Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If there is a problem with the muffler or resonator a restriction point can sometimes be indicated by heat marks , brown usually. The only accurate way to find the culprit is to pressure test the system on load. The starting point is engine side of cat. The reading is the summation of all restriction in the exhaust.Repeat this process in front of the remaining components. Where the pressure drops indicates that closest component towards the engine is the culprit. If there is no pressure drop , remains high then it will be the rear muffler.

Have you got a dyno graph, HP v boost

The angle and location of where the WG rejoins the exhaust is less then ideal IMO, it should have been put into the back of the bend at a less angle

If the cat is 100 cell 5" bodied and intact it shouldn't be a problem

They should have dropped it to confirm, I'd agree on the CAS been a possible problem as already stated

If the cat core is intact it should be ok.

The WG merge point could have been a little better, and angled a bit more shallow. But it doesn't look too bad.

Offset mufflers - depending on internal construction - can provide bigger restriction. Some simply use a slight kink with a full length internal perforated tube. They are little different to one that has a straight internal tube. If yours runs bulkheads and chambers then yes it could be an issue.

That mid muffler definitely needs another look, the rear outlet seems to be necked down. Get that measured and be prepared to modify/replace/delete it.

Thanks guys I have doubts on the mid muffler as well as its seemingly necked down at the back, unsure about front, will check. Is it a stock item, and if replacement needed then just get a generic 3' in/out mid muffler right? What about the xforce rear oval muffler, anyone here made 310+rwkw on that? Confirming that cat is intact, was dropped last week

Unless there is something we can't see, like a piece of metal welded poorly inside the exhaust, it won't be your issue. We can debate it as much as you like Ron, but you could have dropped 2 bolts, seriously less than a minute, and you would have known if it was a problem or not on the dyno. There are a few issues that can limit power like that and jumping to conclusions won't fix any of them.

Get it back on the dyno, (make sure you have the cam timing checked first) drop the exhaust during the run, if that fails change the cas on the spot.

Thanx Scotty - its goin back Monday for a quick check with Yavuz, will ask them why they didnt drop the exhaust seeing as the conclusion was made that its definitely the exhaust. Cam timing as set by me with timing gun and confirmed by Mark is spot on 15degs at idle and also on PFC. I took cat off last week to hammer out some welding dags where the flanges welded to the cat. Hope I havent shattered out the innards with the heavy hammer/screwdriver blows to thedags.. ;S.

Where is the thread about Anthonys CAS on the R34GTT, couldnt find the link, if you dont mind posting here? Would like to read cheers

Thanks guys I have doubts on the mid muffler as well as its seemingly necked down at the back, unsure about front, will check. Is it a stock item, and if replacement needed then just get a generic 3' in/out mid muffler right? What about the xforce rear oval muffler, anyone here made 310+rwkw on that? Confirming that cat is intact, was dropped last week

I used a 3inch xforce rear oval muffler for 320 easy kw's, doesn't look as nice as your one though. Can take a pic of the insides to compare if you want.
  • Like 1

Updates on exhaust study: discovered theres a taper at where the rear exhaust pipe joins with back of mid muffler. Exhaust confirmed 77mm outer dia (3 inch), that taper is 69mm (2.71inches) :( XForce rear muffler is fine, seems to have an angled inner pipe to offset at back entry. - inner dia looks small? :( !

post-49401-13954657449495_thumb.jpg

post-49401-13954657578329_thumb.jpg

post-49401-13954657742776_thumb.jpg

post-49401-13954657880668_thumb.jpg

I think there's a bit more to these Japanese cat back mid mufflers than meets the eye . They're more difficult to see on the car let alone look through and Jasma systems were made to be quiet . If your bolt on import only got modest upgrades some restriction may not have been a big issue . There are limits to how deep that mid muffler can be and from memory there is a bracket bolted across the tunnel in a 33 anyway that limits the length of that mid muffler . The numbers I wrote down are 5 x 10 x 16 inch and that's a Nismo in cat back one - no idea what it's like inside .

I spoke to Wolverine about this stuff yesterday evening and it's beginning to sound like the best mufflers need to be made because the generic ones are too big or too small .

The rear ones like that Xforce could be slightly longer and deeper for Skylines but they're obviously intended to go into other cars with a little less space - so one fits all .

The best scenario would be a run of the biggest straight through mufflers that will fit 32 33 34 made up and a group buy , 3 and 3 1/2" would keep most inc the GTR people happy if quiet .

A .

I find that magnaflow make a good center muffler that fits nice and neat and is in 3,3.5 and 4" sizes

I modified a HKS super drager rear muffler to make it 4" cause it has a big arse barrel around it meaning there was heaps of room for sound deadining around the 4" pipe

At these power levels custom is the best way to get the flow and keep sound to a minimum

Ron your pics on post 31 pretty clearly show the neck-down restriction, pics 3 and 4.

If pic 4 is the rear muffler, the guts of that thing must be somewhere around 2.25". There's the source of your problem Unigroup identified.

Adrian the best/biggest mufflers may well have to be made, but there are decent off the shelf units around provided you look.

There's not much bling factor with Hurricane or Mercury products, but they offer sizes and shapes that can fit and provide decent flow and muffling ability.

Na Wolverine, I had a HKS cannon before, got rid of it, I much like my quiet oval, just hope its not a restriction, Blackkers do you mind taking a pic up inside your muffler tip like I did above, I want to see how big your hole is cos mine looks small lol..

Do you guys not think my mid-muffler could be the culprit with that tapered 2.71inch exit at the back?

Oops your post didnt come through until after I posted, Dale, yehthe guts of that thing looks small aye :(.. I ordered a 3' oval xforce supplied n fitted by Western Mufflers in Fairfield coupla years ago and thought thats what I got, doesnt look like it now..wtf

  • Like 1

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

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...