H
humhead
Guest
That's what I was thinking. Here's the next round:
Hmmm......much less abusive & a partial testimonial. I replied:
I await the next round.
-
Required reading for all forum users!!!
Welcome!
Register to access the full functionality of the GSResources forum. Until you register and activate your account you will not have full forum access, nor will you be able to post or reply to messages.A note to new registrants...
All new forum registrations must be activated via email before you have full access to the forum.A Special Note about Email accounts!
DO NOT SIGN UP USING hotmail, outlook, gmx, sbcglobal, att, bellsouth or email.com. They delete our forum signup emails.A note to old forum members...
I receive numerous requests from people who can no longer log in because their accounts were deleted. As mentioned in the forum FAQ, user accounts are deleted if you haven't logged in for the past 6 months. If you can't log in, then create a new forum account. If you don't get an error message, then check your email account for an activation message. If you get a message stating that the email address is already in use, then your account still exists so follow the instructions in the forum FAQ for resetting your password.Have you forgotten your password or have a new email address? Then read the forum FAQ for details on how to reset it.
Any email requests for "can't log in anymore" problems or "lost my password" problems will be deleted. Read the forum FAQ and follow the instructions there - that's what we have one for...
-
Returning Visitors
If you are a returning visitor who never received your confirmation email, then odds are your email provider is blockinig emails from our server. The only thing that can be done to get around this is you will have to try creating another forum account using an email address from another domain.
If you are a returning visitor to the forum and can't log in using your old forum name and password but used to be able to then chances are your account is deleted. Purges of the databases are done regularly. You will have to create a new forum account and you should be all set.
X pipes
- Thread starter first timer
- Start date
8
80gs1000e
Guest
Whoa, psycholand! :lol:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Sheesh! I hope he doesn't give you his next reply in person... 8O ..!
Mitch
Mitch
L
lecroy
Guest
You not hiding something from us r u?Hoomgar said:
I am not so sure about this. Look at a T/F bike or car....
I agree with him about the wheel dyno. Good for relative numbers but the setup will kill you. Direct drive baby.....
Well, I for one would still run my 4:1s. I'm just that hard headed.
This is a great read. Thanks!!!!
S
Silvermachine81
Guest
He's truely mad.
"Send me your money for more horsepower now....I just cant prove you'll actually get any more"
Most 4 into 1 owners are very open minded because they know their bike is now lacking because of it.
Sadly for GS owners there's not much choice.....
We love our bike and waste heaps of $$$$ on them so if we knew we could get back that stock midrange while keeping our power improvements we would open our wallets in a flash!!
"Send me your money for more horsepower now....I just cant prove you'll actually get any more"
Most 4 into 1 owners are very open minded because they know their bike is now lacking because of it.
Sadly for GS owners there's not much choice.....
We love our bike and waste heaps of $$$$ on them so if we knew we could get back that stock midrange while keeping our power improvements we would open our wallets in a flash!!
H
humhead
Guest
I get the impression that he would not resort to ad hominem abuse if we were face to face. This was a classic example of Ivory Tower syndrome.
"How dare you question me ignorant peon!" That's part of the reason why he's hawking stuff on ebay, instead of running a successful buisness.
Terry
S
Silvermachine81
Guest
EXACTLY, I appreciate your continued efforts with this guy (even after he abused you) to try and get some facts.
I think he's painted himself into a corner and ended up looking like a real ahole, when with a bit of proof he could have just sold 100-1000 units to the guys at this board alone.
We dont just sit round he talking for nothing or because we are lonely sad loser's, We come here to offer our experience & learn off our peer's who have been down the same road before and learned the lessons 8)
If these pipes worked they would create a buzz round here like never before, but I for one would never buy anything off a guy with an attitude like that towards a potential customer how is going out of his way to find out vital information before making his purchase
R
Robert Corrie
Guest
Plus this guy is selling "100,000" mile ignitions that are a bigger joke than his pipe.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Ahhh the misunderstood genius......
What I see is a person who is technical and cannot work with people. I am technical and good at things naturally and to some greater or lesser degree with people through experience and learning. It can be learned.
