Supersprint Centre and Rear exhaust
  • Help
Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Fellow Frogger! Dr_Pug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    548

    Default Supersprint Centre and Rear exhaust

    Having seen one set up on dyno day the supersprint centre and rear back box, managed to put an extra 5kw @ the wheels on dyno on a clio 172. I understand there is a restriction problem from the cat back on the 172 and hence changing this with this type of set up brings it upto the 182 status with a little bit extra.

    Supersprint is also offering stainless steel centre and rear exhaust for the 180.The set up of the back box is similar to the stock box but alot smaller as is the centre exhaust.

    Has anyone had any experience with supersprint, doesnt necessarily have to be a 180. I have sent off a email to company asking to provide dyno figures, awaiting there reply.

    Here are some pics and some notes on the 180 setup

    Advertisement





    - Extensive road and dyno tests.
    - Maximum performance increase (higher torque and peak horsepower output).
    - Stainless steel manifolds, free-flow silencers, for lower backpressure.
    - E.E.C. homologation.
    - Sport sound, innovative design in tail pipe styling.

    Edit, dyno of a supersprint system on BMW thats has impressive improvement in torque, also very loud

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...91904798&q=bmw
    Last edited by WRC180; 25th January 2006 at 11:56 PM.
    04' GTi 180

  2. #2
    Member Ekliptix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Sounds good Dr Pug! I'm really interested in seeing a dyno sheet if they will provide one, as I am looking at doing the exhaust on my 180 too.

    This may sound stupid, but I really like the standard twin tail pipes on my 180, I wish if I decided to modify the exhaust that I could keep the standard twin tips.
    2005 Aegean Blue 206 GTI 180

  3. #3
    Fellow Frogger! Dr_Pug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ekliptix
    This may sound stupid, but I really like the standard twin tail pipes on my 180, I wish if I decided to modify the exhaust that I could keep the standard twin tips.
    The stock twin tail pipe does look nice and for the some reason it suits the rear the spoiler, it gives it an aggressive stance. Lets see if they can provide some dyno results, if not it stays as it is.
    04' GTi 180

  4. #4
    Member pokinacha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    87

    Default Price?

    What is the system going to cost?
    if you want a quote on a excellent system go to Lambros Hi-tech mufflers on paramatta rd Petersham/Leichhardt and talk to Lambros. he'll give you a great muffler and S/S mandrel bent pipes all Aussie made... their Cats are second to none as well. plus i garrantee a great note and you can keep the twin tail pipes.



    my

    Tim
    Last edited by pokinacha; 26th January 2006 at 01:18 PM.

  5. #5
    Real cars have hydraulics DoubleChevron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Ballarat,Vic,Aust.
    Posts
    16,851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_Pug
    Having seen one set up on dyno day the supersprint centre and rear back box, managed to put an extra 5kw @ the wheels on dyno on a clio 172. I understand there is a restriction problem from the cat back on the 172 and hence changing this with this type of set up brings it upto the 182 status with a little bit extra.

    Supersprint is also offering stainless steel centre and rear exhaust for the 180.The set up of the back box is similar to the stock box but alot smaller as is the centre exhaust.

    Has anyone had any experience with supersprint, doesnt necessarily have to be a 180. I have sent off a email to company asking to provide dyno figures, awaiting there reply.

    Here are some pics and some notes on the 180 setup




    - Extensive road and dyno tests.
    - Maximum performance increase (higher torque and peak horsepower output).
    - Stainless steel manifolds, free-flow silencers, for lower backpressure.
    - E.E.C. homologation.
    - Sport sound, innovative design in tail pipe styling.

    Edit, dyno of a supersprint system on BMW thats has impressive improvement in torque, also very loud

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...91904798&q=bmw
    I don't believe it ... not for a second. A little 2.0litre is already giving 172hp without the aid of a turbo, and they expect us to believe a different resonator is going to give another 5Kwatts

    Absolutely laughable. Poogoe/Citroen/Renault already do exceptional exhaust systems, they always have (R16 aside where there is no room).

    Infact I believe the only difference would be it'll be loud and drone in a most annoying way.

    My opinion will change if I see *just* the resonator changed on several identical cars, and those same identical cars, running the same fuel, on the same dyno, with the same dyno operator actually get better power figures.

