Upping The Boost What Else Is Needed

[Street Tuner]

Geea, the APS full turbo back 304 S/S exhaust system has only half a psi presure drop at 280KW at the treads in shoot six mode. In addition the noise reading at the EPA specified RPM test speed is 87 dB, and the NVH at cruise speeds between 60 to 140 kph is very low, you could easily drive the car from Sydney to perth and get out of the car in good shape.

that's quite some achievement Peter! You obviously didnt get that down the local exhaust shop

[bcl]

Geea,

The exhaust will be the same hi-flow system as used in my car that has in excess of 340rwkw.

It overcomes the 2 main problems that we see in the standard system:

1. the restrictive cat

2. the stock rear muffler has small diameter perforated pipes of dual 2”, smaller than the mid-section

The new system is as follows:

· Section 1, comprising a stainless 3.5” down pipe into a high-flow steel-mesh internal cat, and streamlined 3.5”piping into dual 2.5” from the cat. This section has been wrapped in a special ceramic coating to act as a thermal barrier, to retain high gas temps for better exhaust flow, and is a better solution than just a straight stainless pipe.

· Section 2, comprising dual 2.5” pipes with no muffler in mild steel

· Section 3, comprising dual 2.5” pipes with original muffler custom rebuilt containing 2.5” perforated piping, and retaining standard exhaust tip, in mild steel.

By retaining the original exhaust tip, the advantage is that the car looks totally stock from the rear, and will not attack any unwanted attention.

All piping is mandrel bent, with very little restriction in the system… high-flow modern 3.5” cat and high-flow dual 2.5” pipes all the way from the cat.

The exhaust sound is sporty under hard acceleration, but not very loud, with no drone at all at highway speeds. Sound has been measured at 2db louder than the APS system.

If required, the mid/rear section could be done in stainless, at extra cost.

Mild steel is not a problem for the mid and rear sections. I had mild steel in my Calais turbo for 8 years, and have had a 4" mild steel system in my Sti for 4 years, and will probably get another 4 years out of it.

My cat has been fine so far.

If corrosion resistance in an issue for you I'd ask for the rear sections in stainless.

In terms of contraction/expansion issues I suggest you get independent advice from an exhaust shop, rather than believe all you read from certain people. Do as I have and ring up 2 exhaust shops. I expect they will tell you, as they have told me, that expansion/contraction is more an issue with stainless steel than with mild steel. If you want to keep the car for say 10 years, or use the car for show, or if corrosion is an issue then go stainless.... if not then mild steel will do the job.

If you (or others) want more information, including how to get the system, I suggest you email me at brian_c_lord@yahoo.com.au , and I'll be happy to supply more information and many photos of the system.

Due to the current commercial restrictions of this site, I really can’t give you any more information, so email me privately… sorry. I find it very unfortunate there are no avenues for any companies (other than sponsors) to make special offers to forum members.

In this case you do get a lot for $1200+GST.

I have no commercial interest in this matter, and am only too happy to help other forum members enjoy their cars.

Brian

[aps]

Geea, dont be conned into thinking that a system which has 340Kw at the wheels is an answer to what back pressure the exhaust system has, as exhaust back pressure and power levels are 2 seperate issues.

If the owner knew what the back pressure number was at this power level, he would have stated the figure in his last post. Obviously he does not know what back pressure the exhaust has at the claimed power level.

For an explanation of the problems related to high exhaust back pressure, please read my previous post.

I dont under stand how it could be claimed that mild steel is adequate for a high performance Turbo charged engine exhaust system, as high temperature is a by product of increased power levels.

The stock ford exhaust system is manufactured in stainless steel so why would any person degrade the service life of the stock exhaust by installing an inadequate mild steel exhaust system?

Every car manufacturer around the globe uses S/S material ( for turbo applications) as does every quality aftermarket exhaust system manufacturer. The only reason for using mild steel in an exhaust system is for lower cost and the fact it is much easier to both bend and weld, though you pay the penalty in reliability and durability.

In terms of noise emission if the system being discussed is 2 dB louder than the APS system then the exhaust system is right on the border of being illegal and the exhaust noise will only get louder over time, not quieter.

The final and most glaring omission is the lack of answering the question of engine emission compliance. The point is, the onnus of proof to demonstrate continued compliance to ADR 79/00, rests with the owner. What is the point to a cheap exhaust system that

a) wont last long at a high power level and

b) that you will be forced to remove from the car the first time you stopped by the Police, EPA, or Road Traffic Authority and

c) that will result in a serious on the spot fine ($500) when your caught.

In finishing for any person to suggest that a mild steel exhaust system is adequate on a high powered turbo engine simply demonstrates their lack of real life engineering experience in the area of exhaust system design. Fact is every serious performance manufacturer globally utilises a grade of stainless steel for turbo charged exhaust systems.

Ultimately the choice is up to the consumer and a full STREET LEGAL 304 stainless steel system is available from APS at a very competitive price.

Peter

APS

[aps]

Geea, the APS full turbo back 304 S/S exhaust system has only half a psi presure drop at 280KW at the treads in shoot six mode. In addition the noise reading at the EPA specified RPM test speed is 87 dB, and the NVH at cruise speeds between 60 to 140 kph is very low, you could easily drive the car from Sydney to perth and get out of the car in good shape.

that's quite some achievement Peter! You obviously didnt get that down the local exhaust shop

You can say that again Martin the exhaust system development was a huge effort, the combination of low restriction and legal noise emission is a real challenge. I could not find either the quality that we at APS demand or level of engineering we insist on from the local exhaust shop.

Peter

APS

[Street Tuner]

Interestingly enough Peter I have done my fair share of ADR style exhaust development, and while it is easier with a turbo car, its still a pain in the bum to match both back pressure and db output. Very good absorbtion in the mufflers is the trick, but then you pay the penalty of weight.

BTW I dont know of any new car manufacturer that uses mild steel anymore. Why? It more than likely wont last out the three year warranty!

[aps]

Interestingly enough Peter I have done my fair share of ADR style exhaust development, and while it is easier with a turbo car, its still a pain in the bum to match both back pressure and db output. Very good absorbtion in the mufflers is the trick, but then you pay the penalty of weight.

BTW I dont know of any new car manufacturer that uses mild steel anymore. Why? It more than likely wont last out the three year warranty!

Martin that is spot on, we all know that mild steel wont last the journey and that's why ford and Expensive Daewoo utilise stainless steel.

Even when mild steel is ceramic coated the exhaust tube rusts out from inside to outside in a short time period. :(

Keeping the temperature in the tube is great idea if you use a material which is designed to withstand the high temp. :banghead:

Mild steel just wont cope with the high EGT for any length of time ........and that's a fact that all people in the performance Manufacturing industry know, you cant beat 20 plus years of experience to learn this. :banghead:

Peter

APS