What I see is a person who relates to the world technically, and so if he gives a technical description of his product and header problems, which was quite a bit of effort on his part, he EXPECTS you to be able to understand his world. He did all the work, it's as plain as the nose on his face (to him) so why don't you understand?
Yes he will lose customers. He's technical, not a sales person. He is a little arrogant... it appears to be out of ignorance and that he doesn't seem to have much empathy for others. Whatever hey?
For that matter, sometimes I write on the posts because I AM lonely or whatever. Most times I write for 2 reasons, one, to be heard, and two, to help others. Some reasons are selfish, some not.
NOW to a few TECHNICAL comments.......
His theory is largely correct when examining the individual effects of exhaust theory. However, that doesn't mean that when these effects combine - that he is still correct. The whole IS greater than the sum of the parts.
Bernoulli's Principle. He's correct. OK, so PV = n RT where nRT is a constant at a certain temperature. So if PV is = to a constant, then if pressure goes up, volume must go down and vice versa. Good so far.
When pressure goes down due to a transition to a larger volume, 2 things happen, a reflected pressure pulse is created, and a lower pressure point is created. Gas moves easier from high to lower pressures so flow improves, scavenging occurs. But we are interested in efficiency. Efficiency improvement occurs only if the scavenging effect is higher than the reflected pulse created (backpressure). Then you have a GAIN in efficiency. Cool. I can't say if headers succeed at this.
His premise that headers stack up pressure pulses sounds incorrect. Sorry. If they stack, it's because the PV relationship allows them to. They get closer together, but again, they have a larger volume to travel in. Think serial vs. parallel ports on a computer. You have more MASS moving down a pipe pass a point when the pipe gets larger which compensates for the slower speed. The engine has to push the same mass out. It just changes speed.....same mass overall....no extra work.
Suggestion.....Read "The Scientific Design of Intake and Exhaust Systems" a book written by some British blokes.
X guy says, "Headers cause overscavenging and loss of charge mix". Duh. Of course. If headers allow better purging of the cylinder and create scavenging, you can get a condition called by tuners "short circuiting" where some of the intake mixture goes straight out the pipe. What he doesn't say is that the correction and common tuning goal for racers is to consider shortcircuiting and adjust valve overlaps as a compromise to short circuiting and peak cylinder pressures. You don't just jet richer. You have to consider the "whole" not the sum of parts.
Lastly, headers are not just enlarged, stepped pipes. They resonate too. Just like his X pipe. The resonation is mostly set by the length of the primary tubes. Another word for resonation is "standing waves". You can actually see high and low pressure waves that "stand in place" in a clear pipe with smoke in it. If you set the pipe header lengths so the low pressure portion of the standing wave sits at the exhaust valve face, then when the valve opens, you get better scavenging. Unfortunately, this is a tuned condition which occurs only at a certain RPM and multiples of that RPM.
Engines have torque and horsepower peaks. If you tune your pipe's "low pressure resonance" to coincide with the torque peak, you get best midrange. If you shift it higher, you sacrifice midrange but shift volumetric efficiency point a little higher up in the RPM range, so you get max horsepower. If you ever look at an engines horsepower or torque curves, the "area under the curve" stays pretty constant, you just shift it around.
After all is said and done, I still don't know enough about his pipe to understand it's advantage over a header* ... * more correctly known as a "tuned header". I'll read more on that. If I can comment on his product and advantages, I will. Neobro, Mark M, Dink, EarlFor, K. Krause among others... are all people on this site who might have some insightful comments to make on this thread.... In my judgement, they respect both science and the black magic "art" of tuning motorcycles....kinda what the guy who wrote, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" was driving at. So......some tuning generalities.....
Shorter headers (length from head to the collector) raises the resonance point of a pipe for higher peak horsepower. Watch this when swapping exhaust systems not originally intended for your bike.
Larger collectors (to a point) seem to improve flow. I did this by experimentation, not theory.
Exhaust Canisters must be minimum 10 times the swept volume of any one cylinder to flow well. It's in the book.
