Bolt on performance exhaust for the 500e (testing waters)

[gerryvz]

30 pounds isn't going to translate to 5 HP ... that's an over-estimation. Perhaps 3 HP.

The way I had it figured back in my drag-racing days on my E500 was that for every 100 lbs saved, it was ~8-10 HP effective gain.

Far better ROI just to secure a 1992 LH unit with WOT enabled. That's guaranteed, dyno-tested 7-10 10 rear-wheel HP gain.

Or NOS ... ~100 HP/100 lb-ft torque gain (give or take ... my car dyno'd at very close to that).

When I did my custom cat-back exhaust back in the day, I had a measurable, initial 15 HP gain .... from my "butt dyno."

Real world gain? Zilch.

 

[Ascension]

Nope. Won't happen. Seen it tried too many times over the past 12-13 years on the .036


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Works on any engine Gerry the same increase flow tune to the cylinder pulses and increase power. The issue with these cars is room in the engine compartment for what you need in particular with headers. IF there is no performance increase with a good exhaust there is a restriction up stream in the intake or heads that's the limiting factor.
It's simple physics and engines are in the end just a big air /fuel pump, if pump more through and burn it efficiently you make more power it's a set in stone physical law.

 

[gerryvz]

I'm just saying that Bolton exhausts by themselves don't generate more power on the M119 in the .036. I've seen at least 10 people do it (including myself) over the years, and there is just NO real HP to be gained by spending big bucks on a "tuned" or off the shelf system.

I've always said I'm open and maybe the 5thscaleracer system is the bee's knees and maybe someone has finally cracked the code and created a killer exhaust.

But as GSXR and me always have said, the devil is in the details ("the devil is in the dyno sheets")........numbers don't lie.

 

[Ascension]

30 pounds isn't going to translate to 5 HP ... that's an over-estimation. Perhaps 3 HP.

The way I had it figured back in my drag-racing days on my E500 was that for every 100 lbs saved, it was ~8-10 HP effective gain.

Far better ROI just to secure a 1992 LH unit with WOT enabled. That's guaranteed, dyno-tested 7-10 10 rear-wheel HP gain.

Or NOS ... ~100 HP/100 lb-ft torque gain (give or take ... my car dyno'd at very close to that).

When I did my custom cat-back exhaust back in the day, I had a measurable, initial 15 HP gain .... from my "butt dyno."

Real world gain? Zilch.

With these compression ratios NOS is not as effective as it can be + detonatio is a real issue and NOS like the WOT module doesn't help resonse in real world normal driving at all.
That increase you felt in the "butt dyno" might not have been imagined if it helped response at part throttle in the mid range. It could have helped a great deal in normal driving mid range throttle response and just not showed up on the very top end at WOT on the dyno.
I have seen higher velocity small tube headers with bottom end cams used that helped fuel mileage and daily livability a huge amount but didn't raise top end HP at all.

 

[clarkz71]

Internet experts............ lol

Nitrous & high compression, I've made 100hp on a 1.2 liter sportbike with 12:1 compression with small jets.

Here's a quote from Nitrous Direct

Q: Can high compression engines utilize nitrous oxide?

A: Absolutely. High or low compression ratios can work quite suitably with nitrous oxide provided the proper balance of nitrous and fuel enrichment is maintained. Nitrous kits are used in applications from relatively low compression stock type motors to Pro-Modified, which often exceed 15 to 1. Generally, the higher the compression ratio, the more ignition retard, as well as higher octane fuel, is required. For more specific information talk to a qualified technicians.



http://www.nitrousdirect.com/nitrousoxide.html

 

[gsxr]

...and NOS like the WOT module doesn't help resonse in real world normal driving at all.

I agree 100% with this. The WOT enrichment and NOS kits only help at full throttle. If you want a bunch of low/midrange torque, get a 6L motor, they are fantastic for part-throttle power in typical street-driven RPM ranges. But you'll never achieve 6L torque from a normally-aspirated 5L M119.

