Y4 cutouts from badlanzhpe.com

[jawz101]

Has anyone heard of www.BadlanzHPE.com?
It looks like they have a cutout product (Y4 cutouts) that takes a different approach and ads a 2nd set of cutouts that work in addition to the ones connected to a Y pipe and restrict the air from flowing into the regular exhaust when you open the Y cutout. I don't know if this is a waste of money or if it would help with back pressure much.

Any thoughts?

[TooManyFords]

My opinion? Overkill.

If you release the pressure by opening a set of cutouts in a y-pipe right after the header and some of the gasses want to flow down the old exhaust, let it. You have relieved all the pressure you're going to this way.

He's just come up with a clever way to sell twice as many to unsuspecting customers is all.

John

PS: That Monte was oh so attractive with all those extra pipes hanging everywhere... NOT!

[SergntMac]

Any thoughts? John beat me to it.

[jawz101]

I'd have to agree that his car is a salute to jackassery. (and the site could look a little less craptacular)
If anything, the car is kinda entertaining. It does look like "it's officially been pimped" by Kid Rock.

All jokes aside: if a 2nd valve was put not directly at the junction but further down the exhaust a bit I would almost think it would create some pocket of air that would cause the mythical back pressure? (see attached crayon drawing)

I'm not much for physics and how that pressure benefits but I guess it has its merits? Having your exhaust just queef out the front end doesn't seem like it gives you much power unless you are in your at your higher speeds.
I could only see them as beneficial if you're s/c'd. Am I wrong on this?

If not... well... they do look like a tornado to me too

[Blackened300a]

PS: That Monte was oh so attractive with all those extra pipes hanging everywhere... NOT!

Gotta Admit that the Over Exhausted Monte is probably one of the cleanest ones for that Year I have ever seen.

[TripleTransAm]

All jokes aside: if a 2nd valve was put not directly at the junction but further down the exhaust a bit I would almost think it would create some pocket of air that would cause the mythical back pressure? (see attached crayon drawing)


There is an engineering technique that involves modelling physical situations with electrical circuits, with current being analogous to velocity and voltage equating pressure. The math works out perfectly because of the equivalency rates between the electrical components and their 'real' physical counterparts.

So in the case of fluid motion (including exhaust gas), the circuit would involve a pressure (voltage) and a certain resistance to the flow (resistance) and you could work out the resultant flow (current) using Ohm's law. Let's not bother with the numbers but look at the concepts instead.

If you've got a circuit with a voltage source at one end and ground at the other, the resistance to the electrical flow will determine what current is seen through that circuit. Add a second path in parallel to the 1st regardless of the resistance of that path, and you will end up with a lower overall resistance as seen by the voltage source, and hence more current. The voltage source doesn't care what the actual path looks like... if it sees less resistance to it pushing current, more current will be pushed.

In our exhaust example, you add a second path for exhaust to exit. Same as adding a second path to the circuit above... you KNOW you'll get less overall resistance than before. Close off the original path anywhere after the new path is added... that's going to show up as a slight overall increase in resistance since you've essentially removed part of the path!

By a similar analogy, try breathing through a straw with a restriction at one end (just a slight restriction, not complete blockage). Add a second straw to breathe through, with no restriction. Now, remove the restricted straw. Most likely, you'd have appreciated having that extra (albeit restricted) straw to breathe through!


The only benefit I could see to blocking off the original path when opening a cutout would be for sound reasons. Exhaust sound is made up of the collection of exhaust pulses, so recombining pulses in different 'phases' could give you an awful sound, or could make the new exhaust note totally pleasant. (the reason why exhaust note changes with X-vs-H pipes, and why header length tuning has a big effect on exhaust note).

My 1998 WS6 came with one big honking outlet on the driver's side and nothing on the passenger's side (1998-only, looked stupid on Trans Ams with cutouts in the bumper for TWO outlets). I adapted the 'Borla' idea using the stock exhaust system (complete with flanges for 'adjustability') for a total cost of $200 (welding and extra factory tip and misc. tubing). On cold days, I can tell how much exhaust is still being forced through the original muffler and how much is being evacuated through the 'straight' pipe... I'd estimate a 30/70 % mix. Using common sense and the concepts above, exactly HOW would I benefit by closing off the original factory flow path and forcing the same amount of exhaust gas through only one of the paths?

http://www.tripletransam.com/WS6/2000/dual.jpg

[jawz101]

By a similar analogy, try breathing through a straw with a restriction at one end (just a slight restriction, not complete blockage). Add a second straw to breathe through, with no restriction. Now, remove the restricted straw. Most likely, you'd have appreciated having that extra (albeit restricted) straw to breathe through!
Applying the same analogy you really only need 1 straw to see the effects of a cutout... and you should really only be exhaling since this is an exhaust. Just put a hole somewhere in the middle of the straw.
Exhale w/ both ends open, then put your finger on the end of it. Back pressure. (due to a 2nd cutout that could plug up the remainder of the pipe)

I guess I'd cite another thread where a user has kook's exhaust and e-cutouts right after the headers, before the cats.
kook's & e-cutouts - TooManyFords (http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/showthread.php?t=20755&page=2)

"Looking at John's "open vs. closed" dyno test, it's a judgement call for the Marauder owner. Earning a few HP in higher RPMs (above 5500), vs. giving up a few pounds of torque in the low RPMs (under 3000). Since it's torque that moves the car, and if you're serious about your 1320 performance, it seems that cut-outs are not in your best performance interest."

I would think a 2nd cutout (that closed off the main pipe) would benefit you until you hit above say 4500 RPMs, then you'd want to open up the 2nd valve back up and have your exhaust moving through both openings.

I really don't think I'd be hitting the switches while I was racing but wouldn't it give you some improvement at performance if the main piping did open and close synchronously based on RPM or air force being released?

[jawz101]

I guess it was the combination of seeing the dyno results from John's thread and seeing that site that got me curious about how his dyno results could be improved.

I think a 2nd set of cutouts is irrelevent if you had one quick set of cutouts or ones that opened based on airflow or RPM's that you could open up right after your take off and get your RPMs higher. The low end torque would then be back.

When I see the videos of e-cutouts opening they seem too slow to pull it off, but if they were closed the first 3000 RPM I would think it would maximize takeoff time.

[jawz101]

I guess it was the combination of seeing the dyno results discussion from TooManyFord's thread and seeing that site that got me curious about how his dyno results could be improved.

I think a 2nd set of cutouts is irrelevent if you had one quick set of cutouts or ones that opened based on airflow or RPM's that you could open up right after your take off and get your RPMs higher.

When I see the videos of e-cutouts opening they seem to slow to pull it off but if they were closed the first 3000 RPM I would think it would get a better effect... if you even run a 1/4 with them open in the 1st place