    Do you guys understand how many millions of $$$ they would have put into perfecting the tune of the motor for the given intake and exhaust attached This isn't a 20year old Holden where just about any change would be an improvement.

    seeya,
    Shane L.
    'Cit' homepage:
    Citroen Workshop
    Proper cars--
    '85 Series II CX2500 GTi Turbo I
    '63 ID19 http://www.aussiefrogs.com/forum/showthread.php?t=90325
    '72 DS21 ie 5spd pallas (last looked at ... about 15years ago)
    '78 GS1220 pallas
    '92 Range Rover Classic ... 5spd manual.

    Yay ... No Slugomatics


    Modern Junk:
    '07 Poogoe 407 HDi 6spd manual

  6. #6
    Fellow Frogger! ClioF1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    172

    Default

    At the OZRS dyno day last week we saw a definite increase between the stock 172s and a 172 with cat back exhaust.

    I agree the factory exhaust systems are good, but they compromise some power for silencing as do most stock systems.

    The problem is finding an exhaust that will actually increase power and not lose power so thats where the tricky part comes in. You don't want it too loud as well.

    I'm thinking of keeping my exhaust stock though and just changing the cat for a hi-flow item. I really don't like loud exhausts anymore.
    2005 RENAULTsport Clio 182 Cup F1


  7. #7
    Member pokinacha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    87

    Default

    I agree with clioF1, Peugeot use Baffle type mufflers on the back box of all their models. a baffle muffler always has less flow that a straight through type muffler. This is to reduce noise. More flow decreases back pressure thus allowing the engine to rev quicker. problem is, a higher flowing exhaust is only as good as the Cat it's attached to. if you have a 350CFM CAT and a 2.5in hiflow exhaust it's going to do nothing except make more noise. Another problem is with less back pressure there is less torque.

    my suggestion, replace the Cat with a 700CFM+ unit. if there is an increase in power(have a dyno run before and after) then you've proved that a Hiflow Cat will increase peak power and torque.

    my

    Tim

  8. #8
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    409

    Default

    no please dont mention back pressure -

    it has nothing to do with an obstruction to flow, but more to do with a dynamic change in sound-wave reverberations/oscillations at a particular frequency that directly affects a 'boost' at a particular rev range. This is a highly technical and complicated affect on engine performance as it is changed by exhaust port cross section, primary pipe diameter, primary pipe length, the convergence of primaries (tri-y or 4-1) and length of tertiary pipe into first 'chamber' <- usually the catalytic converter.

  9. #9
    Fellow Frogger! ClioF1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XsaraVTS
    no please dont mention back pressure -

    it has nothing to do with an obstruction to flow, but more to do with a dynamic change in sound-wave reverberations/oscillations at a particular frequency that directly affects a 'boost' at a particular rev range. This is a highly technical and complicated affect on engine performance as it is changed by exhaust port cross section, primary pipe diameter, primary pipe length, the convergence of primaries (tri-y or 4-1) and length of tertiary pipe into first 'chamber' <- usually the catalytic converter.
    You're right.

    However, the bit people are most likely to change is the backbox and this provides a flow change rather than much of an acoustic tuning effect.

    On the 182 Clio the headers are a great design so its best to leave that bit alone (along with the tuning Renaultsport have done there), the cat is pretty good but there is room for improvement and the centre/rear mufflers provide a restriction because they are designed to keep the noise down.

    I believe the change in flow characteristic will somewhat alter the torque curve on most cars, however with the Clios it doesn't really seem to be the case apart from boosting torque.
    2005 RENAULTsport Clio 182 Cup F1


  10. #10
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    409

    Default

    spot on. After the first expansion chamber there should be as little disruption to flow as possible.

    i know that the Xsara VTS can be improved as underneath the rear torsion beam tunnels the exhaust is heavily 'crimped'. Apart from the fact i have just bought a house and i spend more time in my SimRacing cockpit than my real car - i was going to play around with side pipes ...

    '04 Citroen Xsara VTS

    Mallala - 1:29.96

  11. #11
    I might be slow... DRTDVL's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    1,288

    Default

    the acustic tuning properties only really apply to the headers of the car as it's mainly used to aid in clearing the chamber of exhaust gases, to provide the max amount of clean fresh air....

    any factory car is a battle of compermise (spelling), comfort, and safetly are are the big killers of performance...

    this is why i have a job.

