning. It is a self-tuning (adjustable) dynamic
device. Torque peaks on a V6 are 2500, 5000, and 7500 RPM and
while the last one is kinda high, the first two are very useful!
The power will not just be at those RPM's, it will be good useful
torque at all RPM's between, those peaks are just "bonus" points
of extra torque, caused by the system's resonance.

OK, I'll answer the Q's as best I can now... :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
What vehicle do they use for the sound clip on the website? I almost want to say its a bike. If any car sounded like that I think it would sound like ass. ESPECIALLY on a v6.

Questions..

1) Will those of us with cams already benefit from this? Or because we have bigger exhaust durations we'd be defeating its purpose?

2) no further questions at this time :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
stangin99 said:
What vehicle do they use for the sound clip on the website? I almost want to say its a bike.

Questions..

1) Will those of us with cams already benefit from this? YES
Or because we have bigger exhaust durations we'd be defeating its purpose? NO, see below

2) no further questions at this time :D

haha, I added one for you!
3) If any car sounded like that I think it would sound like ass. ESPECIALLY on a v6.
1. Yes, the SPI camming strategy is pretty good for this, not ideal
but better than bigger cams and very similar to what the Mustang
V8 development was done on (5.0, stock camming) so it should
be pretty close to the gains I listed above.

2. haha, :rolleyes: ( :D )

3. http://rpm-mustangs.com/temp/drivebyexhaustclip.wav
How it sounds on a 4.6!

It could be a sound that you would not like on a V6. I told
Monty that I personally don't care what it sounds like if the
power is there, and he called me a "purist" for that reason.
The clip on the website was a 4.6 I believe. (or 5.0)
What you are hearing in that throttle-blipping clip is the
separate pulses, it smooths out at higher RPM's. I can
upload a better sounding clip of a 4.6 drive-by. Sounds like
an Even-fire V8. http://rpm-mustangs.com/temp/drivebyexhaustclip.wav
How it sounds on a 4.6!


This system WAS originally developed on, and for motorcycles.
Anyone know where I can host a soundclip???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
so that was a v8. ewwww


Im all for more power, but I'm not about to get some decent power gains by making my car sound like crap. Mustangs look/sound good too. No reason to remove one of those out of a street car only to get some power.
 
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
Top