I have seen higher velocity small tube headers with bottom end cams used that helped fuel mileage and daily livability a huge amount but didn't raise top end HP at all.

Gains are dependent on how restrictive the stock parts are, along with the design of the stock heads/intake/etc. I used to be into American muscle back in high school and I know that headers & exhaust can unlock pretty amazing power gains on your typical small block Chevy or similar pushrod, 2-valve V8's. The M119 is not even on the same planet as those cars. More like a different universe, or alternate dimension. Saying they are all just big air pumps is a radical over-simplification. After getting 40hp from headers/exhaust on a given engine, you wouldn't keep expecting another 40hp from each successive "better" exhaust, would you? At some point, you reach the limit of what the engine can support. MB did not leave much, if any, low-hanging fruit with the M119's.

 

[clarkz71]

Lets look at American muscle.

1970 LS6 454 is 7.4 liters. At 450 HP that's 60 hp per liter

1992 500E, 322 HP. That's 64 hp per liter.

Now compare drivability and maintenance. LS6 has solid lifters, gets maybe 7 mpg.

 

[clarkz71]

I agree 100% with this. The WOT enrichment and NOS kits only help at full throttle. If you want a bunch of low/midrange torque, get a 6L motor, they are fantastic for part-throttle power in typical street-driven RPM ranges. But you'll never achieve 6L torque from a normally-aspirated 5L M119.

An how much does it cost for a 6.0 M119, turn key or conversion kit?

 

[gerryvz]

Continung along Dave's line of thought......I have a good friend in Portland, from my 300SEL 6.3 days, who owned six (count it, SIX) 300SEL 6.3s himself. He's daily driven them for many many years. Two of them had custom-made header systems. Remember, the M100 in the 6.3 was designed in the late 1950s and made its debut in 1963 in the Grand 600. It's a two-valve, big block SOHC motor, very old school (but again an order of magnitude different/better engineered than the pushrod GM V8 of the same era).

Headers allowed my friend to get around 30HP additional from these engines. In drag racing my own 6.3, unmodified, the engine COMPLETELY ran out of steam by 4,000 RPM, with a redline of around 5,300 RPM. Between 1,500 and 3,500 RPM, the thing was literally unparalleled, delivering its full 434 lb-ft of torque. But below and above that range, it was a complete dog.

THe M119 is completely different. It breathes along its entire RPM range quite well, and has a very flat power and torque curve instead of the peaked one on the M-100. Headers just aren't going to help a flat curve, well-breathing engine (that has a great exhaust from the get-go) nearly as much as a restricted engine particularly with a two-valve design with a relatively inefficient & archaic bi-tubular intake design.

You REALLY cannot compare a late-80s/early 90s M119 or later MB engine to a small-block GM or Ford motor that was originally designed in the late 1950s/early 1960s in terms of ability to extract power. MB learned how to do its homework during the 1980s, as evidenced by the differences between the M117 (which you can get an easy, dyno-tested 25 HP just by slapping on the Euro "tri-y" factory headers to replace the US exhaust manifolds and crossover pipe onto) and the M119. The M119 was a HUGE step forward over the M117, despite having a relatively similar bottom-end with some notable improvements.

Here are the M117 factory "tri-y" headers. I've got a freshly ceramic-coated set sitting in my attic right now, waiting to be installed.

Cheers,
Gerry

 

[Ascension]

Internet experts............ lol

Nitrous & high compression, I've made 100hp on a 1.2 liter sportbike with 12:1 compression with small jets.

Here's a quote from Nitrous Direct

Q: Can high compression engines utilize nitrous oxide?

