Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-02-2006, 07:35 PM
300SD
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 35
300 SD straight pipe option?

Greetings,
This past weekend I was told that a straight pipe would make the 85 SD faster.
I have read that these pipes make the car louder, but also return more power.
Has anybody here done this mod to a 617 and what were your results?
I am very happy with the SD and would like to avoid any headaches.
Viva Cuba Libre, CubanDiesel

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-02-2006, 07:55 PM
H-townbenzoboy's Avatar
Now Y2K Compliant
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 4,338
Your SD isn't going to get any faster, or gain any more HP with a straight pipe. It'll just get louder.
__________________
'81 MB 300SD, '82 MB 300D Turbo (sold/RIP), '04 Lincoln Town Car Ultimate

Sooner or later every car falls apart, ours does it later!
-German Narrator in a MB Promotion Film about the then brand new W123.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-02-2006, 08:08 PM
Ara T.'s Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 2,075
Itll help the turbo spin up faster but thats about it.
__________________
1985 CA 300D Turbo , 213K mi
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-02-2006, 08:11 PM
ConnClark's Avatar
Power User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,123
Diesels aren't as sensitive to backpressure as gas engines. You might get up on boost slightly quicker but your gains will be minimal as the stock exhaust flows quite freely. Others have tried it here and the general concensus is the only real gain is noise. So if you are dying for attention go for it, otherwise save your money.
__________________
green 85 300SD 200K miles "Das Schlepper Frog" With a OM603 TBO360 turbo ( To be intercooled someday )( Kalifornistani emissons )
white 79 300SD 200K'ish miles "Farfegnugen" (RIP - cracked crank)
desert storm primer 63 T-bird "The Undead" (long term hibernation)

http://ecomodder.com/forum/fe-graphs/sig692a.png
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-02-2006, 08:24 PM
ForcedInduction
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Louder, slightly faster boost, meaner sound, and 1-2mpg.

You won't get any more HP than you already have, you will just feel it sooner.
I've run with a straight pipe for the last two years. I've even been thinking of adding a muffler. *shock*gasp*horror*

straight pipe
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-02-2006, 09:18 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blue Point, NY
Posts: 25,396
Forget the straight pipe.

But, I can tell you that removing the resonators is a perfectly viable option. I'm highly sensitive to noise and I was reluctant to do it. But, the pipes leading into and out of the resonators were shot and I figure that I'd roll the dice.

Cannot tell the difference from the operation with resonators to the current operation without resonators.

Whether the lack of resonators provide any increased performance due to lowered backpressure is unknown.......but, I'm doubtful.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-02-2006, 10:53 PM
Gurkha's Avatar
Satyameva Jayate Ad vitam
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Boondocks
Posts: 1,026
Straight pipe on my OM616 turbo for the last 3 years,no noise gain at idle and cruise,slightly aggressive note at higher RPM while accelerating,EGT went down,operating temps went down,even under hard driving,temps stay under control,MPG went up,so did throttle response and acceleration,I also modded the air intake for inducing fresh air.I would definitely recommend this mod.
__________________
99 Gurkha with OM616 IDI turbo

2015 Gurkha with OM616 DI turbo

2014 Rexton W with OM612 VGT
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-02-2006, 11:16 PM
greasybenz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 2,082
Yeah so far im saving up for a good muffler but want to add a better flowing down pipe.

Anyone know where i can find a mandrel bent down pipe for the SD?
__________________
Current:
05 E320 CDI
07 GL320 CDI
08 Sprinter
05 Dodge Cummins
01 Dodge Cummins

Previous
2004 E55 AMG
2002 C32 AMG (#2)
1995 E300
1978 300D
1987 300D
2002 C32 AMG(blown motor :[
1981 300SD
1983 300SD
1987 300SDL
2002 Jetta TDI
1996 S420
1995 S500
1993 190E 2.6
1992 190E 2.3
1985 190E 2.3 5-Speed
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-02-2006, 11:18 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blue Point, NY
Posts: 25,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by greasybenz
Yeah so far im saving up for a good muffler but want to add a better flowing down pipe.

Anyone know where i can find a mandrel bent down pipe for the SD?
I finally gave up and bought an OE downpipe. It must be mandrel bent because there is no restriction in the bends.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-02-2006, 11:36 PM
Hit Man X's Avatar
I LOVE BRUNETTES
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FUNKYTOWN
Posts: 9,087
Thumbs up

My SDL had no exhaust on it when I picked it up last July, just sounded like a tractor around town. Not any faster, just noise.
__________________
I'm not a doctor, but I'll have a look.

