The Cal-look Lounge

hi all,

can  i ask you all what are your experience with the Wasp exhaust and the A1 exhaust on race engines?
i wondering if the Wasp really deliver more HP than the A1 muffler,

cheers

Good question, I'm curious too.  What kind of header do the pro gas guys run?

most of the fast guys are using a turbo header

I like A1, I have had 2 of them in earlier engines.
They are nice, but they are not developed by an engine tuner who knows about pulse tuning.
Now I have a Wasp. 302 hp from a 2387 is a good benchmark for an off the shelf exhaust.

Hi Melvin
we dyno drove the wasp then gave it 282 with stingers
with  damper, we lost about 10
because the pulse of the pipe before silencer slowed
If one is to get to it with sound dampener, the tube should be 1000 mm before the damper
/// Micke

Stage 3?

Cool! So, each one is built specific to your engine combo?

so micke your experience is that the wasp it is not productive with every engine ?

My engine made no more HP with stage 2 wasp vs 2 inch turbo Thomas system n/a

Yes.

It is normal that the combination of all the elements must be in the window
If you do not have the right length to the damper (1000mm) will destroy the pulse of the pipes
Wasp is very good
 but you can ruin a good header with damper
// M

Does this mean the Wasp muffler is placed 1000 mm after the collector?

Which is better for drag racing:  Wasp megaphone or Wasp muffler?  I have the Wasp Stage 2 header, but currently running a Magnaflow muffler.

The WASP Muffler was tested by Johannes at JPM on Johnny Steiros car and it showed no difference performance wise to the WASP Megaphone. For all you guys running a RLR Chassis and/or using a wheelie bar - there's a new WASP Header out there called WASP RACE http://csp-shop.de/cgi-bin/cshop/front/shop_main.cgi?func=det&wkid=41959338871&rub1=Products&rub2=Abgasanlage%2CEinzelkomponenten&artnr=28035b&pn=0&sort=0&all= (http://csp-shop.de/cgi-bin/cshop/front/shop_main.cgi?func=det&wkid=41959338871&rub1=Products&rub2=Abgasanlage%2CEinzelkomponenten&artnr=28035b&pn=0&sort=0&all=)

Here's some more information I got from CSP on what's behind engineering the WASP system and what makes the difference:

As the exhaust valve opens, the relatively high cylinder pressure ( 5 – 6 bar ), initiates exhaust blowdown and  a large pressure wave travels down the exhaust pipe. As the valve continues to open, the exhaust gases begin flowing through the valve seat. The exhaust gases flow at an average speed of over 110 m/s while the pressure wave travels at the speed of sound of around 520 m/s.
As one can see, there are two main phenomenons occurring in the exhaust, gas particle flow and pressure wave propagation. The objective of the exhaust is to remove as many gas particles as possible during the exhaust stroke. The proper handling of the pressure waves in the exhaust can help us to this end, and even help us “supercharge” the engine.

As the exhaust pressure wave arrives at the end of the exhaust pipe, part of the wave is reflected back towards the cylinder as a negative pressure (or vacuum) wave. This negative wave, if timed properly to arrive at the cylinder during the overlap period can help scavenge the residual exhaust gases in the cylinder and also can initiate the flow of intake charge into the cylinder. Since the pressure waves travel at near the speed of sound, the timing of the negative wave can be controlled by the primary pipe length for a particular rpm.

The strength of the wave reflection is based on the area change compared to the area of the originating pipe. A large area change such as the end of a pipe will produce a strong reflection, whereas a smaller area change, as occurs in a collector, will produce a less-strong wave. Also, a REAL merge collector like on our WASP and PYTHON Systems will have a smaller area change than a standard formed collector ( like you see them on A-1 and Heritage Sidewinder Systems ) producing a weaker wave.

So, the trick to proper exhaust tuning is to tune an exhaust system is produce a negative wave of the proper strength timed to occur at cylinder overlap.
 
If the exhaust ports on your cylinder heads get too big you lose air velocity and torque, and take the chance of increasing the possibility reversion. As the exiting exhaust gases travel through the headers they are expanding until they cool enough to where expansion stops. The longer you can keep the exhaust velocity up, the better the scavenging of the cylinders, and the more power and torque the engine can make.

