W211 AMG Discuss the W211 AMG's such as the E55 and the E63
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Re-thinking the header back set up.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.
 
Old 09-12-2011, 08:39 PM
  #1  
PLATINUM SPONSOR
Thread Starter
 
Exotic-metal55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,810
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
2003 CL55
Re-thinking the header back set up.

I have made a lot of mid pipe set upd for this CL already and still not happy with the set. The main problem is that the sytem is not modular enough, it is heavy , goes from 3" into 2.75 from my resonators back.

This all came up, as after doing the heads, my mid pipe is not sealing to my V band clamps on the headers. Lot of factors can cause this but again, not modular or flexable enough.

When I add flex connectors, they rub and hit the ground. Fail!

Cats keep blowing out! Fail!

Resonator to muffler section weighs 80lbs. Fail!

Taking off headers with slip collectors and mating up mid pipe tends to leak. Fail!

Starting to feel the X pipe is way over rated , heavy, takes up room and does not allow flexing.









Thinking of starting over fresh and also include just a simple crossover tube to start with. Flex couplers and resonator delete.

Wind drag on my current system is brutal!!
__________________



E63 Biturbo, UPD Cold Air induction kit, UPD performance crank pulley and UPD adjustable rear suspension with ride height adjustment.

CL55 UPD Cold Air Boost kit, UPD 3000 stall converter, UPD 77mm SC clutched pulley and beltwrap kit, Custom long tubes, UPD crank pulley , UPD suspension kit, UPD SC pulley, Aux. HE, Trunk tank w/rule 2000 pump, Mezeire pump, UPD 5pc idler set, Aluminum rotor hats.

www.ultimatepd.com
instagram @ultimate_pd
facebook.com/ultimatepd
Old 09-12-2011, 08:47 PM
  #2  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Forrest Gump 9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,190
Received 35 Likes on 29 Posts
shrimp boat
How about 3" aluminum piping from headers back to exhaust? Instead od x-pipe do an H-pipe. That'll be my set up in a month or so.
Old 09-12-2011, 10:04 PM
  #3  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
I'll tell you what...I see anything over 2.75" to be excessive on any setup under 650whp or higher. I put 507whp on a 2.5" mid setup going to the oem 2.75" rear setup and my car builds power all the way to redline indicating that it has no issues with backpressure even with a 2.5" exhaust with a 2.5" X-pipe. Superchargers care about scavenging just like a naturally aspirated engine does. I would honestly do a 2.75" setup and continue to use an X-pipe as they help equalize the flow.
Old 09-12-2011, 10:11 PM
  #4  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Originally Posted by Forrest Gump 9
How about 3" aluminum piping from headers back to exhaust? Instead od x-pipe do an H-pipe. That'll be my set up in a month or so.
While the aluminum won't melt, the welds will probably crack VERY quick.
Old 09-12-2011, 10:55 PM
  #5  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
chiromikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,649
Received 207 Likes on 157 Posts
'03 E55, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Ducati 748R
Originally Posted by GT-ER
I'll tell you what...I see anything over 2.75" to be excessive on any setup under 650whp or higher. I put 507whp on a 2.5" mid setup going to the oem 2.75" rear setup and my car builds power all the way to redline indicating that it has no issues with backpressure even with a 2.5" exhaust with a 2.5" X-pipe. Superchargers care about scavenging just like a naturally aspirated engine does. I would honestly do a 2.75" setup and continue to use an X-pipe as they help equalize the flow.
+1...been saying this for years now with plenty of dyno/track time to go along with it but everyone has their hearts set on 3" for some reason.
Old 09-13-2011, 03:55 AM
  #6  
Zod
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kuwait
Posts: 2,597
Received 19 Likes on 16 Posts
CLS55 2006, CLS 63S 2015
Man I know how you feel. LT's are loud, leaks ,at least for me from the header/collector part, rubbing and can go on. Fixed most, but it was a pain

TBH i was much happier with the shorti evo headers I had for day to day and the occasional race, but alas power hunger is a btch!

you mentioned flex connectors, do they work?
and why did you need them? ( as all i have holding mine is the engine and the 2 rear muffler mounts) thus it has flex...i think no ?)


