Engine Mods
#31
Tech Initiate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: fuel consumption and hp
Originally posted by Top Gun 777
We have to move spray bar closer to center of hole, reshape bottom end needle ( most important step-right shape-made three needles before got right shape), and it will be moved in till right tunning for idle.
Right now I am preparing drawings to make conversion kit for common carbs. Hope will be done very soon
We have to move spray bar closer to center of hole, reshape bottom end needle ( most important step-right shape-made three needles before got right shape), and it will be moved in till right tunning for idle.
Right now I am preparing drawings to make conversion kit for common carbs. Hope will be done very soon
#32
Increasing the length of the pipe will help produce more power at the top end while shortening the length will produce more torque.
But with the .12 engines the differences are barely noticeable unless the engine is really tuned to perfection.
But with the .12 engines the differences are barely noticeable unless the engine is really tuned to perfection.
#33
Sorry, but my experience is that the longer pipe gives you more torque while the shorter on gives more rpm's.
#34
Originally posted by modellor
Increasing the length of the pipe will help produce more power at the top end while shortening the length will produce more torque.
Increasing the length of the pipe will help produce more power at the top end while shortening the length will produce more torque.
#35
Originally posted by stefan
Sorry, but my experience is that the longer pipe gives you more torque while the shorter on gives more rpm's.
Sorry, but my experience is that the longer pipe gives you more torque while the shorter on gives more rpm's.
AFM
#36
http://www.rbproducts.com/rbww/faqrb...erformance.htm
read it carefully and check out what does "pipe length" mean there.
read it carefully and check out what does "pipe length" mean there.
#37
Originally posted by Manticore
http://www.rbproducts.com/rbww/faqrb...erformance.htm
read it carefully and check out what does "pipe length" mean there.
http://www.rbproducts.com/rbww/faqrb...erformance.htm
read it carefully and check out what does "pipe length" mean there.
http://www.rbproducts.com/rbww/pipe_...foldlength.htm
It tells you how to measure that lenght, and in their pipe product description it tells you the min. and max. lenght suggested for each pipe. But what Modellor and I are trying to explain is that on the pipe's designed size by itself, Longer = Top end, Shorter = Torque.
AFM
#38
Originally posted by afm
Manticore, that's what I was trying to set clear, i totally agree with you, and if we go to:
http://www.rbproducts.com/rbww/pipe_...foldlength.htm
It tells you how to measure that lenght, and in their pipe product description it tells you the min. and max. lenght suggested for each pipe. But what Modellor and I are trying to explain is that on the pipe's designed size by itself, Longer = Top end, Shorter = Torque.
AFM
Manticore, that's what I was trying to set clear, i totally agree with you, and if we go to:
http://www.rbproducts.com/rbww/pipe_...foldlength.htm
It tells you how to measure that lenght, and in their pipe product description it tells you the min. and max. lenght suggested for each pipe. But what Modellor and I are trying to explain is that on the pipe's designed size by itself, Longer = Top end, Shorter = Torque.
AFM
These pipes of course, that i am comparing are with the same stinger outlet diameter.
#39
Tech Fanatic
Originally posted by afm
But what Modellor and I are trying to explain is that on the pipe's designed size by itself, Longer = Top end, Shorter = Torque.
AFM
But what Modellor and I are trying to explain is that on the pipe's designed size by itself, Longer = Top end, Shorter = Torque.
AFM
So maybe you can not state it longer and shorter (pipe length terms), just different language problem i guess.
#40
Originally posted by x_man
I thought it was the other way round, where longer pipe will gives more resonating volume, lower resonating time(lower pitch sound) and backpressure, shorter pipe will have less resonating volume higher resonating time(higher pitch sound) and less backpressure hence better reving engine(top end).
These pipes of course, that i am comparing are with the same stinger outlet diameter.
I thought it was the other way round, where longer pipe will gives more resonating volume, lower resonating time(lower pitch sound) and backpressure, shorter pipe will have less resonating volume higher resonating time(higher pitch sound) and less backpressure hence better reving engine(top end).
These pipes of course, that i am comparing are with the same stinger outlet diameter.
http://www.bolly.com.au/book/Book.js...er=6&Section=1
http://www.hpt-sport.com/direct.htm (go to pipes)
Hope it helps
AFM
#41
Originally posted by GoldFinger
I thin you were addressing to the divergent cone shape.
So maybe you can not state it longer and shorter (pipe length terms), just different language problem i guess.
I thin you were addressing to the divergent cone shape.
So maybe you can not state it longer and shorter (pipe length terms), just different language problem i guess.
Some examples are;
Small volume - high heat - narrow operating range (peaky)
High volume - lower power (if too big) - broad range
Steep angles - 'peaky' - high power
Shallow angles - broad range - moderate power
Smaller or larger diameter stinger - lower or higher pressures and heat.
There are a multitude of ways of quoting pipe length. The most accurate method (and most rarely used) is to quote the distance from the piston face to the Mean Reflection Point (MRP). The MRP is the average point of the reflected wave forces. Many people quote a length of plug to the high point, which is easy when pipes have a clearly defined high point ... most modern pipes have a flat or mildly curved center section which is used to "tune" the operational power band..smoother, wider etc.etc.
AFM
#42
Why don't we read agian articles on the web sites I posted on the beginning of this thread.
Generaly-longer pipe kick in earlier and give us benefit at lower RPM, but it will not bring us to highest possible RPM. Short pipe will ki9kck in later at higher RPM range will give us much higher topr RPM level, but engine first has to reach that leve when pipe will start making charging ( resonance effect).
At any lenght of pipe, it will not start working till engine reach RPM on which pipe is tuned. If engine isn't able to reach that level, pipe will never bring any benefits ( resonace charging).