A: Absolutely. High or low compression ratios can work quite suitably with nitrous oxide provided the proper balance of nitrous and fuel enrichment is maintained. Nitrous kits are used in applications from relatively low compression stock type motors to Pro-Modified, which often exceed 15 to 1. Generally, the higher the compression ratio, the more ignition retard, as well as higher octane fuel, is required. For more specific information talk to a qualified technicians.



http://www.nitrousdirect.com/nitrousoxide.html

Will it help in a high compression engine yep. Will be as efficient to add N2O or boost to a high compression engine as it will to a lower where you have more room in the chamber to force mix into no not by a long shot. There is a reason that every manufacturer who uses a supercharger of any kind will drop the compression ratios on the engines they design for boost. Same concept applies both for physical and chemical supercharging.
When we built the 600 HP SD 455 Pontiac for the car we were going to run the cannonball with in 1981 we built a 9.5 to 1 motor for N2O and also to run on whatever pump gas we had to use.

 

[Ron500E]

An how much does it cost for a 6.0 M119, turn key or conversion kit?

Vath (Vaeth) does the rebuild work on these for AMG I was told.
Didn't get a price from them when I last spoke with them about 2 years ago.
Probably one of those "if you have to ask" type questions......

R

 

[gerryvz]

I went & visited them in person about 5 years ago. Met with the guy who heads up that custom build part of the company. He told me 20K euros + shipping from the USA to do a 6L


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[clarkz71]

Vath (Vaeth) does the rebuild work on these for AMG I was told.
Didn't get a price from them when I last spoke with them about 2 years ago.
Probably one of those "if you have to ask" type questions......

R

Kind of my point. About $25K

Might as well find a nice E60

Besides Nitrous or supercharger, it is what it is.

 

[gsxr]

1970 LS6 454 is 7.4 liters. At 450 HP that's 60 hp per liter

1992 500E, 322 HP. That's 64 hp per liter.

Now compare drivability and maintenance. LS6 has solid lifters, gets maybe 7 mpg.

It gets even worse if you adjust the old "gross" power ratings to SAE net, which would be apples/apples. The LS6 is probably more like 400hp SAE, maybe, on a good day. And you are absolutely correct about drivability, maintenance, and economy...

 

[gsxr]

An how much does it cost for a 6.0 M119, turn key or conversion kit?

Depends if you have one laying around the shop waiting to get swapped into a car. I know one person who scored a 400E RENNtech with 6L engine for under $5k. But yes, if you want to build a fresh/new 6L from scratch, you are likely looking at >$20k if paying a shop to build it for you, and still north of $10k if you scrounge the parts and build it yourself. Not cheap, but the ROI is pretty darn good.

 

[clarkz71]

Actually the SAE started measuring HP at the transmission tail with all engine accessories
operating in 1972

The 450 HP was real on the LS6 in 1970

EDIT: I see what your saying, it's really 400hp to 322hp

So 54hp per liter for the 7.4 liter LS6 and still 64hp per liter for the M119 5.0

Ouch.

 

[Ascension]

It gets even worse if you adjust the old "gross" power ratings to SAE net, which would be apples/apples. The LS6 is probably more like 400hp SAE, maybe, on a good day. And you are absolutely correct about drivability, maintenance, and economy...

Don't buy the advertized figures on stuff from that era as many were grossly under rated for SS classes. The 1962 Pontiac 421 SD in the Catalina for example was rated at 405 real dyno numbers on those always came in around 480 to 500.
[video=youtube;gNg569agwiU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNg569agwiU#t=389[/video]
PS Jim Butler who owns Butler performance bought me out in 1988 when I remarried and got out of running hot Pontiacs.

 

[5thscaleracer]

 

[gerryvz]

You guys might be interested in the following. Some 10 years ago, I spent several days in the Mercedes-Benz Corporate Archives in Stuttgart-Untertürkheim. I "discovered" the complete technical report that was created by the MB Experimental Department at the end of production prototype testing of the 300SEL 6.3, back in June of 1968. No one had EVER seen this document before.

It was an exhaustive engineering comparison of all facets of the 6.3's performance. Quite a detailed and extensive document, even by today's standards.

What surprised me the most, were the comparisons and tests that MB did with the sedan 6.3 against the most popular big-block US muscle-cars of the day.