Exhaust gasses are compressible. So bigger muffler volumes WILL flow better for a given outlet diameter.
Keeping your exhaust gases hotter will reduce mass and aid exhaust flow.
Setup your cams as a compromise to Torque, Peak Horsepower, or a blend of both. Then adjust your carburators to supply the correct mix with this cam setup. It's what you want that matters.
And the list is much longer.
It is very complex. At least I shared some principles. - Dieter
What I see is a person who is technical and cannot work with people. I am technical and good at things naturally and to some greater or lesser degree with people through experience and learning. It can be learned.
What I see is a person who relates to the world technically, and so if he gives a technical description of his product and header problems, which was quite a bit of effort on his part, he EXPECTS you to be able to understand his world. He did all the work, it's as plain as the nose on his face (to him) so why don't you understand?
Yes he will lose customers. He's technical, not a sales person. He is a little arrogant... it appears to be out of ignorance and that he doesn't seem to have much empathy for others. Whatever hey?
For that matter, sometimes I write on the posts because I AM lonely or whatever. Most times I write for 2 reasons, one, to be heard, and two, to help others. Some reasons are selfish, some not.
NOW to a few TECHNICAL comments.......
His theory is largely correct when examining the individual effects of exhaust theory. However, that doesn't mean that when these effects combine - that he is still correct. The whole IS greater than the sum of the parts.
Bernoulli's Principle. He's correct. OK, so PV = n RT where nRT is a constant at a certain temperature. So if PV is = to a constant, then if pressure goes up, volume must go down and vice versa. Good so far.
When pressure goes down due to a transition to a larger volume, 2 things happen, a reflected pressure pulse is created, and a lower pressure point is created. Gas moves easier from high to lower pressures so flow improves, scavenging occurs. But we are interested in efficiency. Efficiency improvement occurs only if the scavenging effect is higher than the reflected pulse created (backpressure). Then you have a GAIN in efficiency. Cool. I can't say if headers succeed at this.
His premise that headers stack up pressure pulses sounds incorrect. Sorry. If they stack, it's because the PV relationship allows them to. They get closer together, but again, they have a larger volume to travel in. Think serial vs. parallel ports on a computer. You have more MASS moving down a pipe pass a point when the pipe gets larger which compensates for the slower speed. The engine has to push the same mass out. It just changes speed.....same mass overall....no extra work.
Suggestion.....Read "The Scientific Design of Intake and Exhaust Systems" a book written by some British blokes.
X guy says, "Headers cause overscavenging and loss of charge mix". Duh. Of course. If headers allow better purging of the cylinder and create scavenging, you can get a condition called by tuners "short circuiting" where some of the intake mixture goes straight out the pipe. What he doesn't say is that the correction and common tuning goal for racers is to consider shortcircuiting and adjust valve overlaps as a compromise to short circuiting and peak cylinder pressures. You don't just jet richer. You have to consider the "whole" not the sum of parts.
Lastly, headers are not just enlarged, stepped pipes. They resonate too. Just like his X pipe. The resonation is mostly set by the length of the primary tubes. Another word for resonation is "standing waves". You can actually see high and low pressure waves that "stand in place" in a clear pipe with smoke in it. If you set the pipe header lengths so the low pressure portion of the standing wave sits at the exhaust valve face, then when the valve opens, you get better scavenging. Unfortunately, this is a tuned condition which occurs only at a certain RPM and multiples of that RPM.
Engines have torque and horsepower peaks. If you tune your pipe's "low pressure resonance" to coincide with the torque peak, you get best midrange. If you shift it higher, you sacrifice midrange but shift volumetric efficiency point a little higher up in the RPM range, so you get max horsepower. If you ever look at an engines horsepower or torque curves, the "area under the curve" stays pretty constant, you just shift it around.
After all is said and done, I still don't know enough about his pipe to understand it's advantage over a header* ... * more correctly known as a "tuned header". I'll read more on that. If I can comment on his product and advantages, I will. Neobro, Mark M, Dink, EarlFor, K. Krause among others... are all people on this site who might have some insightful comments to make on this thread.... In my judgement, they respect both science and the black magic "art" of tuning motorcycles....kinda what the guy who wrote, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" was driving at. So......some tuning generalities.....