By starting with a slightly smaller tube at the cylinder head flange. This step is necessary to ensure the exhaust velocity stays UP. As the gases expand, they get to the next size, or the second step and than to the third step. This allows for a contained (managed) control of the expansion of the spent gases while still keeping an efficient exhaust velocity in the tubes connect to the collector. This gradual increase in size provides the maximum balance of exhaust velocity and volume.
 
There is one more important thing that we found on the Dyno, but is not explainable by physics the firing order. We found that a collector that merges in firing order makes more power and torque than one without. 

That's a great read above, but why did Danny not see any increase on his dyno testing?

I think giving an answer to that question is next to impossible without knowing/testing the whole combination.

I get that, but at €1000 it's a bit of a risk if it doesn't add power?

Maybe I'm missing something here, but with four primary's merging into a common collector, how can you NOT have them in firing order, only in a split collector, a split turbo hot side or a 421 primary system would it matter that correct scavenge pairing was achieved, I've seen big name systems fall down on this, some are popular beyond belief, but serious guys are not fooled, proper pairing of course is 1/3 2/4, but putting 4 pipes into a collector in any order you like will always see an exhausting pipe next to an open intake pipe,,,,,, far more important is matching primary pipe diameter and overall system length to the rpm band of the chosen cam shaft, now we have the biggest problem of all time to face, at least for circuit racing, noise, 2017 db tolerance is pegged at 98db static, this is THE one to pass as we always do ok on the dive by metering, it may take 3 silencers to achieve, as we speak I'm up dating and hope to noise test with two early next week, but I'm preparing for a third or a possible super trapp, exhaust exit will be lower rear fender by the drivers door in an effort to remove engine clatter and carb roar from the noise meter reading, even straight cuts may need to go, also moving to ally push rods, loads of work and added Weight. Nightmare...

Can´t say for sure nwhy Danny´s engine did not pay off with the Wasp. My hunch is that it is intake related.

T

lot of intrest information, thx :)


the 2 inch turbo Thomas system n/a of danny is also special build , meaby thats the raison the wasp will not made more hp than the 2 inch turbo Thomas system n/a

I thought that was an interesting comment as well. If you look at the collector the firing order goes in a counterclockwise direction, maybe the exhaust gasses create a swirl pattern in the secondary and are evacuated more efficiently?? I've never looked at another collector in this way but it is an interesting theory.

the end of the megaphone from the wasp is big,....

(https://www.mupload.nl/img/vrgwmwgn4vpm2.jpg)


last time i see more systems where the end of the megaphone comes smaller again,.... you see it on vw's but also on other race cars like on 1 of the pictures below

(https://www.mupload.nl/img/sjloyhc33bzsf.jpg)

(https://www.mupload.nl/img/1wcpih80lzcom.jpg)

(https://www.mupload.nl/img/cl5edqwpzh1pu.jpg)

can some body explain that ...? is there a raison for or not ?

The swirling pipes thing in the collector is sometimes a disadvantage. If it causes increased vacuum at the collector then it would simulate a different pipe length. It depends on the rest of the combo if this is better or not. In some instances having a steady vortex might actually cause a momentary pressure spike possibly, perhaps during blow-down when you least need it?

The narrowed-down collector neck has been around for a while now, the idea is it helps separate the primary pipes from the main exhaust. The theory being it then helps build a broader torque/power range by making both primary pipes and also collector pipe final length less critical in terms of perfect length across the rev range. I know a lot of bike guys who have returned to a big collector with a big area change to help their stuff better after having tried the narrow-neck swirl collector in a few different formats, me included.

Theoretically of course........

I am also testing a few stepped tuned headers of own build. first one I had a slight cross to not have swirl. My new one is rotational and agree with the logic that it could be disadvantage in theory, but from what I have researched it is that a spin typically creates a vortex and the center open area makes the collector choke think it has mare area....  of course in theory...
I will be on the dyno Friday testing different collectors, choke sizes, tube size and lengths and straight and meg. I too have eyed the WASP but can build a bunch for that much.
Any header will not be an exact tune for all motors, too much cam difference, flow, and such affect mating a combination. Instance is typically a longer duration cam wants longer primary length and vice versa. I am seeing a general start point for after collector length to be relatively half the length of primaries, if they are correct length.

TEST, TEST, TEST

Bolt on is gamble