cassidym
|
| posted on 15/9/04 at 10:12 PM |
|
|
Exhaust
I'm contemplating running my exhaust system under the body of the car rather than at the side.
The guys at our local forum gave valid reasons for me to seriously reconsider this, however I'm just curious to know whether it can be done and
how.
|
|
|
|
|
chrisf
|
| posted on 15/9/04 at 10:35 PM |
|
|
Won't ground clearance be an issue? I have mine set at 4.5" with 2" bump travel. It will be a small exhaust to keep from smacking
the ground at bump.
...of course your's may be higher.
--Chris
|
|
|
Stuart Walker
|
| posted on 15/9/04 at 11:29 PM |
|
|
Mine doesnt leave room for a bend so it will have to go under the car, I'd be interested to know if anyone else has done this too, what reasons
did they give?
|
|
|
cassidym
|
| posted on 16/9/04 at 12:26 AM |
|
|
One of the best arguments against running it under car was given by a local board member; that is that the exhaust will be too close to the fuel tank
for comfort. He proposed using a fuel cell tank rather than a standard seam welded tank. It makes sense.
I'm going to build a +442 (not started yet  ) and am just investigating above option for various reasons - one of them being costs.
Me thinks, it'll be cheaper if you run a plain vanilla exhaust hidden beneath than a fancy piece at the sides.
Me thinks;
a. Locost look good without exhaust on side
b. Locost look good with a proper professionally looking
exhausts on both sides.
So I may go either way but (b) is going to hit my pocket hard, however (a) may cause my early demise, not that it would be a tragedy. 
|
|
|
Dale
|
| posted on 16/9/04 at 01:16 AM |
|
|
I would be leary of having the exhast exit from the back of the car as the aerodynamics of this fun brick are such that its very likely that the fumes
will be brought back up and towards the cockpit, especially if you have a windscreen. It would be kind of like the old station wagons that had a rear
window that would go into the tailgate and the fumes would get sucked back in the car.
Dale
|
|
|
cassidym
|
| posted on 16/9/04 at 01:27 AM |
|
|
Well, another good argument against.
Thanx Dale.
|
|
|
locoboy
|
| posted on 16/9/04 at 07:51 AM |
|
|
agree with Dale here, My F27 has a side exit and used to have a relatively short exhaust - it ended by where your knees are when your sitting in the
car.
Although it was turned away from the car at the vey end of the exhaust i used to stink of fumes even when i had the side screens on because of the way
the turbulent air moved from outside the cabin to inside it.
I also blew my hat off and it exited over the roll bar and then came back in and landed in the passengers footwell - looked like bloody magic lol
ATB
Locoboy
|
|
|
pbura
|
| posted on 16/9/04 at 11:30 AM |
|
|
Rotaries need a pretty big exhaust system, especially if you must have a cat. I was thinking about duals under the car for awhile, then decided to
put the cat and a presilencer on the side, with the muffler across the back under the kick-up. Mike Laws of Oz has his this way:
Heat under the fuel tank is a concern. I'm leaning towards an ally heat shield over the muffler, with NASCAR-type insulation under the tank.
Pete
|
|
|