Shorter headers (length from head to the collector) raises the resonance point of a pipe for higher peak horsepower. Watch this when swapping exhaust systems not originally intended for your bike.
Larger collectors (to a point) seem to improve flow. I did this by experimentation, not theory.
Exhaust Canisters must be minimum 10 times the swept volume of any one cylinder to flow well. It's in the book.
Exhaust gasses are compressible. So bigger muffler volumes WILL flow better for a given outlet diameter.
Keeping your exhaust gases hotter will reduce mass and aid exhaust flow.
Setup your cams as a compromise to Torque, Peak Horsepower, or a blend of both. Then adjust your carburators to supply the correct mix with this cam setup. It's what you want that matters.
And the list is much longer.
It is very complex. At least I shared some principles. - Dieter
A
Anonymous
Guest
x pipe article
x pipe article
Look at page 26 on Exhaust 101 in this link...
http://www.mustangguides.com/MustangMTG_Iss1.pdf
- Some principles and even mentions x pipes but not clearly......
I want pictures..... - Dieter
x pipe article
Look at page 26 on Exhaust 101 in this link...
http://www.mustangguides.com/MustangMTG_Iss1.pdf
- Some principles and even mentions x pipes but not clearly......
I want pictures..... - Dieter
A
Anonymous
Guest
Here is a link with some x-pipe designs with PHOTOS:
http://www.v6mustangstuff.com/V8XPipe.htm
I think the design goal is to cross the pipes at the collector instead of putting the 4 pipes into 1 pipe.
My guess is that the length to the "X" adjusts the resonance of the primary pipe,
And the crossover allows the pipe to create a vacuum on the adjoining pipe much like the old Victorian perfume atomizers, which would draw the fluid up the tube because air was passed over the mouth opening. Much like carburators for that matter.
Lastly, I believe Cambell "tunes" his pipes (remember he keeps saying 8000 rpm) to create backpressure when he doesn't want the pipe to pull mixture out of the cylinder.
Evidently, there is some validity to his pipe design. - Dieter
http://www.v6mustangstuff.com/V8XPipe.htm
I think the design goal is to cross the pipes at the collector instead of putting the 4 pipes into 1 pipe.
My guess is that the length to the "X" adjusts the resonance of the primary pipe,
And the crossover allows the pipe to create a vacuum on the adjoining pipe much like the old Victorian perfume atomizers, which would draw the fluid up the tube because air was passed over the mouth opening. Much like carburators for that matter.
Lastly, I believe Cambell "tunes" his pipes (remember he keeps saying 8000 rpm) to create backpressure when he doesn't want the pipe to pull mixture out of the cylinder.
Evidently, there is some validity to his pipe design. - Dieter
H
humhead
Guest
Tony
I agree the theory is sound, but why not back it up with results? More improtantly why react the way he did to a simple request for information?
He's asking a potential customer to pay top dollar for an exhaust - and he won't even refund the entire purchase price if you're not satisfied.
Also note the nonsense regarding Edison & the light bulb. When confronted with the truth, he tried to pass it off as a joke. All I can say is stick to points & pipes Monty - comedy is not your strong suit!
My overall feeling about the whole thing is sadness. Dr. Campbell is an intelligent man. It's a shame he's also more than a little........ troubled :wink:
Terry
PS I did quite a lot of research on the patents he holds & the principles behind them. I still want to see a comparison test involving motorcycles.
I agree the theory is sound, but why not back it up with results? More improtantly why react the way he did to a simple request for information?
He's asking a potential customer to pay top dollar for an exhaust - and he won't even refund the entire purchase price if you're not satisfied.
Go back and read the delusional tirade I received in response to my question. That's more than a little arrogant - it's downright delusional.
Also note the nonsense regarding Edison & the light bulb. When confronted with the truth, he tried to pass it off as a joke. All I can say is stick to points & pipes Monty - comedy is not your strong suit!
