You know what the SLC needs.... - Page 2

Alex · 7th August 2009, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesa

The thought at this point is to (possibly) make an exposed (think indy fords from the 60's) above the DL .... or mod the DL to cover the exit pipes. Just a thought..... until J posts a sound clip of his bundle of snakes.....then the gloves come off!!!!

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Good thought

Jac Mac · 7th August 2009, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesa

J .......you're a mean man (and those Kinslers don't help the envy factor any either).

What did JacMac say, people shouldnt say "you cant" to him? Hell it caused him to go make a really cool WOOD transaxle

A 180 would have to sit on top of the rear sub frame and as noted the body only clears the top of the sub by a couple inches. I have been thinking on a way around this issue and it helps a little that my deck lid is raised an inch or so vs the stock setup. Even with the extra room there isnt enough space to keep it under the body. The thought at this point is to (possibly) make an exposed (think indy fords from the 60's) above the DL .... or mod the DL to cover the exit pipes. Just a thought..... until J posts a sound clip of his bundle of snakes.....then the gloves come off!!!!

I've already nutted out a way to fit '180° headers to an SLC, just look for tree's with the right shape branch's to whittle them out of!

Alex · 7th August 2009, 11:32 PM

The more I study it the more I'm beginning to give up on the 180* idea - poking them out of the body is cool at first, then I dunno, novelty wears off pretty quickly.

When I get my SS longtube set built, rear exit, any of you guys think you might want a set? Just seeing if I can defray my cost a bit

Doc Kaler · 8th August 2009, 07:55 AM

EFN,

It's a tough choice between Jac Mac wooden headers and your proposed long tube headers. The aroma of mesquite or hickory wafting into the cabin might be quite appealing! I might go for your design if as Fran mentioned, there is an improvement in flow, Ceramic coated, of course. I have been toying with purchasing the Ice engineworks mock-up system when the time comes for my headers.

Jack · 8th August 2009, 08:51 AM

What an SL-C really needs is to be in Doc's garage!

Doc Kaler · 8th August 2009, 11:31 AM

Amen to that!!!

Alex · 14th August 2009, 03:36 AM

So thinking more about this, what happens if, say, instead of having cylindres 1,2,3,4 all merging into 1 collector for 1 side, you had 2 collectors. for example, 1, 3 merged together, and 2,4 merged together (or some other combination).

Would that change the tone for the better/worse?

Doug Clark · 14th August 2009, 07:58 AM

In the design of my car I was unable to fit in a conventional crossover system.
In the end I cam up with the design below where the crossovers are done behind the sump 'lump'.
I've no idea it this would work on an SLC but it might, unless you dry sumped and dropped the motor.

As it is I won't be able to do this straight off, due to the poxy emissions test I need to pass before getting on the road.

John · 14th August 2009, 11:51 AM

The complex exhaust routing is the reason I suggested a flat plane crank. There is a reason most race cars (and Ferrari's) run one. It makes exhaust routing much easier.

Alex · 17th August 2009, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug68

In the design of my car I was unable to fit in a conventional crossover system.
In the end I cam up with the design below where the crossovers are done behind the sump 'lump'.
I've no idea it this would work on an SLC but it might, unless you dry sumped and dropped the motor.

As it is I won't be able to do this straight off, due to the poxy emissions test I need to pass before getting on the road.

With the header tubes going underneath the motor/oil pan (what it looks like from that, which maybe i'm seeing it wrong.....), since heat rises wouldn't that REALLY raise the oil temps and kick the snot out of your engine?

CRASH(Mike) · 17th August 2009, 02:52 PM

I was thinking that dry sumping and leaving it in the "stock" position would give the room needed.

No doubt heat will be a factor, but probably able to be dealt with. This is a pretty high air flow area when done accordingly.

Alex · 17th August 2009, 03:57 PM

But regardless of air flow, heat still rises up (into the engine), no?

Paul Osborn · 17th August 2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EFNFAST

But regardless of air flow, heat still rises up (into the engine), no?

Please select all those that apply:

exhaust wrap tape,
heat shield,
drive fast,
all of the above

Jac Mac · 17th August 2009, 04:12 PM

I had 180° crossovers like that under the wet sump of my Boss 302 race car, ran three seasons without any problems. 1" gap between pan & pipes, no heat sheild, no exh wrap, just drove fast, yours being powered by a chev might need a bit of help from wrap & sheild since going fast might be a bit of an ask.

Mesa · 17th August 2009, 05:34 PM

Jac, Jac, Jac.....BTW: There were NO MKIVs at laguna this weekend, sorry.

I took this issue to heart this past friday at laguna. While watching the class that runs the cobra's and the mustangs I noticed a distict difference in some of the mustang's exhaust note. While ALL the cobra's had a booming sound, some of the mustangs had a raspy - even sounding - higher pitched note It. The higher pitched sound was not all that different from the "Spinning GT40" YouTube clip. Me likes that sound - so in an effort to get to the bottom of it I took note of the cars that had the preferred sound and chased them down in the pits.

The cars that had the preferred sound had "X" pipe exhaust routing.

John M · 17th August 2009, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug68

In the design of my car I was unable to fit in a conventional crossover system.
In the end I cam up with the design below where the crossovers are done behind the sump 'lump'.
I've no idea it this would work on an SLC but it might, unless you dry sumped and dropped the motor.

As it is I won't be able to do this straight off, due to the poxy emissions test I need to pass before getting on the road.

This is pretty neat, but i would rather have the engine that much lower instead of putting the exhaust under it. I'm a firm believer in keeping the CG as low as possible... But very cool none the less!

Alex · 15th October 2009, 07:49 PM

Re-visiting the 180* topic as I was talking a bit about it with the guy whose going to build my headers for my SLC - I'm basically just going to run straight pipes on the SLC (i.e., no mufflers or anything, just straight tubes, regardless of if i go 180* or 'normal' longtubes out the back).

Anyways, for those of you who have your LS's in the car, do you think with some creative routing one could have the pipes running safely under the engine, use a traditional wet-sump setup, as well as have room to have some type of heat shield plate between the pipes and the oil pan?

Oh yes, and of course the headres can't be hanging 1'' above the ground

Alex · 15th October 2009, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by x19.driver

The complex exhaust routing is the reason I suggested a flat plane crank. There is a reason most race cars (and Ferrari's) run one. It makes exhaust routing much easier.

(keeping in mind I know nothing about engine building)

- Is there a manufacturer who makes flat plane cranks for LS3s?

- Does a flat plane crank mean anything in terms of reliability? (e.g., far more wear, very unreliable, etc....)

Brian Hamilton · 15th October 2009, 09:18 PM

OK, guys,
You're going to have to just kinda babysit Ol' Brian here.

Explain the Flat-Crank to me please...

Brian Hamilton · 15th October 2009, 09:25 PM

Oooooh, I think I found out. Google is your friend. It's where the counterweights are 180* from each other so the crank looks more like a flat box rather than a more circular piece. Am I right?