Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just wondering if there will be a noticeable difference on a stock turbo (R33 11psi) between a split dump, and a split dump/front pipe (where the split joins to the main pipe further along)? What is your experience?

Also, do you guys always heat wrap your stainless steel dump/front pipes? Is it required/advisable?

Another thing, i noticed when i put my highflow cat on, it caused richness. Will i find the same with going from standard dump to split dump? ie, requires a retune?

Cheers

EDIT: i currently have a stock dump going into a 3 inch front pipe - 3 inch cat back. very straight thru exhaust. hardly a bend in it, with a cannon on the end.

Edited by Munkyb0y

you wont see anything noticeable b/w front dump and split dump. IMO, and others will agree, either a front/dump in 1 from flyn. or a jjr split front/dump will be exactly the same.

unless ur targeting more than 250rwkw, then either will be ok. if you want more, go a the front/dump in 1 like flyn has.

the longer wastegate sepparation on the split dump design improves power, due to reduction in turbulence at the turbine exit. This is well proven on the GTR, with products like the Trust style setups. The gtst is going to benifit in exactly the same manner. If you look under the forced induction 'guide' sticky there is a back to back dyno of the improvement on a fairly stock gtst, as proof if you need it. The theory is sound enough however.

I recently aquired a JJR split pipe for my stagea (Rb25det), it needed a die grinder to clean up the alignment of the flange. IT was cheap so some elements of it's finish are what you expect for the price.

I usually heat wrap the pipe. Be sure to do it properly, with even overlap of the tape. DEI make a tape that has a line marked on it as a guide.

Edited by rev210

There was alot of discussion about this a few years ago when BATMBL introduced his pipes into the market and was competing against CES... as rev210 said the longer wastegate separation the less turbulence.

I currently run an apexi front pipe and stock dump. Wouldnt mind changing over to a BATMBL pipe when I put my new turbo on though....

thanks for the replies

i'm still tossing up whether to keep my current 3inch front, and just add the split dump to it.

but after some more research, it would seem that to gain most benefit from a split dump pipe, the split should be a minimum of about 40cm before joining back to the main pipe. so i guess a split dump/front pipe is the way to go.

thanks for the replies

i'm still tossing up whether to keep my current 3inch front, and just add the split dump to it.

but after some more research, it would seem that to gain most benefit from a split dump pipe, the split should be a minimum of about 40cm before joining back to the main pipe. so i guess a split dump/front pipe is the way to go.

Make sure 100000% it is...coz my friend's joins almost instantly (shit custom job) and now he has a brand new engine...cooked. (couldnt lower boost in the run in period). Otherwise, if done properly, i personally think they are the way to go.

Make sure 100000% it is...coz my friend's joins almost instantly (shit custom job) and now he has a brand new engine...cooked. (couldnt lower boost in the run in period). Otherwise, if done properly, i personally think they are the way to go.

guess he drove with his foot down too far then! :(

This is my opinion only but I reckon you lose a bit of convienence if the dump/engine pipe is in one piece . The turbine housing outlet/dump pipe bolts can be a pain to work around in situ and I have to wonder if removing a turbo with the dump attached would be easier . You can get at the fasteners easily enough once the turbos been removed .

Also if you needed to remove the engine pipe alone for some reason its very easy to drop- it off the bottom of a conventional dump pipe .

All up to you guys but making things straightforward to work on saves knuckles and time in the long run .

Thoughts ? Cheers A .

This is my opinion only but I reckon you lose a bit of convienence if the dump/engine pipe is in one piece . The turbine housing outlet/dump pipe bolts can be a pain to work around in situ and I have to wonder if removing a turbo with the dump attached would be easier . You can get at the fasteners easily enough once the turbos been removed .

Also if you needed to remove the engine pipe alone for some reason its very easy to drop- it off the bottom of a conventional dump pipe .

All up to you guys but making things straightforward to work on saves knuckles and time in the long run .

Thoughts ? Cheers A .

I reckon you have a good point. But I think most people when they were shopping for exhausts like I was too at one stage, only thought about the 'fit and forget' side. I haven't had to remove mine again thankfully.

But if your going to be removing and refitting the exhaust on a regular basis, having a separate dump to front pipe certainly would be more convenient.

Getting to a couple of the bolts on the back of the turbo are a bit hard to get to but they're not impossible. Having a friend on hand is a must whether its a separate dump or not & it makes things a lot easier.

I would agree that removing the turbo would make it heaps easier to remove the dump, but it then involves removing more things in the engine bay, like undoing the turbo to exhaust manifold bolts, water line, oil line, hot intercooler piping, pod/airbox, intake pipe and afm.

By the time you've had all that off, you could've removed the the heat shield and O2 sensor and dump & front pipe.

It's not a bad idea, but it just depends on the cars duty's as to what you use.

Cheers.

so u saying an extremly small dump pipe wotn effect boost ?

*should have probably mentioned his injectors were f**ked :(

You say that the small dump pipe meant your friend was unable to 'turn down the boost' during his run-on, and in turn this is his excuse for blowing up his engine. This is one of the most ridiculous comments I have ever read on SAU.

Blaming an undersized dump pipe for overboosting and blowing up a new engine............. :laughing-smiley-014:

Sounds like your friend leaned out his motor, either due to an injector problem, poor tune or too much boost - This has nothing to do with his split dump pipe and is completely irrelevant to this thread.

You say that the small dump pipe meant your friend was unable to 'turn down the boost' during his run-on, and in turn this is his excuse for blowing up his engine. This is one of the most ridiculous comments I have ever read on SAU.

Blaming an undersized dump pipe for overboosting and blowing up a new engine............. :laughing-smiley-014:

Sounds like your friend leaned out his motor, either due to an injector problem, poor tune or too much boost - This has nothing to do with his split dump pipe and is completely irrelevant to this thread.

Who said i/he was entirely blaming the dump pipe ? I just said it played a part in stuffing up boost levels and as well as his injectors weren't too good causing, like you said, the motor to lean out and go bang.

And no he wasnt giving it too much, it was still in the run in period (obviously gave it a bit sometimes, but not constantly).

So its pretty much what you said, too much boost, shit injectors....How is that the most stupid comment ever made on SAU ?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...