My overall feeling about the whole thing is sadness. Dr. Campbell is an intelligent man. It's a shame he's also more than a little........ troubled :wink:
Terry
PS I did quite a lot of research on the patents he holds & the principles behind them. I still want to see a comparison test involving motorcycles.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi Humhead:
Yeah, for the record I agree with your post above.
I thought the Edison thing was strange. Someone that theoretical wouldn't understand that a bulb offers resistance to current, the filament gets hot and glows.
But I wonder if it is that simple. Things are as complicated as you want to look into is what I have found. The trick is to pick the top 3 or 5 or 10 as appropriate. Mr. Cambell has a way to go with salesmanship.
And then, not to honor your reasonable request for dyno results, then in my opinion I would just flat stay away from him and his product. It is VERY unusual that he would not have dyno results on his pipe...don't you think? He would WANT to know how superior his product is...as a technical person.
That doesn't mean his pipe doesn't have advantages over a 4 into 1. I'll bet it does, and he doesn't want to show the dyno because it will also show the weak points.
Something I have heard no one mention. The X-pipe design "crosses-over" pipes. We have all seen the Yoshimura "duplex" pipes with their cans welded to the down tubes. I betcha those cans are another form of what the X-pipe design does. The cans were designed to increase midrange. I believe they increased "effective volume" of the down tubes without seriously affecting flow and that they also created a vacuum on the adjacent pipe. Again, all of these affects occuring best at a certain RPM given pulse "phase" or simply frequency.
Believe me, I try to relate electronic theory to this stuff. They are quite similar. But it still is incredibly difficult. Some of the hardest science is laminar flow theory and behavior. That's pipes.
Most OEM's had a crossover before the mufflers. I have found this to increase midrange. I did it on a V-four. And I would bet that's what the Yosh cans did (and Suzuki did it on Katanas too!).
Buy a 4 into 1 system with the midrange cans on the down tubes, or learn about megaphone design and take a kerker header and put a properly designed, large volume megaphone on it. My suggestion. ...and thanks. - Dieter
Yeah, for the record I agree with your post above.
I thought the Edison thing was strange. Someone that theoretical wouldn't understand that a bulb offers resistance to current, the filament gets hot and glows.
But I wonder if it is that simple. Things are as complicated as you want to look into is what I have found. The trick is to pick the top 3 or 5 or 10 as appropriate. Mr. Cambell has a way to go with salesmanship.
And then, not to honor your reasonable request for dyno results, then in my opinion I would just flat stay away from him and his product. It is VERY unusual that he would not have dyno results on his pipe...don't you think? He would WANT to know how superior his product is...as a technical person.
That doesn't mean his pipe doesn't have advantages over a 4 into 1. I'll bet it does, and he doesn't want to show the dyno because it will also show the weak points.
Something I have heard no one mention. The X-pipe design "crosses-over" pipes. We have all seen the Yoshimura "duplex" pipes with their cans welded to the down tubes. I betcha those cans are another form of what the X-pipe design does. The cans were designed to increase midrange. I believe they increased "effective volume" of the down tubes without seriously affecting flow and that they also created a vacuum on the adjacent pipe. Again, all of these affects occuring best at a certain RPM given pulse "phase" or simply frequency.
Believe me, I try to relate electronic theory to this stuff. They are quite similar. But it still is incredibly difficult. Some of the hardest science is laminar flow theory and behavior. That's pipes.
Most OEM's had a crossover before the mufflers. I have found this to increase midrange. I did it on a V-four. And I would bet that's what the Yosh cans did (and Suzuki did it on Katanas too!).
Buy a 4 into 1 system with the midrange cans on the down tubes, or learn about megaphone design and take a kerker header and put a properly designed, large volume megaphone on it. My suggestion. ...and thanks. - Dieter
M
Mark Harrop
Guest
You guys never cease to amaze me......
I just found this on e-bay and thought I'd run it by you guys for an appraisal, but it seems you are already on it.....
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4522603932&category=35596
more snake oil?....It looks cool though.....
