Couple of little issues in this too. Articsoldier I'm not sure where you cut and pasted that text from but I'd like to know the source and what fuel they were referring to. A turbo diesel IS on boost all the time. It may not be on max boost all the time but tend to be on meaningful boost far more often than a petrol. I don't have a boost gauge on our Challenger but I do on my Patrol and between light throttle around town to light highway cruising I'm making anything from about 5 to 10 psi with a 15psi max.
I've mentioned size before and questioned whether any of these exhaust makers actually have test data to back up the ideal size. The other thing to consider with something like the Tiapan system is the thermal dynamics of airflow. I'm not sure I believe their claims that the air diverted over the baffles in their special muffler increases airflow by heating the air that far down the line and pretty much every turbo muffler is just a perforated baffle and would therefore do the same thing. Their design of starting at 2.5" through to the flex joint then upping to 3" for the remainder is flawed. In theory the system should be the opposite stepping down towards the back. As exhaust flows it cools. When it cools it contracts. When that cooler contracted air hits a larger pipe size (or is contracted within the same larger pipe) it has to slow down and spread out to fill the larger void before it can return to the same flow. At this point the turbo is again pushing against this slower airflow so ideally the pipe diameter should reduce at that point to enable the air to maintain full velocity.
The other thing that is being overlooked here in the Challenger specific application is the ECU's inability to quickly control overboosting when the system is opened up, hence the theory of "as little back pressure as possible is good and less is better" is negated, if the control systems can no longer maintain stable boost within original tolerances.
I've mentioned size before and questioned whether any of these exhaust makers actually have test data to back up the ideal size. The other thing to consider with something like the Tiapan system is the thermal dynamics of airflow. I'm not sure I believe their claims that the air diverted over the baffles in their special muffler increases airflow by heating the air that far down the line and pretty much every turbo muffler is just a perforated baffle and would therefore do the same thing. Their design of starting at 2.5" through to the flex joint then upping to 3" for the remainder is flawed. In theory the system should be the opposite stepping down towards the back. As exhaust flows it cools. When it cools it contracts. When that cooler contracted air hits a larger pipe size (or is contracted within the same larger pipe) it has to slow down and spread out to fill the larger void before it can return to the same flow. At this point the turbo is again pushing against this slower airflow so ideally the pipe diameter should reduce at that point to enable the air to maintain full velocity.
The other thing that is being overlooked here in the Challenger specific application is the ECU's inability to quickly control overboosting when the system is opened up, hence the theory of "as little back pressure as possible is good and less is better" is negated, if the control systems can no longer maintain stable boost within original tolerances.
Comment