  12. #12
    Fellow Frogger! Dr_Pug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleChevron
    I don't believe it ... not for a second. A little 2.0litre is already giving 172hp without the aid of a turbo, and they expect us to believe a different resonator is going to give another 5Kwatts

    Absolutely laughable. Poogoe/Citroen/Renault already do exceptional exhaust systems, they always have (R16 aside where there is no room).

    Infact I believe the only difference would be it'll be loud and drone in a most annoying way.

    My opinion will change if I see *just* the resonator changed on several identical cars, and those same identical cars, running the same fuel, on the same dyno, with the same dyno operator actually get better power figures.

    Do you guys understand how many millions of $$$ they would have put into perfecting the tune of the motor for the given intake and exhaust attached This isn't a 20year old Holden where just about any change would be an improvement.

    seeya,
    Shane L.
    Please view the video that is present in the social events section, OZrenault dyno day and you will see the 172 with the cat back exhaust putting out 99kw @ wheels and a stock 172 putting out 94.5 kw @ wheels.

    PS. What do you think the difference is between the 172 & 182? Hint: Mechanically the motor is the same
    Last edited by WRC180; 31st January 2006 at 02:49 PM.
    04' GTi 180

  13. #13
    Fellow Frogger! Dr_Pug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    548

    Default

    Unfortuantly no dyno results for the supersprint system, here is there reply email.


    Dear Mr.XXXX,

    Thank you again for kind enquiry, Sorry the dyno charts for that car are not available, For that specific car Peugeot 206 RC 180hp we developed the system (center + rear muffler) testing not a stock car, A France tuner brought the car to Italy (at our facility in Mantova) already was modified .

    For sure I can confirm you that the stock rear silencer was restrictive with a relevant back pressure (due to baffles inside the stock silencer box)
    while we developed and offer a " free flow " system with no baffle a lower back pressure rate.

    With best regards

    Flavio Taddei
    Supersprint
    04' GTi 180

  14. #14
    Real cars have hydraulics DoubleChevron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Ballarat,Vic,Aust.
    Posts
    16,851

    Default

    What would be interesting is if you guys could get a bog stand car. Dyno it, then fit the exhaust and re-dyno it, using the same fuel in the tank at the same dyno.

    An extra 3hp @ 7000rpm is useless if it loses torque and tractability down low (after all how often can you use 7000rpm in traffic/street driving).

    I'm willing to be convinced, but my experiance has been reasonator changes make noise and detract from low speed drivability (my experiance certianly isn't extensive at all though).

    After all, 3hp could easily be the difference between cars with no modifications.

    seeya,
    Shane L.
    'Cit' homepage:
    Citroen Workshop
    Proper cars--
    '85 Series II CX2500 GTi Turbo I
    '63 ID19 http://www.aussiefrogs.com/forum/showthread.php?t=90325
    '72 DS21 ie 5spd pallas (last looked at ... about 15years ago)
    '78 GS1220 pallas
    '92 Range Rover Classic ... 5spd manual.

    Yay ... No Slugomatics


    Modern Junk:
    '07 Poogoe 407 HDi 6spd manual

  15. #15
    Fellow Frogger! ClioF1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleChevron
    What would be interesting is if you guys could get a bog stand car. Dyno it, then fit the exhaust and re-dyno it, using the same fuel in the tank at the same dyno.

    An extra 3hp @ 7000rpm is useless if it loses torque and tractability down low (after all how often can you use 7000rpm in traffic/street driving).

    I'm willing to be convinced, but my experiance has been reasonator changes make noise and detract from low speed drivability (my experiance certianly isn't extensive at all though).

    After all, 3hp could easily be the difference between cars with no modifications.

    seeya,
    Shane L.
    I'm going to have to post up these dyno sheets to stop the confusion!

    The stock 172 (Phase 2) put out 96.7kw and the 172 with cat back exhaust put out 98.8kw.

    The car with the exhaust had more torque over the full rev range.

    Yes its not highly scientific without testing the exhaust on the same car, but seeing as we did 172 vs 182 (96.7kw vs 99kw) you can see there is a little bit of room to gain power and torque with exhaust mods on the Clio.
    2005 RENAULTsport Clio 182 Cup F1


  16. #16
    1000+ Posts U Turn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,761

    Default

    ClioF1, yes please, am eagerly awaiting the dyno sheets!
    ----
    DoubleChevron, I was very skeptical as well because of my previous dyno tests with different rear mufflers on my car. But as Dr_pug and ClioF1 said, there is another thread that shows the results of their recent dyno shootout with various cars. There were mostly Clio 182's, but also 2 Clio 172's. The Clio with the cat-back aftermarket exhaust modification was making exactly the same power as the Clio 182's (in fact, more than some of the 182's), and 5 kW more than the stock Clio 172. I have to admit I was quite stunned at this also, and would definitely love to see a direct "stock" vs "modded" comparison on the exact same car, on consequecutive dyno runs. However, 5 kW at the wheel is massive and I just can't explain it away when there is a Clio 172 putting out the exact same power at the wheels as all the Clio 182's are.