I just found this on e-bay and thought I'd run it by you guys for an appraisal, but it seems you are already on it.....
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4522603932&category=35596
more snake oil?....It looks cool though.....
A
Anonymous
Guest
more fuel for the fire...
more fuel for the fire...
Terry Vance in Gulfport Mississippi on the 1980-81 Suzuki With The 16 valve GS1100 Engine. Classic Terry Vance, narrow slot helmet, head turned and total concentration at the staging lights! Bike had Cone Head Carbs and a Murray "X" Pipe! Suzuki Twin Swirled The World, and 20 years later the heads still have the same Patent Number!
www.bertaut.com/gssuzuki.html
more fuel for the fire...
Terry Vance in Gulfport Mississippi on the 1980-81 Suzuki With The 16 valve GS1100 Engine. Classic Terry Vance, narrow slot helmet, head turned and total concentration at the staging lights! Bike had Cone Head Carbs and a Murray "X" Pipe! Suzuki Twin Swirled The World, and 20 years later the heads still have the same Patent Number!
www.bertaut.com/gssuzuki.html
A
Anonymous
Guest
Update:
I reread the whole thread and looked at the latest posts.
I would say Monty was genuinely angry and sounds very frustrated that his pipe is not more well known, particularly that it has been since 1987 that he patented the idea.
My guess is also the bike does not need rejetting because the pipe creates backpressure when needed to prevent short-circuiting. I have learned jetting for a lean condition meant a pipe flowed better. It may not apply to this pipe.
I believe the pipe works.
Since Monty disputes dyno's, a fair question would be quarter mile times, changes in fuel efficiency in the bike. Terence?
I reread the whole thread and looked at the latest posts.
I would say Monty was genuinely angry and sounds very frustrated that his pipe is not more well known, particularly that it has been since 1987 that he patented the idea.
My guess is also the bike does not need rejetting because the pipe creates backpressure when needed to prevent short-circuiting. I have learned jetting for a lean condition meant a pipe flowed better. It may not apply to this pipe.
I believe the pipe works.
Since Monty disputes dyno's, a fair question would be quarter mile times, changes in fuel efficiency in the bike. Terence?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Tony,
This is pretty much the crux of tuning. The area under the curves is mostly fixed and all you can do is optimize for your desired RPM range. I will not comment on the X-pipe design, since I have not read the site material, but your comments on it relating to it acting as a crossover tube sound like they are right on.
From what I have seen and read, the best pipe for peak power (and torque, of course) on an inline 4 is a 4-1 with a megaphone after the collector. Properly tuned, the 4-1 header produces the strongest scavenging pulses and a megaphone draws out the duration to the max possible time frame (when used with a reverse cone), resulting in the best power and widest powerband. This explains why the two most power intensive forms of racing, drag racing and F1 cars, still use a 4-1 megaphone design despite decades of research into alternatives. F1 in particular has pretty much unlimited budgets associated with it and they still use megaphones on their exhaust systems. Many of the current MotoGP bikes also run megs for the same reasons.
The disadvantage of the 4-1 is that it inherently creates a flat spot in the torque curve at about 1/2 the tuning RPM, which is why so many people swear at them. This can be worked around with careful pipe design, but it is always a difficulty to overcome. I have an aquaintance who has built many megaphone systems with great success and he uses quite a different approach than "typical" aftermarket systems. His systems use very short primary pipes to tune for a high peak RPM, then use a megaphone to fill in the low end and midrange. His results have been very good with this approach and the pipes do not exhibit the typical 4-1 flat spot at all. I am planning to build a custom 4-1 using his specs to see how well it works. From past performance I expect it to do very well. But you never know until you try...
For anyone interested in his specs (for my 82 GS1100E, stock valves and cams) they are:
Primary pipes - 25" long (including exhaust port length), 1.625"OD x 0.049" wall.
Collector outlet - 2.5"OD
Megaphone - 21-24" long (there is some leeway here), inlet 2.5"OD, outlet 5"OD if there is room. If no room, 4" OD outlet is OK.
Muffler to go after the meg section.