'85 300SD 245k
'87 300SDL 251k
'90 300SEL 326k

Six others from BMW, GM, and Ford.

Liberty will not descend to a people; a people must raise themselves to liberty.
[/IMG]
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-03-2006, 04:53 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 44
I noticed on that other thread people are comparing backpressure on a gas engine to a diesel. We all know that on a gas engine a certain amount of backpressure is desired for optimal performance. My knowledge so far is on a diesel the less back pressure the better, in every aspect minus noise but even then I dont think it would be that bad since I drive a 5.9L Cummins with 5" stacks straight piped behind my head. On the turbodieselregister.com which I am a member of, people who want a lil more performance to their trucks put on a civil lil system and it helps a lil and the sound isnt bad but for anyone who wants lower egts, better mileage, (sound), and a system not getting filled with soot from literally pouring fuel down the engines throat from the performance diesel tuning today straight pipe is the way to go for most.
__________________
1976 300D 115 Blue Grey exterior 95K miles


2004 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins Silver exterior 5"stacks etc...
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-03-2006, 05:00 AM
Hit Man X's Avatar
I LOVE BRUNETTES
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FUNKYTOWN
Posts: 9,087
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by doppx006
We all know that on a gas engine a certain amount of backpressure is desired for optimal performance.


Incorrect. Backpressure is always bad. Too low of exhaust velocity hurts power on an N/A gasser at lower RPM.
__________________
I'm not a doctor, but I'll have a look.

'85 300SD 245k
'87 300SDL 251k
'90 300SEL 326k

Six others from BMW, GM, and Ford.

Liberty will not descend to a people; a people must raise themselves to liberty.
[/IMG]
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-03-2006, 05:10 AM
ForcedInduction
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/html_product/sue462/backpressuretorquemyth.htm
Some say that "an engine needs backpressure to work correctly." Is this true?

No. It would be more correct to say, "a perfectly stock engine that cannot adjust its fuel delivery needs backpressure to work correctly." This idea is a myth. As with all myths, however, there is a hint of fact with this one. Particularly, some people equate backpressure with torque, and others fear that too little backpressure will lead to valve burning.

The first reason why people say "backpressure is good" is because they believe that increased backpressure by itself will increase torque, particularly with a stock exhaust manifold. Granted, some stock manifolds act somewhat like performance headers at low RPM, but these manifolds will exhibit poor performance at higher RPM. This, however does not automatically lead to the conclusion that backpressure produces more torque. The increase in torque is not due to backpressure, but to the effects of changes in fuel/air mixture, which will be described in more detail below.

The other reason why people say "backpressure is good" is because they hear that cars (or motorcycles) that have had performance exhaust work done to them would then go on to burn exhaust valves. Now, it is true that such valve burning has occurred as a result of the exhaust mods, but it isn't due merely to a lack of backpressure.

The internal combustion engine is a complex, dynamic collection of different systems working together to convert the stored power in gasoline into mechanical energy to push a car down the road. Anytime one of these systems are modified, that mod will also indirectly affect the other systems, as well.

Now, valve burning occurs as a result of a very lean-burning engine. In order to achieve a theoretical optimal combustion, an engine needs 14.7 parts of oxygen by mass to 1 part of gasoline (again, by mass). This is referred to as a stochiometric (chemically correct) mixture, and is commonly referred to as a 14.7:1 mix. If an engine burns with less oxygen present (13:1, 12:1, etc...), it is said to run rich. Conversely, if the engine runs with more oxygen present (16:1, 17:1, etc...), it is said to run lean. Today's engines are designed to run at 14.7:1 for normally cruising, with rich mixtures on acceleration or warm-up, and lean mixtures while decelerating.

