X pipe on twin 6262 turbos
10-04-2013, 12:51 PM
#1
X pipe on twin 6262 turbos Thinking about going twins for next year, I was wondering if a x pipe on the hot side would be a waste of time and money or would it keep both banks at equal pressure going into the turbos?
The only reason I was thinking about a x pipe was because of sum threads that on here that had to much back pressure and burnt valves out of the heads particularly the the side that had the longest hot side tubing before the turbo.
just wondering if it would be beneficial?
The only reason I was thinking about a x pipe was because of sum threads that on here that had to much back pressure and burnt valves out of the heads particularly the the side that had the longest hot side tubing before the turbo.
just wondering if it would be beneficial?
10-05-2013, 08:29 AM
#2
Probably don't need an x pipe per say, just a H pipe would do. I think the skyline or supra TTs used to have header cross over pipes to balance the presure. I can't see it causing any problems.
10-05-2013, 12:34 PM
#3
9 Second Club
Thinking about going twins for next year, I was wondering if a x pipe on the hot side would be a waste of time and money or would it keep both banks at equal pressure going into the turbos?
The only reason I was thinking about a x pipe was because of sum threads that on here that had to much back pressure and burnt valves out of the heads particularly the the side that had the longest hot side tubing before the turbo.
just wondering if it would be beneficial?
The only reason I was thinking about a x pipe was because of sum threads that on here that had to much back pressure and burnt valves out of the heads particularly the the side that had the longest hot side tubing before the turbo.
just wondering if it would be beneficial?
As for backpressure causing burnt valves...I find that very hard to believe.
Expecially post turbine pressure. Pre turbine pressure can be very high, and still not burn valves. Ive run turbo setups on 4cyl cars that have seen as high as 60psi pre-turbine, and never had an issue burning valves.
10-05-2013, 12:57 PM
#5
9 Second Club
No, after as normal
Before would be weird.
At the end of the day, only 1 cylinder is firing at a time. So in theory one pipe entering an X is left with 2 larger exits. So it should be freer flowing.
Whether or not any turbulence or other weird things come into play, who knows
If the system and silencers/mufflers are big enough, and say dual 3" anyway, cant see it making much difference as there would be minimal restriction anyway
Last car I tested was a friends, 4cyl turbo with around 750hp. Quiet 3" system with 2 large sliencers.
Measured only 2-3psi in the downpipe at most.
Before would be weird.
At the end of the day, only 1 cylinder is firing at a time. So in theory one pipe entering an X is left with 2 larger exits. So it should be freer flowing.
Whether or not any turbulence or other weird things come into play, who knows
If the system and silencers/mufflers are big enough, and say dual 3" anyway, cant see it making much difference as there would be minimal restriction anyway
Last car I tested was a friends, 4cyl turbo with around 750hp. Quiet 3" system with 2 large sliencers.
Measured only 2-3psi in the downpipe at most.
10-06-2013, 12:48 AM
#7
The X pipe before is what I was asking.. I have never seen it done but was just wondering if it would benefit the engine with a x pipe making equal pressure pre turbo, basically sinking the turbos to one another using equal back pressure
Trending Topics
10-06-2013, 04:02 AM
#8
9 Second Club
I think it would be a very bad thing. It would lose gas speeds, and probably soften any pulses of gas sent to each turbo, as well as complicating plumbing.
10-06-2013, 09:56 AM
#9
I say try it. just take a tube from each bank and put a flange on them. and then make a spacer that has a flange on both sides as a coupler. that way at the track/dyno you can try it with the H pipe and remove the "coupler" then install 2 block off plates and try it again. then you can PROVE if its good or bad. just make sure to monitor as much as possible. back pressure ect....
10-06-2013, 12:57 PM
#10
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (46)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If. It's pre-turbo the scavenging effect of the x-pipe would be beneficial. More continuous smooth flow rather than pulses with reversion. Sounds interesting.
10-07-2013, 09:43 AM
#11
What? X-pipes have no place in a turbo system.
After the turbo it will just be additional restriction and pointless.
Pre-turbo would be even worse. You want the exhaust pulses to be as strong as possible. You also want the turbos as close to the manifolds as possible.
Not a good idea at all IMHO.
After the turbo it will just be additional restriction and pointless.
Pre-turbo would be even worse. You want the exhaust pulses to be as strong as possible. You also want the turbos as close to the manifolds as possible.
Not a good idea at all IMHO.
12-12-2014, 10:41 AM
#12
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Peoria IL
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bringing this one back from the dead.
Obviously an x-pipe pre turbo (aka a crossover) is a terrible idea, but why/how would an x-pipe in the post-turbo portion be a bad thing or create restriction? My car will have a LOT of tubing to get to the rear bumper, and I planned to put a smooth transitioning X-pipe as close to the turbos as possible. I'm building the exhaust from scratch so I figured I might as well put it in there.
Obviously an x-pipe pre turbo (aka a crossover) is a terrible idea, but why/how would an x-pipe in the post-turbo portion be a bad thing or create restriction? My car will have a LOT of tubing to get to the rear bumper, and I planned to put a smooth transitioning X-pipe as close to the turbos as possible. I'm building the exhaust from scratch so I figured I might as well put it in there.
12-12-2014, 02:47 PM
#14
9 Second Club
One cylinder only fires at a time, and your single 3" merging into a X with larger area and exposed to two 3" outlet path options, should offer less restriction ?
I dont think it's as clear cut as you suggest
12-12-2014, 03:14 PM
#15
I agree. I can't see how an X pipe post turbo can cause any measurable amount of restriction as long as the pipe diameter remains the same. I probably wouldn't do it on a race car but I like the way it sounds for a street car. I don't notice any difference on mine anyways.
12-12-2014, 04:23 PM
#17
Without separate bank pulses there is no "break" or easy alternate path for flow.
If you split a single pipe into 2 pipes that intersect and you will have a restriction at the intersection. It disrupts laminar flow or some such technical jumbo...
12-12-2014, 04:27 PM
#18
On an N/A application, there is a noticeable reduction in exhaust noise. I would think that would still apply post turbo, which would be my main motivation for installing one. I can't imagine it would hurt anything, but doubt there would be any performance advantage.