This tunes for a power peak at approximately 8000-8500rpm, which is what I requested as the stock redline is very conservative and can easily be extended to 10,000rpm. I also plan to run anti-reversion cones in the primary pipes to help eliminate the 4-1 flat spot. Sounds pretty radical, but going by his results with past work, I expect it to make significantly more power than my current pipe. We shall see. When I get it built, I will definitely be dynoing it, so results will be posted for all to see (one way or the other...)
Mark
H
humhead
Guest
Tony
Go back & read my second post on page two of this thread. I offered the use of one of my GS1000s as a test mule. I live near Englishtown NJ. I made that offer months ago. I haven't heard a word in reply. The ball is in Monty's court.
A
Anonymous
Guest
First response to Mark M's post. Thank you. I try to understand designs intuitively. Doesn't mean I am right, but my guess on the X-pipe function is an educated one.
Secondly, on the GS750EZ, the Kerker header primary tube lengths were about 31 inches. Peak Horsepower occurred at 8500 RPM. I eliminated the flat spot by jetting richer with faster taper needles and setting my cams as a compromise between peak HP and peak torque (106 to 108's) AND enlarging the exhaust canister volume (to about 26 " long by 5.5" in diameter-small by todays standards) AND keeping multiple baffles AND creating a scavenging effect at the exhaust tip and keeping the intake airbox. Not sure which change gave me the most. The large 4 in 1 pipe helped greatly.
To humheads last post: I hear you. Campbell is not replying. My guess, and it's a guess, is he's been down this road before and he sounds very frustrated in general..so no response. Won't get sales that way in any case. I would love to get some objective evidence on his design. Seems 1/4 mi times and fuel efficiency, roll-on times, before and after, on a stock bike would be excellent testimony to the superiority of the X-pipe. The first 2 are so easy to do, all you need is a stop watch, an odometer and a couple of tanks of gas. Roll ons are a little harder, but measurable.
Regards all. - Dieter
Secondly, on the GS750EZ, the Kerker header primary tube lengths were about 31 inches. Peak Horsepower occurred at 8500 RPM. I eliminated the flat spot by jetting richer with faster taper needles and setting my cams as a compromise between peak HP and peak torque (106 to 108's) AND enlarging the exhaust canister volume (to about 26 " long by 5.5" in diameter-small by todays standards) AND keeping multiple baffles AND creating a scavenging effect at the exhaust tip and keeping the intake airbox. Not sure which change gave me the most. The large 4 in 1 pipe helped greatly.
To humheads last post: I hear you. Campbell is not replying. My guess, and it's a guess, is he's been down this road before and he sounds very frustrated in general..so no response. Won't get sales that way in any case. I would love to get some objective evidence on his design. Seems 1/4 mi times and fuel efficiency, roll-on times, before and after, on a stock bike would be excellent testimony to the superiority of the X-pipe. The first 2 are so easy to do, all you need is a stop watch, an odometer and a couple of tanks of gas. Roll ons are a little harder, but measurable.
Regards all. - Dieter
A
Anonymous
Guest
But your peak torque occurred at about 5500, right? That is really the point of max resonance and scavenging on your pipe.
As you note, the cam lobe centers have a large effect on the shape of the torque curve. Timing those to match your pipe should produce the best power, but it may not be the right type or where you like. My goal with the new pipe is to "rock" the torque curve to higher rpm for more peak power. If I can keep the current bottom end and midrange torque and move the peak over about 1500-2000rpm it would be ideal. I would like around 118-120rwhp when all is said and done (this will eventually include port work, new cams and bigger carbs). The new pipe will have a lot more volume for a muffler than the current Kerker can has. I hope to find the same sort of gains as you mention. As I mentioned elsewhere, I am currently working on a new tail pipe to replace the Kerker one. The new tail pipe will have a true meg with reverse cone, followed by a small plenum chamber and a large core muffler section. It will have about 6 times the flow area and close to double the original volume after the header, all in the quest for more flow and scavenging.
That's the bitch of doing all this experimentation. You really need to do one thing at a time, but who has that much time (and money)?
Mark
Similar threads