    But yeah I agree with you re. 5 kW or not, I personally could not live with the noise.
    ----
    Can the owner of that Clio 172 with the cat-back aftermarket exhaust confirm that is the only modification done to the car?
    ----
    pokinacha, on my peugeot I've seen the inside of both the centre muffler/resonator and the rear muffler. The centre muffler/resonator is completely straight through inside with a perforated pipe, no different to any of the high flow straight through aftermarket resonators out there.

    The rear muffler is a re-directed baffle type as you pointed out. But several months ago I did a dyno test with 3 mufflers (OEM, good quality aftermarket straight through, and good quality aftermarket reverse flow). There were 3 conseqecutive runs done, one after the other with the dyno shop changing the mufflers there and then (I had the two aftermarket mufflers fitted with the same ring flange to match the OEM muffler, so it was as an easy bolt up). The results were the OEM peugeot muffler and the aftermarket straight through type both produced exactly the same power at the wheels. The aftermarket reverse flow muffler produced 3 kW less. I was very surprised to find a) that the peugeot OEM muffler put out exactly the same power as a completely unrestrictive straight through type; and b) the well made reverse flow muffler produced a significant 3 kW less. I can't explain why these results were so, but that's how they were. Refer http://www.aussiefrogs.com/forum/att...0&d=1111235376
    the lowest blue line is the reverse flow, the green line is OEM and the blue line is straight through.


    ----
    edit: PS. I checked the OZRS thread with the graphs that have been recently posted, and noticed a couple of things. There is actually another stock Clio 172 there. The difference in power between the modded one and the stock ones are 2.1 kW and 4.3 kW respectively. Hmmmm.
    Last edited by U Turn; 1st February 2006 at 08:26 PM.
    Take the long way home....

    - 306 gti6

  17. #17
    Member pokinacha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by U Turn
    The rear muffler is a re-directed baffle type as you pointed out. But several months ago I did a dyno test with 3 mufflers (OEM, good quality aftermarket straight through, and good quality aftermarket reverse flow). There were 3 conseqecutive runs done, one after the other with the dyno shop changing the mufflers there and then (I had the two aftermarket mufflers fitted with the same ring flange to match the OEM muffler, so it was as an easy bolt up). The results were the OEM peugeot muffler and the aftermarket straight through type both produced exactly the same power at the wheels. The aftermarket reverse flow muffler produced 3 kW less. I was very surprised to find a) that the peugeot OEM muffler put out exactly the same power as a completely unrestrictive straight through type; and b) the well made reverse flow muffler produced a significant 3 kW less. I can't explain why these results were so, but that's how they were

    That is an interesting result. I knew Pug exhaust systems were good but not that good. I guess i should have dyno'd my SV before and after i put on the Hi-Tech system. meh, i'm young and i like to be able to hear that glorious V6 roar. You should hear it go through the Leura Tunnel. mmmmm. Oh yeah and i like to annoy the oldies with my loud exhaust altho it isn't that loud until you plant your foot and get above that 4000rpm mark. I'll Definatly Dyno my Volvo 850R before and after when i buy one.
    I do recomend anyone who wants to put an aftermarket exhaust on their car in Sydney to go and see Lambros at Hi-tech Mufflers. Lovely note and top quality product.

    http://www.hitechmufflers.com.au/

    If you're into Rallying you'll know these guys.


    Tim

  18. #18
    Fellow Frogger! ClioF1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    172

    Default

    Guys be careful when you refer to each car and power outputs.

    The 172 putting out 94.5kw atw is a Phase 1 - usually referred to as a Mk1. They were the original 85 Clios brought into Australia. Slightly different engine setup to the Phase 2. There is a different air cleaner, possibly ECU tune and other minor things.

    Also, yes the 172 Phase 2 with exhaust has nothing else done to it.
    2005 RENAULTsport Clio 182 Cup F1


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •