Evo X O2 eliminating down pipes

[CICreations]

That I am aware of, there are at least 3 companies making this style of O2/downpipe single piece.Â* AMS's design is a single large opening whereas ETS and UR's designs both utilize a dual pipe design.Â* I was hoping to get opinions (preferable facts) as to how this works with a single large cavity vrs 2 seporate pipes merging together further down the down pipe.Â* If there are any other companies out there making these please contribute to the thread!Â* I really want to keep price and fan-boy bias out of this to keep things civil.Â*

AMS piece

http://www.amsperformance.com/cart/images/P/ams_performance_mitsubishi_lancer_evolution_x_wide _mouth_downpipe.jpg

http://www.amsperformance.com/cart/images/D/ams_performance_mitsubishi_lancer_evolution_x_wide _mouth_downpipe%202.jpg

http://www.amsperformance.com/cart/AMS-Mitsubishi-Lancer-Evolution-Evo-X-Widemouth-Downpipe.html

ETS piece

http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/4636/88255068td4.jpg

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/3097/48967581pa5.jpg

http://www.extremeturbosystems.com/Mitsubishi/Eagle-Evolution-X-Evo-X-Exhaust-Systems/c5_5303_5304/p16576/ETS-Mitsubishi-Evolution-O2-Eliminator-Downpipe/product_info.html

UR piece

http://www.ultimate-racing.com/Products2/EvoX/EvoX-O2Housing2.jpg

http://www.ultimate-racing.com/Products2/EvoX/EvoX-O2Housing3.jpg

http://www.ultimate-racing.com/Products2/EvoX/EvoX_O2HousingDP.shtml

T1R piece

http://www.hybridr.com/shop/images/D/DSC09112a.jpg

http://www.typeoneracing.com/catalog/product_image.php?imageid=454
:mitsu:

-CI

[mangoes]

Bump! I wanna know also! Has anyone ever dyno tested these back to back?!

Seems like the AMS would flow more though, thats a huge opening.

Would the dual-type be for response?

Ready to learn =)

[evogeo]

found this on the cobbtuning website..
it has a lot of information concerning your question..
seems like an external dump woukd be the best..
but without dumping into the atmosphere ets seems like a good choice but more prone to cracking than the ams..
i would go with the ams because of their cast and they seem to have a good size flex section.. also the "widemouth" design seem like it would flow better than the ur dual pipe design.

"Post Turbo Exhaust

The main performance goal of a post turbo exhaust is to create the least amount of backpressure possible. There are a lot of factors that affect this.

Turbulence is one main factor. If the gasses are all stagnating and/or running into protrusions or running into each other it creates more backpressure than a well designed system. The more laminar (smooth and straight) the gas flow, the more the system can flow for a given pipe diameter. Steep angles and abrupt pipe diameter chances should be avoided.

The methods of collecting the outlet gasses and the wastegate gasses add another part of the equation to change. It would be optimal not to join the outlet from the turbo and the wastegate together, but the real world messes with our fun. Just dumping the wastegate to atmosphere is great for a racecar, but not a street car. So a street exhaust should combine them to get all of the gasses through the same cat and muffler system.

Some of the turbo outlet designs include: flanges with a simple pipe, bell mouths, divorced wastegate, and split bell mouths You also have castings and formed piping to choose from. Which one works best is also determined by quite a few different factors and how well they are designed and manufactured.

Flange w/Simple Pipe - The only advantages to this design are cost and simplicity. The pipe does not have to be formed and the flange is simple therefore reducing cost. The labor to weld the pipe to the flange is easy and therefore less costly as well. That is the main factor that make it desirable to the factory and why it is used on the stock exhaust. The wastegate gasses joining the turbo gasses right at the turbo outlet does create turbulence in the worst spot post turbo and reduces flow, thus not making it as desirable for performance as other designs.

BellMouth - This method is much closer to optimal for joining the gasses from the outlets. There is more room for them to join and if the transition is done properly it can flow very well into the main piping. It packages very well and does not have a lot of complexity, making for less to break. We have gotten the best results from this type of downpipe so far. Boost response has been the best out of the outlet designs we have tuned on, it is easy to put a wideband oxygen sensor bung into. We have also had the fewest problems with this design.

Split Bell Mouth - This design separates the gasses in the beginning of the turbo outlet and joins them at the rear of the bell mouth section. It works well and has some of the advantages of the bell mouth and some of the advantages of the divorced wastegate designs. The main deterrent for this is the cost and complexity of adding the splitter. I am a fan of keeping things as simple as possible while still making the product work well.

Divorced Wastegate - Keeping the gasses from the turbo outlet and wastegate separate until farther back in the system is an attempt to combine the advantages of not collecting the gasses and the real world. Combining them far back is closer to optimal than collecting them closer to the outlets. It is also critical to power production and spool-up to join the pipes smoothly and avoid turbulence. The disadvantages are that you add a lot of cost and complexity. You have big temperature differences on each pipe and that makes for a system that can crack. Putting in flex or expansion joints helps, but adds even further complexity and yet another part to fail. With all of the exhaust systems we have tuned with on the dyno we have seen that it is generally harder to bring boost on as quickly with these types of systems as compared to the bell mouth type systems. Perhaps it helps the wastegate function too well. Also, we have had a few situations where the splitter caused problems allowing the wastegate to function properly by not allowing it to open to its full extent, or even open at all. That caused either boost spiking, or no control over boost what so ever. Since the wastegate could not function the turbo ran as if it did even not have one, and the poor turbo just ran whatever boost it could make uncontrolled. The fix was not hard, but the least amount of stuff to go wrong the better. I know that I would not be happy having to pay for someone to install the exhaust only to have another place diagnose the problem, remove the exhaust, repair the part, and re-install the exhaust.

Cast Outlets - Castings have the advantage of keeping a lot of heat in the exhaust as well as freedom with design. You can basically make it almost any shape you want. The disadvantages are more weight and cost. Cast iron pieces can weigh a ton and that is a valid concern for many people. The casting form that the piece is made in is also very expensive and depending on complexity can range from a couple of thousand dollars to well up in the tens of thousands.

Formed Piping -Forming pipe has almost as much design freedom as a casting with less expense and less weight. The only disadvantage lies in if it is not done properly. Poor forming can look bad and effect flow by having creases and crimped spots. You can also get the piping too thin if you try to stretch the metal too far. If done improperly you can also make the metal brittle and it will usually happen where the metal is the thinnest."

[CICreations]

Nice find dude...thanks for posting!

[HB Speed]

T1R makes one as well.. We have had good results with the AMS and T1R

[mondizzie_evo]

Good find geo

[CICreations]

T1R makes one as well.. We have had good results with the AMS and T1R


Thanks! Added it!

[JaysEvoX]

HAS ANY ONE INSTALLED OR HAVE ANY INPUT ON THE MEGAN RACING DP?

[storm_trooper]

there is also specialty X and xtreemboost O/2 downpipes as well.

[antics22]

CIC, get the AMS one. Its a beautiful piece and at the same price as the ETS one, i'd rather have a fully casted piece. In theory, by separating the chambers, the ETS one is supposed to make more power, however one can argue that the dedicated tube is not long enough and it merges too soon (due to limits of the overall length of the pipe).

[Mike W]

I have seen two busted DPs so far. Both were the short flex section design. One the flex section broke, the other one of the welds higher up completely broke. If you must get a long DP, I would recommend the AMS one for the long flex section. Labor is not included in the parts warranty and there is serious down time involved in getting one fixed/replaced under the manufacturer's warranty. If you already have one of these long DPs, get a tougher front motor mount ASAP. I keep the AMS press in mount in stock.

What ever install labor you pay or how ever much skin you lose on the install if you do it your self.... you will have to do that all over again when it comes time to replace your clutch. Something to think about.

Since the EVO X does not have an O2 sensor screwed into the cast turbo outlet ("O2 Sensor Housing") these are not O2 Eliminator Down Pipes anymore I am thinking.

Mike W

[Kellendros08]

there is also specialty X and xtreemboost O/2 downpipes as well.


Yeah, i hear great things about Specialty X's DP...

http://www.specialtyx.com/downpipes.htm

[CICreations]

I got a tip from a tuner recently that the ETS is doing really well for them. I was wondering this particular DP would work with a ported FP Red.

Bump for anyone hearing any good or bad things about the DP's currently available.

[Mike W]

ETS is my current favorite for the short flex style. That allows the ultimate turbine exit flow and great scavenging for the wastegate flow. Be sure to use a stiff motor mount. I have not seen an ETS DP failure yet (of 4 running around that I know of).

I like the potential longevity of the AMS cast pipe too. Though choice.


That Specialty X stuff looks Chinese made for better or for worse. Either way, what makes it $200 better than the other DPs available?

Mike W

[evogeo]

does UR have a new design? Photo taken from scm forum.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a200/bikergeo/ur1.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a200/bikergeo/ur2.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a200/bikergeo/ur3.jpg

looks like they changed the style of return pipe..and the position of the flex section...

I curently have the older style ur but if i had to do it all over again ams would be the choice..

[antics22]

yup, that is their redesigned one... Glad to see the changes. I had their first gen one, and the original placement of their flex joint made no sense at all... At the track, my entire exhaust system would push back and off the exhaust hangers at the rear!!!

This design appears to make more sense and the flex joint will actually serve its function.

[rdebow]

If going with a stiffer front motor mount to limit the movement. Which durometer made by AMS do you recommend, 70a or 90a? Is the 70a adequate enough or should I just go for the 90a.

[evogeo]

The 70a is more than enough...

[CICreations]

That UR looks like that nice piece.

[MR Dan]

The 70a is more than enough...


Im running the 70A durameter AMS front mount which is already VERY stiff....I cant imagine how much more vibration the 90A grade contributes :-o

[CICreations]

Is anyone ever going to release a DP with an cutout for the X? That is super sneeky lol

[evox08]

BVP Came out with one

[imprezivevo]

so, the T1R is good right?... cuz i've heard of one cracking under pressure during a tune... yes i know it was being tuned but still would anyone recommend it? and does anyone have any experiences to convince anyone to buy it?

[Mike W]

The T1R has a short flex section similar to the Ultimate Racing and ETS. The shorter the flex section, the more likely it will be to fail. Those short flex sections all broke on DSMs 12 years ago and they break now still. Use them with a solid front motor mount at least.

Mike W

[imprezivevo]

deng i checked up how much i would pay for the solid fron motor mount, and the t1r, i'd be better off just paying the 450 for the ams one lol cuz the motor mount is like 120 and the t1r is like 320?