Originally Posted by Exotic-metal55
I have made a lot of mid pipe set upd for this CL already and still not happy with the set. The main problem is that the sytem is not modular enough, it is heavy , goes from 3" into 2.75 from my resonators back.

This all came up, as after doing the heads, my mid pipe is not sealing to my V band clamps on the headers. Lot of factors can cause this but again, not modular or flexable enough.

When I add flex connectors, they rub and hit the ground. Fail!

Cats keep blowing out! Fail!

Resonator to muffler section weighs 80lbs. Fail!

Taking off headers with slip collectors and mating up mid pipe tends to leak. Fail!

Starting to feel the X pipe is way over rated , heavy, takes up room and does not allow flexing.









Thinking of starting over fresh and also include just a simple crossover tube to start with. Flex couplers and resonator delete.

Wind drag on my current system is brutal!!
Old 09-13-2011, 09:17 AM
  #7  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
SterlingE55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,693
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
2006 E55, 2012 Jeep SRT, 2008 G37s 6MT (The Mrs.), 2005 Explorer
Originally Posted by chiromikey
+1...been saying this for years now with plenty of dyno/track time to go along with it but everyone has their hearts set on 3" for some reason.
One of the biggest reasons I'm going with 3" is availability. It's not too hard 2.75" to find but 3" is everywhere and if I need it in a pinch I can get it. That being said I plan on using most of the factory exhaust with my LT's.
Old 09-13-2011, 09:22 AM
  #8  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
SterlingE55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,693
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
2006 E55, 2012 Jeep SRT, 2008 G37s 6MT (The Mrs.), 2005 Explorer
Brooke,
The logical suggestion: Two midpipes 1: Aluminum "race" set up 2: Steel "daily" set up

I noticed how stiff the short flex connectors are really stiff in the short variety. Maybe longer ones farther back where you can tuck them up?

The crazy suggestion: Two turbos in the back like the STS setup for vettes, 'maros and the the like. Muwahahah.
Old 09-13-2011, 10:33 AM
  #9  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Originally Posted by 99DirtybirdWS6
One of the biggest reasons I'm going with 3" is availability. It's not too hard 2.75" to find but 3" is everywhere and if I need it in a pinch I can get it. That being said I plan on using most of the factory exhaust with my LT's.
You are right...2.75" is difficult to find compared to 2.5 and 3. But before going to 3" I'd prefer, and did, to go 2.5". 3" is juts too big.

For the record, I put 417whp on a SINGLE 2.5" exhaust on my Supercharged G35 with so little back pressure that when I would remove the exhaust I would gain ZERO whp.

I've also seen 500+whp on SINGLE 2.5" exhausts and 700+whp on a SINGLE 3" exhaust. Granted, backpressure was starting to get noticeable ( not even horrible ) on those setups but they are pretty extreme for the pipe size used.

Do you really think you need DUAL 3" pipes that can support 1000+whp?
Old 09-13-2011, 11:21 AM
  #10  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
SterlingE55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,693
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
2006 E55, 2012 Jeep SRT, 2008 G37s 6MT (The Mrs.), 2005 Explorer
No I don't think I need it wasn't trying to imply that. I wish I did. I haven't built my exhaust yet and won't for another month or two. My plan is to use most of the factory set up. So we'll just have to see what it looks like when I'm done as I'm not even sure yet.
Old 09-13-2011, 12:13 PM
  #11  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
loudandheard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
C32/C55 AMG
I read some where that back pressure will not be an issue if you can maintain the same size pipe from beginning to end. I need to see if I can find that article.
Old 09-13-2011, 12:29 PM
  #12  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
loudandheard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
C32/C55 AMG
Here is some good info:

Some people operate under the misguided notion that wider pipes are more effective at clearing the combustion chamber than narrower pipes. It's not hard to see how this misconception is appealing - wider pipes have the capability to flow more than narrower pipes. So if they have the ability to flow more, why isn't "wider is better" a good rule of thumb for exhaust upgrading? In a word - VELOCITY. I'm sure that all of you have at one time used a garden hose w/o a spray nozzle on it. If you let the water just run unrestricted out of the house it flows at a rather slow rate. However, if you take your finger and cover part of the opening, the water will flow out at a much much faster rate.

The astute exhaust designer knows that you must balance flow capacity with velocity. You want the exhaust gases to exit the chamber and speed along at the highest velocity possible - you want a FAST exhaust stream. If you have two exhaust pulses of equal volume, one in a 2" pipe and one in a 3" pipe, the pulse in the 2" pipe will be traveling considerably FASTER than the pulse in the 3" pipe. While it is true that the narrower the pipe, the higher the velocity of the exiting gases, you want make sure the pipe is wide enough so that there is as little backpressure as possible while maintaining suitable exhaust gas velocity. Backpressure in it's most extreme form can lead to reversion of the exhaust stream - that is to say the exhaust flows backwards, which is not good. The trick is to have a pipe that that is as narrow as possible while having as close to zero backpressure as possible at the RPM range you want your power band to be located at. Exhaust pipe diameters are best suited to a particular RPM range. A smaller pipe diameter will produce higher exhaust velocities at a lower RPM but create unacceptably high amounts of backpressure at high rpm. Thus if your powerband is located 2-3000 RPM you'd want a narrower pipe than if your powerband is located at 8-9000RPM.

Many engineers try to work around the RPM specific nature of pipe diameters by using setups that are capable of creating a similar effect as a change in pipe diameter on the fly. The most advanced is Ferrari's which consists of two exhaust paths after the header - at low RPM only one path is open to maintain exhaust velocity, but as RPM climbs and exhaust volume increases, the second path is opened to curb backpressure - since there is greater exhaust volume there is no loss in flow velocity. BMW and Nissan use a simpler and less effective method - there is a single exhaust path to the muffler; the muffler has two paths; one path is closed at low RPM but both are open at high RPM.
Old 09-13-2011, 01:24 PM
  #13  
PLATINUM SPONSOR
Thread Starter
 
Exotic-metal55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,810
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
2003 CL55
I am a huge proponet of 3" exhaust on our motors! At least on the front half , if you can go all the way back. I also made over 500 with stock manifolds and 2.75 but when I went with 3" collectors/ 1.75 primaries and cleaned up any kinks, another 45 HP was un-leashed.

Supercharged engines need to breath and dont need back pressure for scavenging like N/A cars do. To many people build thier E55 systems like they are for a N/A motor.

Here are my exhaust problems after almost 2 years. My headers do not leak but V band and band clamps do at times. Everytime I need to remove a header or work on exhaust, then V bands dont flex to line up. Second most hated area, is where our mid pipe bolts to the rear section. This area always causes fit issues, flow issues and takes to much time to mess with. This i coming off

Oh yeah, I weighed my tail section (mufflers and resonators) and it is right at 80-85lbs! Fail!

First, thanks for the tip on the aluminum pipe. That brings up some nice ideas! I just need to find a tig welding machine and brush up my tig skills.

Here is my new plan. LT`s have to stay on but I did shorten the collectors and made more ground clearance. I am good with those now. Although, doing the ported heads, the header re/re is about 40% of the time used on the project.

1) Leave V band clamps on header.
2) Leave X pipe just after tranny
3) Continue to use two 45 deg bends pipes from header to X pipe that are V band at header and band clamp at X pipe.
4) Have off road pipes and catted 45 deg. pipes.
5) Off road pipes will have 4" flex joints right off the header this time and Catted pipes will have flex pipe right after cats.
6) Will remove resonators and add 3" ball fittings back there to help with adjustability.
7)Remove factory mid pipe to rear pipe flanges and replace with ball or V band clamps.


here are V band clamps on my short 45 deg pipes, just before the pipe.


