X pipes

[AOD]

Wow. Terry, bravo on the email chain, your polite educated responses and questioning sure riled him up.

Granted the man may have designed this and patented it, but you have to look at patents as a way to make money, since they don't always make you PROVE the design.

As an engineer I too seek the same thing you were after. Exhaust tuning and design goes along way just like intake tuning and design, so I'd be curious to see the numbers behind the claims, in an engineering sense.

In the end though, for most people, it's Dyno Run A vs. Dyno Run B that gives the immediate answer. 99% of us do in the professional world too...

Keep on,

~Adam

[lecroy]

and dyno runs produce observable, repeatable numbers that allow comparison.

Depends what your calling repeatable.

[pano]

Gee-s-is,

Please let us know how it sounds and works. We are all interested.

[Anonymous]

Repeatable?

Yes, I am aware that from dyno to dyno and from day to day you can get lots of variation.

But who tunes their bike using different dynos on different days?

Dyno numbers are relative numbers, valid only for that dyno and setup. But they are still useful for A:B comparisons of cam and ignition timing, carburetor jetting, and, yes, different pipes, ON A GIVEN BIKE AND SETUP.

A dyno is not a miraculous horsepower validator, it is simply a tool that can be used to help you make your ride work better. Other uses get further and further from what can be defended logically and scientifically.

Mr X-pipe claims his product does a superior job to MAC or V&H or Harris, which are pretty much the only new pipes available for many of our bikes. He bases this on his theories about how 4:1s work versus how his X-pipe works.

4:1s are necessarily compromise designs because they don't take into account the variables of the individual bike, cams, ignition, carbs, airbox, etc. So too is the X pipe. Campbell does not, for your $600.00, offer to tune the pipe to your bike, or vice-versa.. So I see no objective basis on which he can claim his pipe is better, certainly not $400.00 better.

[Anonymous]

Mark wrote....

Take a look at:

http://www.burnsstainless.com/Megaphones/megaphones.html

Actually, the Burns Stainless site is a great one to take a look at
for a bunch of header/collector/exhaust info. Beautiful stuff, but lots
of $$$.

Mark

Well - OPEN up the link mark posted and VOILA, there is a "tab-link" on the left side of the page marked "X & Y pipes". Hey

Mark - you can build your own "X" pipe too! I gotta get me some of those X-Y "chrome"-o-somes also. Heh heh....- Dieter

[Nerobro]

Dynos... what a subject.

Dynojet, and all acceleration dynomometers are all stupidly consistant. They tell you EXACTLY how much force you are applying to the rollers. From dyno to dyno the numbers can change a little. And they are dependant on acceleration, so you don't get steady state numbers from them. But you can get repeatable (within less than a percentage point) numbers using the same, dyno time after time.

Dynos don't lie. Operators can lie. But you're there, you can take care of making sure things don't get fudged up. Make sure you get the "uncorrected" numbers. Make sure you have your tire pressures set right. (or at least consistantly, run to run)

On another note, different kinds of dyno will report different numbers. The only numbers that matter are the ones at the rear wheel.

Now for the BS that guy was spewing. Call an exhaust what you will, but saying "blah blah design is a miracle" is bull. Exhaust tuning is somewhat of an art, and somewhat of a science. Your job as an exhaust manufacturer is to build an exhaust that will do the most good for the engines preformance.

All he's talking about is exhaust tuning. There's no magic involved. Tehre's no simple forumula that will give us everything we need. (however said forumla can give us a good starting point... but that's another story entirely)

He says dynos lie. They don't. They give an accurate representation of what the engine is doing at what rpm for a given accleration. (this is assuming an inertial dyno) Change one part, and said dyno will tell you EXACTLY what changed. And that change will be consistant from dyno to dyno. If a 4-1 exhaust causes a flat spot, that flat spot will show up on every dyno we try it on. We will also see the same percentage changes throughout the rev band.

I think the guy doesn't know he's spewing bull.

As for an x pipe on a 4cyl... All that would end up being is a 4-2-1 exhaust versus a 4-1. It's nothing new......................

[Anonymous]

Actually,from the pictures,it looks to be a 4-into-2 design,with no 'mufflers',per se ,just stubby turn-outs with some sort of baffles in them.

[Mysuzyq]

Re: X pipe

I will let you guy's know if the pipe works, I have bid on one, I dont care about the power Iam buying one for the looks ( may sound stupid, but I can afford to be stupid cause I was smart when I was young witch allows me to be stupid with my money now) )

Is that the whole exhaust or just the headers...please post a pic once you have them on your bike.

Some of the pics on his site show an additional aluminum can (MX-3) attached to the x-pipe.

Tony.

[lecroy]

I did not notice anything in the claims about power gains. Like the magnetic braclet. It has a patent too. But the claims are all about packaging, not performance.


I agree that a roller dyno is good for relative data, for one setup. But go to any real test lab that's doing engine research and your going to see direct drive.

[Craig]

Gee-s-is:
I too would love to hear how your new purchase works. Please keep us informed.

Kind regards...Craig

[Mark Harrop]

Looks like Pointshyofgenius is getting a set as well....maybe they have found the secret weapon!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4525327397&category=35596

[Anonymous]

x

The guys site makes a great deal of effort to avoid showing off his product which is enough to make anyone sceptical. Regardless, he is right about one thing, while 4 into 1 exhausts make peak power and tourq, they generally are not the best exhaust for anything except drag racing or superspeedways. I have experimented with dozens of exhausts over the years and the best powerband has always been obtained by a 4 into 2 into one system like those manufactured by Hindle. They are more xpensive to manufacture than a 4into one because they have three y collectors as opposed to one collector. Look at the stock exhaust on a 2004 gsxr600, 750, or 1000. They are all 4-2-1 for the midrange benefit AND THESE BIKE MAKE BIG TIME POWER ON THE TOP END! The six hundred also has two crossovers or x pipes betqweeen cylinders 2 and 3 in an effort to boost its feeble midrange. A properly designed 4-2-1 will match the 4-1 in top end or come awful close and clobber it in the midrange. Even if MR. pipe is a snake oil salesman, hopefuly he has inspired some investigation. Most of us think 4-1's are the way to go and never question whether or not it is true.

[pano]

Hey guys, I emailed an x-pipe ebay winner and asked how he liked his pipe and how it sounded.

I got his response today...

"Real happy with the X-pipe. Super light weight, gives tremedous response in the 2500-6000 RPM range. Way too loud is the only problem, but darn if it doesn't actually work. I am building a 750 motor with a shell cam etc etc ..that is what they were for and I bet the thing will really hump. thanks for asking matt "

[wolfie]

bump + some more to get past the 10 character limit.