I post some diagrams and graphs below, excerpted from this document that I scanned with MB's blessing.

Enjoy the comparo with the US iron. MB kicked the crap out of ALL these cars back in the day, LOL!!

The attached photo was MY M100.981 motor from my 300SEL 6.3

Cheers,
Gerry

 

[gerryvz]

Here are performance statistics that I compiled some 10 years ago, that y'all may be interested in.

 

[500AMM]

I should have pictures..........

As for power I would say cat back exhausts are good for +500hp and + 342lb/ft of torque in addition to the 1000hp these cars make stock.

But I won't know till we dyno a car. Currently seeking a good running 500e with owners consent to do 6 pulls of before and after runs.

is that true?!

Here is a real gainful exhaust, guys. For grown men with hair on the chest (..which in my case is mostly on top of the head..)

 

[Maui]

is that true?!

Here is a real gainful exhaust guys, for grown men with hair on the chest (..which in my case is mostly on top of the head..)

Nice! I would love to hear it too!

 

[500AMM]

Nice! I would love to hear it too!

He He...nice sticker, eh?..it was meant as a joke regarding the speculations about the HP gain vs ROI.

On mine it is a MAE muffler with huge end pipes, all the rest is stock. But it gives a nice sound though.

-a-

 

[Maui]

You guys might be interested in the following. Some 10 years ago, I spent several days in the Mercedes-Benz Corporate Archives in Stuttgart-Untertürkheim. I "discovered" the complete technical report that was created by the MB Experimental Department at the end of production prototype testing of the 300SEL 6.3, back in June of 1968. No one had EVER seen this document before.

It was an exhaustive engineering comparison of all facets of the 6.3's performance. Quite a detailed and extensive document, even by today's standards.

What surprised me the most, were the comparisons and tests that MB did with the sedan 6.3 against the most popular big-block US muscle-cars of the day.

I post some diagrams and graphs below, excerpted from this document that I scanned with MB's blessing.

Enjoy the comparo with the US iron. MB kicked the crap out of ALL these cars back in the day, LOL!!

The attached photo was MY M100.981 motor from my 300SEL 6.3

Cheers,
Gerry

I would be curious to know what model year the tested cars were as well as the list price of each car tested. The big block chevy was pretty much a boat anchor by 1972 with about 240 hp. The Pontiac 455 also went from 370 hp in 1970 to 200 hp by 1975. I don't know much about Mopar, so I can't really comment on them. All of the US cars were all cast iron block, carbureted with cast iron, untuned exhaust. There were a few exceptions like the Camaro ZL1 which had an aluminum block. Only 69 ZL1 Camaros were ever built due to the additional cost that pushed the cars into the $8k range.

 

[Ascension]

You guys might be interested in the following. Some 10 years ago, I spent several days in the Mercedes-Benz Corporate Archives in Stuttgart-Untertürkheim. I "discovered" the complete technical report that was created by the MB Experimental Department at the end of production prototype testing of the 300SEL 6.3, back in June of 1968. No one had EVER seen this document before.

It was an exhaustive engineering comparison of all facets of the 6.3's performance. Quite a detailed and extensive document, even by today's standards.

What surprised me the most, were the comparisons and tests that MB did with the sedan 6.3 against the most popular big-block US muscle-cars of the day.

I post some diagrams and graphs below, excerpted from this document that I scanned with MB's blessing.

Enjoy the comparo with the US iron. MB kicked the crap out of ALL these cars back in the day, LOL!!