Picture down stream of the X pipe.

__________________



E63 Biturbo, UPD Cold Air induction kit, UPD performance crank pulley and UPD adjustable rear suspension with ride height adjustment.

CL55 UPD Cold Air Boost kit, UPD 3000 stall converter, UPD 77mm SC clutched pulley and beltwrap kit, Custom long tubes, UPD crank pulley , UPD suspension kit, UPD SC pulley, Aux. HE, Trunk tank w/rule 2000 pump, Mezeire pump, UPD 5pc idler set, Aluminum rotor hats.

www.ultimatepd.com
instagram @ultimate_pd
facebook.com/ultimatepd

Last edited by Exotic-metal55; 09-13-2011 at 01:27 PM.
Old 09-13-2011, 03:25 PM
  #14  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Originally Posted by Exotic-metal55
I am a huge proponet of 3" exhaust on our motors! At least on the front half , if you can go all the way back. I also made over 500 with stock manifolds and 2.75 but when I went with 3" collectors/ 1.75 primaries and cleaned up any kinks, another 45 HP was un-leashed.

Supercharged engines need to breath and dont need back pressure for scavenging like N/A cars do. To many people build thier E55 systems like they are for a N/A motor.
I'm sorry but these engines are no different than any other engine with the same power output. You gained large amounts of power by working on your ultra restrictive manifolds...but that's where exhaust is the hottest ( and has the largest volume ) which makes sense...especially since the oem manifolds are HORRIBLE. After the manifolds however, things change. This car has HUGE exhaust piping from the factory. Even the bone stock piping is more than enough for 500+whp by just removing the cat converters which are the only real restrictions. Also keep in mind that AFTER the center section, the rear section with the mufflers, exhaust gas is so cool and is moving so slow that the scavenging effect is not important so you can move to the largest pipes possible just to keep back pressure as low as possible. This is why even in stock form the exhaust pipes GROW from 2.5" to 2.75" the further back they go.

As stated before, I've seen 700whp on a SINGLE 3" exhaust...what makes you think the 55K is any different?

Also, you mention backpressure and scavenging as if they were one thing and they are complete and totally different things. You want the highest amount of scavenging possible with the smallest amount of backpressure possible ( zero backpressure would be ideal, but nearly impossible ). The 55K does not need backpressure, but I can assure you that is DOES need scavenging.

Just look at how many people have installed cutouts over they stockish exhaust and have gained little to no power from them. And cutouts are as extreme as you can go.

Keep in mind that the ONLY engines that are exempt from this are turbo engines due to the fact that the turbo will block any efforts to induce scavenging. But Supercharged and N/A engines are to be treated the same.

Last edited by GT-ER; 09-13-2011 at 03:35 PM.
Old 09-13-2011, 03:26 PM
  #15  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Also, as I stated before...the use of aluminum is probably a very bad idea. I doubt it'll last long enough without cracking for it to matter.
Old 09-13-2011, 05:47 PM
  #16  
PLATINUM SPONSOR
Thread Starter
 
Exotic-metal55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,810
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
2003 CL55
Originally Posted by GT-ER
Also, as I stated before...the use of aluminum is probably a very bad idea. I doubt it'll last long enough without cracking for it to matter.
You may have mis-read my comments or I was not clear but scavenging and back pressure are not related. We each have our own way of doing things and thats what makes it so much fun. If you like 2.5 , then go for it! I like 3" all the way back to my resonators, then 2.75" from there. Lot of the LT`s offered for our cars are better suited for N/A cars , due to their scavenging but also create more back pressure on highly moded 55`s.

