Technical Design Differences between cans?

Power, noise, mapping, price, and the ever popular : "More power or just noise?"
Post Reply
Doerbird02
500cc
500cc
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:25 pm
Country: USA
City: Monterey, CA
Year: 2012
Colour: White
Model: SMT
Location: Monterey, CA

Technical Design Differences between cans?

Post by Doerbird02 » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:28 pm

My question is: Are exhaust slip on cans (not the whole system) designed specifically for the bike they are intended to go on? I ask that question because I'm both cheap, and technically curious. The cheap side of me has a hardly used set of Two Brothers slip ons from a Honda ST1300 that would be a fairly easy fit to my SMT. The technical side of me, says that is probably a really bad idea. 1. Two Brother's does not sell an exhaust system for the SMT, so that shoudl be the first red flag. 2. Technically speaking, all exhaust systems are simply a physics problem of getting air to pass with the minimum back pressure necessary for the engine, creating more hp/torque/noise... so if they are all basically the same, does a manufacturer simply create one set of internals and change the exterior can to fit a wide range of bikes? 3. The issue with the physics problem is that each engine would have a system that has different exhaust gas speeds and back pressure needs, so that would indicate that for best results, the exhaust manufacturer should have tested the various parameters to come up with their design. 4. I have been unable to find specific details on any manufacturer's site that says exactlly what they do to the internals of the can, other than it will increase hp, blah, blah...

Thoughts?
Rotweiler, Leo Vince cans, SAS and Canister removed, 2nd Flies Removed, Kev's #20 map, forks heavier springs and custom valving from KTM World, random orange anodized bits for looks
Image

Sweetlou
500cc
500cc
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:50 am
Country: USA
City: Islip
Year: 2013
Colour: Black & Orange
Model: SMT

Re: Technical Design Differences between cans?

Post by Sweetlou » Sun Oct 19, 2014 10:30 pm

The can themselves are not made for a specific bike but rather the mount is customized. Internally pipes are basically the same.

Doerbird02
500cc
500cc
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:25 pm
Country: USA
City: Monterey, CA
Year: 2012
Colour: White
Model: SMT
Location: Monterey, CA

Re: Technical Design Differences between cans?

Post by Doerbird02 » Tue Oct 21, 2014 1:52 pm

Well, got an answer form Two Brothers directly. There is no difference between exhust slip ons, regardless of bike. Model differences are simply construction, as in Aluminum, Titanium, or Carbon Fiber. The internals are the same for all of them, so there is no performance gain, other than weight and asthetics. The only bike model specific difference is the bit of pipe that connects the can to the rest of the exhaust system, which is different for each bike. Luckily, the SMT has a straight bit of pipe, so it doesn't require a special section of pipe to connect the can and have it line up correctly. I'll give it a go when I get a chance and see how it works. Might have just saved some $ :o Now, I can afford some other bits and have a reason to play with Tune ECU...

Question for those in the know, when do you know that you should repack the exhaust? These cans haven't been used in a few years and before that they came off my old bike, which was used, so I have no idea when how many miles are on them. Thanks
Rotweiler, Leo Vince cans, SAS and Canister removed, 2nd Flies Removed, Kev's #20 map, forks heavier springs and custom valving from KTM World, random orange anodized bits for looks
Image

budgesrsv
990cc
990cc
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:18 pm
Country: uk
City: manchester
Year: 2011
Colour: Black

Re: Technical Design Differences between cans?

Post by budgesrsv » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:35 pm

Easiest way to tell if they need re-packing is by the amount of heat that's transmitted to the outer surface of the cans. The wadding starts to burn away at the engine end first and works its way up the can. If you cant put your hand on them after a run then they probably need re-packing.

User avatar
kevxtx
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4695
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 11:40 am
Country: Australia
City: Brisbane
Year: 2014

Re: Technical Design Differences between cans?

Post by kevxtx » Fri Oct 24, 2014 9:43 am

Packing normally burns out at the rear end of the can so feel the temp across the can it should be even, if it is much hotter at the rear of the can on the outer skin then it may need repacking. Have a look at my Leovince cans:

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5414&p=22722&hilit=repack#p22722

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5414&hilit=repack&start=30

budgesrsv
990cc
990cc
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:18 pm
Country: uk
City: manchester
Year: 2011
Colour: Black

Re: Technical Design Differences between cans?

Post by budgesrsv » Fri Oct 24, 2014 6:05 pm

Maybe running baffles makes them go at the rear end ? All the ones I've packed have gone at the end that joins to the mid pipe ! Mind you I rarely fit baffles :lol:

Kernow
500cc
500cc
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 10:29 am
Country: Uk
City: LIskeard
Year: 2010

Re: Technical Design Differences between cans?

Post by Kernow » Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:45 pm

Are you staying the honda cans have the same 3 bolt flange as a ktm ? That could make for some bargain pipes for some .

Post Reply