The attached photo was MY M100.981 motor from my 300SEL 6.3

Cheers,
Gerry

I know for fact that much of hottest of the old Detroit stuff was grossly underrated back in the mid 60's to very early 1970's. They did it for 2 reasons insurance companies were killing sales if the rated um accurately because of the rates and the Super stock wars where they used factory HP ratings as a guide. Pontiac played big time games with those early 421 SD's as no joke those were very honest 500HP engines in the Swiss cheese aluminum front cats in 63.
http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/...-swiss-cheese-catalina-could-sell-for-800000/
Those cars left puddles of molten aluminum at the start line from the aluminum long branch headers melting and the aluminum on the front end was so thin it was like a soda can! Then there was the 67 Hemi Dart a buddy of mine had with acid dipped body panels and ---.
PS in the late 70's I was street driving an ex super stock 4 speed Ram Air 1972 455 HO GTO that ran honest low 11's. My 1st car was a 1963 Studebaker Super Hawk with a Paxton I inherited from my dad ( we also owned a 57 Golden Hawk and a 55 President speedster) second car was a 1970 Calypso Corral Boss 302 Mustang ( which was the poster child for no bottom end torque and a real slug till you got the revs up on that 302 Cleveland then look out!).

 

[gerryvz]

MB has always been a bit conservative on their power ratings, as well. Even with the E500E.

Look at the results that the "heavier" weight 6.3 got, with basically same gearing ratio as the 500E, against those muscle cars with their 3.XX gearing. And look at the top speeds of all those cars. 6.3 was 141 MPH. I wouldn't want to drive ANY of those muscle cars much over 100 MPH, and good bye if you had to turn one of them.

Contrast that with the fuel-injected, air-suspended 6.3 which handled quite well even by today's standards. The fact that MB went BACK to air suspension in recent years tells you a lot about how good it is.....

Muscle cars' suspension was hella crude by comparison. Don't get me wrong, I live US muscle cars ...... for what they are. You look at the overall vehicular engineering (not just the powertrain) of an MB vs. a US car from back in the day, and it's really night and day.

Was Volvo, perchance, making big-block V-8s in the early 1960s?

 

[Maui]

1970 was the peak of the US "Muscle Car" era. The compression ratios dropped significantly starting in 1971 and by 1974 they were absolutely pathetic. Having owned several 1970 and earlier I can say they are a blast to drive but you are right Gerry, they were made to go straight. I upgraded to Hotchkiss suspension on my '70 Chevelle SS396 and it actually handled quite well for what it was. I also threw in a nice lumpy cam, aluminum heads, headers, ignition,etc. Nothing like the 500E and no where near as comfortable but still a very fun car. Of all the cars I've owned I miss that one the most. You also have to realize these were $3.5k cars when new.

I am lover of the automobile and love them all for what they are. I guess the nice part about those old muscle cars is there is no shortage of bolt on performance products, they are very easy to work on and they were just plain fun cars. Now you can buy 600hp right off the showroom floor and they're cheap enough to be disposable.

 

[Ascension]

Point well taken on some of the old muscle cars not being good handlers. My EX SS 72 GTO was brutal to drive NO PS NO Power brakes no air no radio no rear sway bar just the 455 HO a rockcrusher and 3.90 gears in the 12 bolt.
One thing I did notice is what MB used for the test comparisons. Not the brightest bulbs in the array or the quickest by far in the US iron. Still the MB was a far superior car in every way but the short straight lines.
The one US manufacturer had they survived that would likely have given MB a good run was Studebaker as they were WAY ahead of their time!!
Of ours after my dad passed i had my choice and the one that I should have taken was the 55 speedster what a beautiful thing those cars were and to do this in 1955--!! Ours was Pink and White and because of the color---.
http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/carsforsale/studebaker/president/1665774.html

 

[Stevester 500E]

All good points. So, it sounds to reason that a super charged zl1 lsa engine with 780hp plus a 6 speed manual tranny would be a good modern transplant into a 500e.

 

[gerryvz]

You also have to realize these were $3.5k cars when new.

True. The 6.3 was over $13,000 in 1968-1969....about double the price of a Cadillac of the era....

 

[Maui]

I just have a soft spot in my heart for those old US muscle cars that I grew up with. But, time marches on and with age comes the desire and ability to own a true classic like the 500E.