I use the the dyno to test each mod, each exhaust change and every change for that matter. There are more restrictions in the exhaust than cats. I know, because I have dynoed them. CL55 have much better mufflers than the E and NO 2.5" areas. the E does not have 2.75 all the way back, as it has areas of 2.5 and the CL does not. Again, all these minute changesd have been dynoed.
__________________



E63 Biturbo, UPD Cold Air induction kit, UPD performance crank pulley and UPD adjustable rear suspension with ride height adjustment.

CL55 UPD Cold Air Boost kit, UPD 3000 stall converter, UPD 77mm SC clutched pulley and beltwrap kit, Custom long tubes, UPD crank pulley , UPD suspension kit, UPD SC pulley, Aux. HE, Trunk tank w/rule 2000 pump, Mezeire pump, UPD 5pc idler set, Aluminum rotor hats.

www.ultimatepd.com
instagram @ultimate_pd
facebook.com/ultimatepd
Old 09-13-2011, 11:05 PM
  #17  
Super Member
 
BenzoDoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: HTX-->ATL -->CHI
Posts: 798
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
2015 E63S 4Matic
Occam's razor. What cuts weight, drag, and backpressure? Minimizing the amount of pipe distal to your headers.

Keep your current setup for the street and so that your exhaust gases are routed out the back for day to day driving, but have Jerry tune you with turndowns off of your LT's. No need for flex pipes, x pipes, or any real changes. There's not a decibel max that I know of at the mile.

Old 09-14-2011, 12:03 AM
  #18  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
GT-ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
2005 E55 AMG
Originally Posted by Exotic-metal55
You may have mis-read my comments or I was not clear but scavenging and back pressure are not related. We each have our own way of doing things and thats what makes it so much fun. If you like 2.5 , then go for it! I like 3" all the way back to my resonators, then 2.75" from there. Lot of the LT`s offered for our cars are better suited for N/A cars , due to their scavenging but also create more back pressure on highly moded 55`s.

I use the the dyno to test each mod, each exhaust change and every change for that matter. There are more restrictions in the exhaust than cats. I know, because I have dynoed them. CL55 have much better mufflers than the E and NO 2.5" areas. the E does not have 2.75 all the way back, as it has areas of 2.5 and the CL does not. Again, all these minute changesd have been dynoed.
Trust me when I say that I'm itching over here admiring your work but this is one area where I strongly believe that you are not maximizing your power output ( more importantly, your powerband ).

Regardless, Benzodoc is correct if you REALLY want to save weight.
Old 09-14-2011, 12:19 AM
  #19  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Forrest Gump 9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,190
Received 35 Likes on 29 Posts
shrimp boat
Or you can go nut with titanium
Old 09-14-2011, 09:51 AM
  #20  
PLATINUM SPONSOR
Thread Starter
 
Exotic-metal55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,810
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
2003 CL55
Originally Posted by BenzoDoc
Occam's razor. What cuts weight, drag, and backpressure? Minimizing the amount of pipe distal to your headers.

Keep your current setup for the street and so that your exhaust gases are routed out the back for day to day driving, but have Jerry tune you with turndowns off of your LT's. No need for flex pipes, x pipes, or any real changes. There's not a decibel max that I know of at the mile.

I agree! Can`t beat that set up for the mile/track. Used to run cut outs and tune them the same way. Just keep changing the cut-out diameter turn -down pipe, until you get the desired power curve.
__________________



E63 Biturbo, UPD Cold Air induction kit, UPD performance crank pulley and UPD adjustable rear suspension with ride height adjustment.

CL55 UPD Cold Air Boost kit, UPD 3000 stall converter, UPD 77mm SC clutched pulley and beltwrap kit, Custom long tubes, UPD crank pulley , UPD suspension kit, UPD SC pulley, Aux. HE, Trunk tank w/rule 2000 pump, Mezeire pump, UPD 5pc idler set, Aluminum rotor hats.

www.ultimatepd.com
instagram @ultimate_pd
facebook.com/ultimatepd

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.

Quick Reply: Re-thinking the header back set up.



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:58 AM.