Start from longest possible pipe and run it, after that start shortening it, till you will find the best effect-don't forget at differnt load engine will go to level differently-more load takes more time to get there.
Generaly-longer pipe kick in earlier and give us benefit at lower RPM, but it will not bring us to highest possible RPM. Short pipe will ki9kck in later at higher RPM range will give us much higher topr RPM level, but engine first has to reach that leve when pipe will start making charging ( resonance effect).
At any lenght of pipe, it will not start working till engine reach RPM on which pipe is tuned. If engine isn't able to reach that level, pipe will never bring any benefits ( resonace charging).
Start from longest possible pipe and run it, after that start shortening it, till you will find the best effect-don't forget at differnt load engine will go to level differently-more load takes more time to get there.
#43
That is correct. This arguement is my fault. Typed my first post back to front and didnt realise.
Sorry everyone.
Sorry everyone.
#44
Originally posted by Top Gun 777
.......Generaly-longer pipe kick in earlier and give us benefit at lower RPM, but it will not bring us to highest possible RPM. Short pipe will kick in later at higher RPM range will give us much higher top RPM level, but engine first has to reach that level when pipe will start making charging ( resonance effect).
At any lenght of pipe, it will not start working till engine reach RPM on which pipe is tuned. If engine isn't able to reach that level, pipe will never bring any benefits ( resonace charging).
Start from longest possible pipe and run it, after that start shortening it, till you will find the best effect-don't forget at differnt load engine will go to level differently-more load takes more time to get there.
.......Generaly-longer pipe kick in earlier and give us benefit at lower RPM, but it will not bring us to highest possible RPM. Short pipe will kick in later at higher RPM range will give us much higher top RPM level, but engine first has to reach that level when pipe will start making charging ( resonance effect).
At any lenght of pipe, it will not start working till engine reach RPM on which pipe is tuned. If engine isn't able to reach that level, pipe will never bring any benefits ( resonace charging).
Start from longest possible pipe and run it, after that start shortening it, till you will find the best effect-don't forget at differnt load engine will go to level differently-more load takes more time to get there.
But lets not confuse the pipe's lenght by itself with total exhaust lenght, that is why i think that the best explained method is the one given by RB Products and it is called "pipe to manifold lenght", which will give us the effects you so well explained.
Sorry if i got confused between those two concepts that started this argument (pipe lenght vs total exhaust lenght), that in the end has been very productive for everyone.
AFM
#45
Originally posted by afm
Totally agree with that TG, that is why there are so many pipes out there in the market, and each manufacturer and it's different models of pipe try to enhance different "power bands", but if you don't tune them correctly to your engine and application, they are worthless.
But lets not confuse the pipe's lenght by itself with total exhaust lenght, that is why i think that the best explained method is the one given by RB Products and it is called "pipe to manifold lenght", which will give us the effects you so well explained.
Sorry if i got confused between those two concepts that started this argument (pipe lenght vs total exhaust lenght), that in the end has been very productive for everyone.
Agree with you 100%.
I am talking about length of tuned pipe ( total lenght) wich is dictating by RPM of our engines ( applications).
Over the years Tuned ( Resonance) pipe went through whole type of development and reshaping. In 70's pipes looked very thin and very long cons, hole on the stinger was arround 8.5-9 mm, Later was add middle straight piece, which actualy gave a lot of more benefits, later it start getting fatter and cons became shorter, stinger hole was going smaller too-7mm-6mm. etc. So the whole evolution came through the development. What we have now is lates best possible, but still lenght of the pipe dictate when charging porcess will began ( poweer add). Shape was chaging to improve efficiency. On the beggining it was adding 5-8 %, later 10-15 and now is about 18up to 25%. Now on control line speed models ( .15 engine) stinger size is 4.5 mm. much slmaller then we have on our RC cars. Those pipes are working on only one way-highest possible RPM during the fly, so not everything frome those designs can be apply to our application, but I am sure some of them easy wilol work ( right now experimenting on it too). BTW, I saw new Mugen pipe on Robby Collins car-that is blasting pipe.
AFM
Totally agree with that TG, that is why there are so many pipes out there in the market, and each manufacturer and it's different models of pipe try to enhance different "power bands", but if you don't tune them correctly to your engine and application, they are worthless.
But lets not confuse the pipe's lenght by itself with total exhaust lenght, that is why i think that the best explained method is the one given by RB Products and it is called "pipe to manifold lenght", which will give us the effects you so well explained.
Sorry if i got confused between those two concepts that started this argument (pipe lenght vs total exhaust lenght), that in the end has been very productive for everyone.
Agree with you 100%.
I am talking about length of tuned pipe ( total lenght) wich is dictating by RPM of our engines ( applications).
Over the years Tuned ( Resonance) pipe went through whole type of development and reshaping. In 70's pipes looked very thin and very long cons, hole on the stinger was arround 8.5-9 mm, Later was add middle straight piece, which actualy gave a lot of more benefits, later it start getting fatter and cons became shorter, stinger hole was going smaller too-7mm-6mm. etc. So the whole evolution came through the development. What we have now is lates best possible, but still lenght of the pipe dictate when charging porcess will began ( poweer add). Shape was chaging to improve efficiency. On the beggining it was adding 5-8 %, later 10-15 and now is about 18up to 25%. Now on control line speed models ( .15 engine) stinger size is 4.5 mm. much slmaller then we have on our RC cars. Those pipes are working on only one way-highest possible RPM during the fly, so not everything frome those designs can be apply to our application, but I am sure some of them easy wilol work ( right now experimenting on it too). BTW, I saw new Mugen pipe on Robby Collins car-that is blasting pipe.
AFM