Getting back to the discussion, the reason that exhaust valves burn is because the engine is burning lean. Normal engines will tolerate lean burning for a little bit, but not for sustained periods of time. The reason why the engine is burning lean to begin with is that the reduction in backpressure is causing more air to be drawn into the combustion chamber than before. Earlier cars (and motorcycles) with carburetion often could not adjust because of the way that backpressure caused air to flow backwards through the carburetor after the air already got loaded down with fuel, and caused the air to receive a second load of fuel. While a bad design, it was nonetheless used in a lot of vehicles. Once these vehicles received performance mods that reduced backpressure, they no longer had that double-loading effect, and then tended to burn valves because of the resulting over-lean condition. This, incidentally, also provides a basis for the "torque increase" seen if backpressure is maintained. As the fuel/air mixture becomes leaner, the resultant combustion will produce progressively less and less of the force needed to produce torque.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Miscellaneous/exhausttheory.htm
Turbos

Another object that might be sitting in your exhaust flow is a turbine from a turbocharger. If that is the case, we envy you.

Not only that, but turbos introduce a bit of backpressure to your exhaust system, thus making it a bit quieter. All of the typical scavenging rules still apply, but with a twist. Mufflers work really well now! Remember, one of the silencing methods is restriction, and a turbine is just that, a restriction.

This is actually where the term "turbo muffler" is coined. Since a turbine does a pretty good job of silencing, OEM turbo mufflers can do a lot less restricting to quiet things down. Of course, aftermarket manufacturers took advantage of this performance image and branded a lot of their products with the "turbo" name in order to drum up more business from the high performance crowd. We're sad to say that the term "turbo" has been bastardized in this respect, and would like that to serve as a warning. A "turbo" muffler is not necessarily a high-performance muffler.
Pipe Sizing

We've seen quiet a few "experienced" racers tell people that a bigger exhaust is a better exhaust. Hahaha… NOT.

As discussed earlier, exhaust gas is hot. And we'd like to keep it hot throughout the exhaust system. Why? The answer is simple. Cold air is dense air, and dense air is heavy air. We don't want our engine to be pushing a heavy mass of exhaust gas out of the tailpipe. An extremely large exhaust pipe will cause a slow exhaust flow, which will in turn give the gas plenty of time to cool off en route. Overlarge piping will also allow our exhaust pulses to achieve a higher level of entropy, which will take all of our header tuning and throw it out the window, as pulses will not have the same tendency to line up as they would in a smaller pipe. Coating the entire exhaust system with an insulative material, such as header wrap or a ceramic thermal barrier coating reduces this effect somewhat, but unless you have lots of cash burning a hole in your pocket, is probably not worth the expense on a street driven car.

Unfortunately, we know of no accurate way to calculate optimal exhaust pipe diameter. This is mainly due to the random nature of an exhaust system -- things like bends or kinks in the piping, temperature fluctuations, differences in muffler design, and the lot, make selecting a pipe diameter little more than a guessing game. For engines making 250 to 350 horsepower, the generally accepted pipe diameter is 3 to 3 ˝ inches. Over that amount, you'd be best off going to 4 inches. If you have an engine making over 400 to 500 horsepower, you'd better be happy capping off the fun with a 4 inch exhaust. Ah, the drawbacks of horsepower. The best alternative here would probably be to just run open
exhaust!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-03-2006, 08:13 AM
t walgamuth's Avatar
dieselarchitect
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lafayette Indiana
Posts: 38,627
i have

a straight pipe in place of the back muff on my 350sdl. it sounds like a baby cummins. not too bad though. i cant feel any difference in performance and i imagine that i might get a half mile to the gallon better economy, cant tell for sure though.

i like it, but when i get read y to sell i will put the muff back on.

i did the same with my 500sec. there the sound is much better. love the growl. also feel half to one mpg better.

tom w
__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-03-2006, 12:41 PM
ConnClark's Avatar
Power User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,123
To see how backpressure effects a diesel you can dig through this research paper.

http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1937/naca-tn-619/

To summarize the findings with respect to back pressure for you

A diesel is less sensitive to back pressure than a gas engine.

Turbochargers and diesels are a great match.

Basically when it comes to back pressure on a diesel, a drop in back pressure gets you a little more power. As back pressure increases the power from a diesel engine drops off at an increasing rate. In other words its an exponetial function.

__________________
green 85 300SD 200K miles "Das Schlepper Frog" With a OM603 TBO360 turbo ( To be intercooled someday )( Kalifornistani emissons )
white 79 300SD 200K'ish miles "Farfegnugen" (RIP - cracked crank)
desert storm primer 63 T-bird "The Undead" (long term hibernation)

http://ecomodder.com/forum/fe-graphs/sig692a.png
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page