 

[Stevester 500E]

>>>The fact that the M119 has been in production for nearly 25 years and in that entire time nobody has developed headers/exhaust with a proven double-digit power gain speaks volumes

I get what you are saying. But as far as headers, I doubt that MB eliminated all the "eliminable" back pressure. The engineers were limited to the design of the manifolds because of the parameters they had to design around -the engine bay was not wide enough to lend flexibility in design, etc. Perhaps the final design was a good one, considering the dimensions they had to work around.

I am not sure how many attempts have been made, in the past 25 years, to develop headers/exhaust with proven double digit power gains.
I am sure it is a difficult task if one is working within the confines of a bolt-on design and without any other modifications. I think it will be an out of the box thinker who will design something with significant power gains. Whether that design will have an appealing sound is another topic.

 

[Ron500E]

The one US manufacturer had they survived that would likely have given MB a good run was Studebaker as they were WAY ahead of their time!!
Of ours after my dad passed i had my choice and the one that I should have taken was the 55 speedster what a beautiful thing those cars were and to do this in 1955--!! Ours was Pink and White and because of the color---.
http://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/carsforsale/studebaker/president/1665774.html

And of course there's the Porsche connection with Studebaker also.

R

 

[Ascension]

I'm just saying that Bolton exhausts by themselves don't generate more power on the M119 in the .036. I've seen at least 10 people do it (including myself) over the years, and there is just NO real HP to be gained by spending big bucks on a "tuned" or off the shelf system.

I've always said I'm open and maybe the 5thscaleracer system is the bee's knees and maybe someone has finally cracked the code and created a killer exhaust.

But as GSXR and me always have said, the devil is in the details ("the devil is in the dyno sheets")........numbers don't lie.

Someone did "crack the code" with headers and saw substantial HP and torque gains but could it be made to fit in the compartment of a W124 is the ?? Check post 4 in this thread http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7048

 

[gerryvz]

I think bottom line that the market for these exhausts, even if they do make 10-20 additional HP or even just +2 (or -2, per my bet in the pool) is that most owners of the .036 don't really care to modify their cars, preferring to keep then stock and fairly original. It's going to be why the market will be very very limited.

With the +100 HP nitrous kits, I'd be surprised of 10 of these kits actually sold. It's not like Jackasic has sold 10 dozen or hundreds of his E500E WaveTrac differentials or sway bars to owners here. I'd expect these exhausts will sell 10-15, max. And that's OK ... the market is what it is.

MB's are just not the kind of car that lend themselves well to modifying, for a huge number of reasons. And that's reflected in the relative dearth of aftermarket "modification/tuning" parts. It's far better to buy a Honda, Toy-ota, Porsche, BMW, an Audi, a Volvo (I guess) or really, a new-school US muscle car (new Camaro, Mustang, Dodge Challenger) or an old-school muscle car if you want to hot rod a car. Your options are just going to be more than they ever will be with a Mercedes.

Either that or fork out the bucks up front for an AMG. Honestly, it's hard to beat the "bang for the buck" of a gently used E55 AMG or E63 AMG or C63 AMG, or the like, given depreciation curves. For the amount of money you'd spend buying and then blinging out a Mustang or BMW, you can just go buy a 600+ HP AMG and be done with it.

 

[gsxr]

Someone did "crack the code" with headers and saw substantial HP and torque gains but could it be made to fit in the compartment of a W124 is the ?? Check post 4 in this thread http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7048

There was no code cracking involved. He built a 6.3L engine with fully ported heads, monster custom camshafts, aftermarket ECU, on a full race engine and got 490rwhp (about 600 at the crank, assuming the numbers are accurate). The camshafts alone likely cost more than you paid for your entire car. I'm not sure you could get any farther away from "bolt on performance" mods without talking about putting a Volvo engine in the E500E.

 

[clarkz71]

I'm not sure you could get any farther away from "bolt on performance" mods without talking about putting a Volvo engine in the E500E.

Volvo engine ???

I thought this thread was about going faster ??

 

[gerryvz]

+1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DerFuror]

...is that most owners of the .036 don't really care to modify their cars, preferring to keep then stock and fairly original. It's going to be why the market will be very very limited.

I would consider this exhaust as an alternative to a stock exhaust if a replacement exhaust was or will shortly be required for my car...or possibly to just have on hand for when/if the times comes.

It appears to offer the advantages of stainless steel construction, weight reduction & tip choice. It is designed as bolt-on, requiring no mod to fit.

The sound signature would be important to me. I don't want to hear it under normal driving conditions & I don't want others to hear me as I drive thru their neighborhood. I only want it to snarl at WOT (as the original does). No droning.

If this alternative exhaust dynos the same as original, goody. If it provides extra HP, bonus. If it provides slightly less, a detraction but not necessarily a deal breaker for me.

 

[Rouven036]

I see it the same way, i really considder to get this exhaust if the quality, turn down tips and the sound is to my liking. I don't really believe on a performance gain here - but since it is stainless and will be most probably lighter its a good option anyway and if the possibly bigger diameter of the system eases out the breathing capacity of my upcoming 6 liter conversion then why not.
I hated my Brabus exhaust from the beginning, cut off the tips and turned them 90 degree to get a "original" turn down design just with a bigger diameter.
Like that look of bigger original style tips alot....

 

[Maui]

I have a history of not leaving things alone so I would be in.

 

[gsxr]

The sound signature would be important to me. I don't want to hear it under normal driving conditions & I don't want others to hear me as I drive thru their neighborhood. I only want it to snarl at WOT (as the original does). No droning.

If this alternative exhaust dynos the same as original, goody. If it provides extra HP, bonus.

For the cat-back setup, I agree 100%... I'm not expecting a significant power gain (would be a bonus if there is); and the weight reduction, sound improvement, and appearance are all enticing.

For a full exhaust system (manifold-back, or cylinder-head back)... I personally would want significant power gains to justify the expense. Different scenario, almost need two different discussion threads.

 

[gerryvz]

Lots of folks jumping to conclusions. I want hard comparo data on weight, sound, power generation and fit/finish. Remember, y'all are just going off of a few photos that have been published.

It's ok to get excited, but don't wet your pants until the real data gets published.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gsxr]

It's ok to get excited, but don't wet your pants until the real data gets published.

Too late. *goes to change pants*

 

[Klink]

I would consider this exhaust as an alternative to a stock exhaust if a replacement exhaust was or will shortly be required for my car...or possibly to just have on hand for when/if the times comes.

It appears to offer the advantages of stainless steel construction, weight reduction & tip choice. It is designed as bolt-on, requiring no mod to fit.

The sound signature would be important to me. I don't want to hear it under normal driving conditions & I don't want others to hear me as I drive thru their neighborhood. I only want it to snarl at WOT (as the original does). No droning.

If this alternative exhaust dynos the same as original, goody. If it provides extra HP, bonus. If it provides slightly less, a detraction but not necessarily a deal breaker for me.

My thoughts on the entire matter exactly!

 

[clarkz71]

Lots of folks jumping to conclusions. I want hard comparo data on weight, sound, power generation and fit/finish. Remember, y'all are just going off of a few photos that have been published.

It's ok to get excited, but don't wet your pants until the real data gets published.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is my position as well. Dyno results, fit/finish..

 

[gerryvz]

Too late. *goes to change pants*

I know a good psychologist who specializes in bed-wetting, who I can refer you to if you'd like.....

 

[Klink]

I know a good psychologist who specializes in bed-wetting, who I can refer you to if you'd like.....

 

[savmjv]

Does he know anything about the 500E and the allure of expensive, shiny metal things?

 

[gerryvz]

Does he know anything about the 500E and the allure of expensive, shiny metal things?

Who are you talking about ... the psychologist, the purveyor of these exhaust systems, or GSXR ?!?