Snopczynski Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 but youve never owned a shearer 2 into 1, so using any info from past experiences with say a motofast or dyno port is irrelevent. lms1977 just switched from the dynoport to the shearer and said there was quite a difference in power and how it performed, maybe he would have gained more by switching twins but his riding style doesnt suit them. I dont think you guys understand that 2 into 1 pipes are bullshit. They don't make more low-mid power than twin low-mid pipes make. So, yeah I understand completely, and I dont have real high expectations about the shearer 2 into 1 pipe. Especially after the conversation I had with Matt shearer about it. My bike is built for low-mid power, so I am interested in what adds torque, hp, and has a good torque backup down low. The Shearer pipe (or any 2 into 1 pipe) in my opinion would choke the shit out of a serval, probably make a worse looking dyno chart than a T5 does already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BANSHEE HP Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I dont think you guys understand that 2 into 1 pipes are bullshit. They don't make more low-mid power than twin low-mid pipes make. So, yeah I understand completely, and I dont have real high expectations about the shearer 2 into 1 pipe. Especially after the conversation I had with Matt shearer about it. My bike is built for low-mid power, so I am interested in what adds torque, hp, and has a good torque backup down low. The Shearer pipe (or any 2 into 1 pipe) in my opinion would choke the shit out of a serval, probably make a worse looking dyno chart than a T5 does already. for somthing that doesnt interest you, you sure like giving an uninformed opinion of a pipe youve never owned or comaperd side by side with another. atleast admit that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotta_goatsfast Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 for somthing that doesnt interest you, you sure like giving an uninformed opinion of a pipe youve never owned or comaperd side by side with another. atleast admit that. I suppose people who run a 2 into 1 pipe really don't understand how two stroke pipes function. In very simple terms, you have a megaphone (the part of the pipe that gets bigger). This creates a low pressure wave right behind the exhaust pulse to aid in pulling exhaust gases out and also to pull fresh air/fuel through the transfers. Unfortunatly, it pulls the fresh mixture through the exhaust port, too. Next is a reverse megaphone (the cone shaped area that reduces in size until it is the diameter of the stinger). This reflects the soundwave toward the cylinder, forcing the fresh mixture back through the exhaust port right before the piston closes the port. Now-unless I'm missing something-the 2 into 1 pipe fails because only half of the air/fuel mixture residing in the exhaust would be reflected back. I say this because the soundwave reflecting from a single expansion chamber gets divided when it hits the "Y" portion of the pipe. So, half of the soundwave energy drives the fresh mixture in and the other half of this energy is either hitting the opposing cylinder's piston or worse yet fighting the exhausted gasses from being expelled from an open exhaust port. On the other hand, go ahead and purchase single pipes. I ride with two banshees that (used to) swear by them (along with single carbs) and I whooped the hell out of them in all types of riding from open fields to MX courses to tight woods with FMF pipes. Since then one has switched back to stock carbs and FMFs and the other dual 28pwks and Pro Circuits with mild porting. Unfortunatly for them I'm building a 421 serval. lol, but I really do think that anyone who has a 2 into 1 pipe should look into a used set of dual pipes aimed at low rpm performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BANSHEE HP Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I suppose people who run a 2 into 1 pipe really don't understand how two stroke pipes function. those people are basically every snowmobile manufacturer, and after market snowmobile pipe company. explain to them how the pipes they've been using for 30 years are not working properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopczynski Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 for somthing that doesnt interest you, you sure like giving an uninformed opinion of a pipe youve never owned or comaperd side by side with another. atleast admit that. 1. How does this not interest me? Did I say that? 2. I have done extensive dyno testing with single pipes, and single carb intakes. The setups were also ridden and tested by my seat of the pants dyno. Then the same bike had twin carbs installed, and then also twin pipes, and then was once again tested both ways. 3. I will admit that I have not tested a shearer pipe, but I will also admit that I dont think it will beat out a set of pro circuits or pt mids hp wise or torque number wise. I would also admit that I think the bikes with the twin pipes will rev up faster than the single would. There is a reason the single pipes never caught on, they suck. The Single shearer was developed for turbo motors, and people are just running them on NA motors for some reason now. The truth hurts! Ask some of the old school members on here, I used to be a huge single pipe and single carb fanatic. Hard numbers, dyno testing, tuning, and research changed my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotta_goatsfast Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I suppose people who run a 2 into 1 pipe really don't understand how two stroke pipes function. those people are basically every snowmobile manufacturer, and after market snowmobile pipe company. explain to them how the pipes they've been using for 30 years are not working properly. I'm not big on snowmobiles, but the last radar run my buddies and I attended all the hottest 2 cycle sleds that launched hardest and were capable of higher top speeds had an exhaust for each cylinder. They also did NOT fit under the stock plastic. Maybe that is why a "bolt on" pipe for trail sleds are one pipe. To me, I need more proof that a certain product is better than the competition. Someone's "butt dyno" doesn't cut it. If that were true, we'd all be street racing with turbonators! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BANSHEE HP Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 1. How does this not interest me? Did I say that? 2. I have done extensive dyno testing with single pipes, and single carb intakes. The setups were also ridden and tested by my seat of the pants dyno. Then the same bike had twin carbs installed, and then also twin pipes, and then was once again tested both ways. 3. I will admit that I have not tested a shearer pipe, but I will also admit that I dont think it will beat out a set of pro circuits or pt mids hp wise or torque number wise. I would also admit that I think the bikes with the twin pipes will rev up faster than the single would. There is a reason the single pipes never caught on, they suck. The Single shearer was developed for turbo motors, and people are just running them on NA motors for some reason now. The truth hurts! it interests you because every thread on a 2 into 1 pipe you're posting, i pass by tons and tons of thread the dont concern me in the slightest bit but you are attracted to these posts time and again. i didnt mean you were interested in the pipe because it would better your bike but that you would interested in telling someone else to ditch the set up and build exactly as you did. this thread started with a guy who changed pipes, noticed a diifference(for the better so he said), posted about his experience, then countless ppl tell him hes going about things all wrong, that the pipe is garbage even though he is pleased with the performance. why does it have to be that way? i like shearers better the cpi for drag racing(and any 2 names could be put in place here),always make more hp on the dyno and better runnin in the dunes. should i post in every thread that mentions cpi pipes in the persons setup and tell them they need such and such pipe these kinda reeds etc etc, that its proven that cpi makes less power and generally just try to make the person feel is if there bike is not up to snuff, that theyve been wasting time and money in what they're doing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopczynski Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 it interests you because every thread on a 2 into 1 pipe you're posting, i pass by tons and tons of thread the dont concern me in the slightest bit but you are attracted to these posts time and again. i didnt mean you were interested in the pipe because it would better your bike but that you would interested in telling someone else to ditch the set up and build exactly as you did. this thread started with a guy who changed pipes, noticed a diifference(for the better so he said), posted about his experience, then countless ppl tell him hes going about things all wrong, that the pipe is garbage even though he is pleased with the performance. why does it have to be that way? i like shearers better the cpi for drag racing(and any 2 names could be put in place here),always make more hp on the dyno and better runnin in the dunes. should i post in every thread that mentions cpi pipes in the persons setup and tell them they need such and such pipe these kinda reeds etc etc, that its proven that cpi makes less power and generally just try to make the person feel is if there bike is not up to snuff, that theyve been wasting time and money in what they're doing? In almost all cases of someone running a single pipe that I notice, it involves someone moving from a stock exhaust, or a fairly unmatched pipe for the persons motor, over to the single pipe. This passes straight over the pipes developed for the persons desired riding style. Example: Average Joe member comes in and says I just switched from FMF Fattys over to the single pipe on my stock bike with a pod for trail riding and it has tons more bottom end. One of the correct first pipe choices in my eyes is the FMF Gnarley for a low-mid pipe. The Fatty is meant as a midrange-top end pipe in the FMF line up, of course it is not suited as a low-mid pipe. However, the FMF Gnarley was developed for this exact instance (low and midrange power emphasis). I do not tell someone to build as exactly I did. I suggest what I would do based on my opinion and hours upon hours of testing and tuning with the components DEVELOPED for the particular power range they are trying to achieve the most emphasis in. I run pro circuits, but you will find me suggesting pt mids, fmf gnarleys, and pro circuits as a low-mid range pipe to try. I run Mikuni TM 28mm carbs, but you will find me suggesting 28-30mm pwk's, lectrons, and TM's for a low-mid range carburetor. Shearer makes a true drag pipe, but the cpi setup is meant as a mid-top range pipe from the testing I have seen and from the info I have acquired on them. So it does not suprise me that you are happier with shearer pipes as a drag racing pipe. I would suggest a cpi in a mid-top pipe choice. I would suggest a Shearer over that pipe for someone looking to drag race. If you have a lot of specific information on something that is backed by lots of testing, tuning, and has been cross analyzed with different setups, on different motors, then yes you should tell people they are wasting their time and money in the direction they are going. Another thing with single pipes on sleds is this. Snowmobiles typically operate in one rpm range and use clutching from the cvt to obtain the desired power delivery, acceleration, and engine braking. A banshee uses an entire rpm range and requires direct clutch lever application, and gearing choice to obtain desired power delivery. That is another reasone (besides fitting the pipe under the hood) that single exhaust choice on a snowmobile is not as critical as it is on a trail ridden banshee. All too often someones opinion on here is based on using 1 or 2 singular products and basing a result off this. Not many people feel the need to test more than 2 options on something because of the obvious time and money requirements to do so. When average Joe member comes in and says " Hey my 2 into 1 pipe works awesome" it is based off of the limited testing they have done. All to often you hear, well my bike hauls ass, or rips, or runs great. Im sure it does based off of the parts those individuals have picked. Had they optimized their choices correctly for what they are doing, they more than likely would have seen even bigger and better results from their setup. I.E. picking a set of low tensions carbon fiber reeds for a trail motor over a set of vforce reeds which are meant for max intake airflow and not max intake velocity (desired for faster acceleration with less peak rpm). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trick2stroke Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) it interests you because every thread on a 2 into 1 pipe you're posting, i pass by tons and tons of thread the dont concern me in the slightest bit but you are attracted to these posts time and again. i didnt mean you were interested in the pipe because it would better your bike but that you would interested in telling someone else to ditch the set up and build exactly as you did. this thread started with a guy who changed pipes, noticed a diifference(for the better so he said), posted about his experience, then countless ppl tell him hes going about things all wrong, that the pipe is garbage even though he is pleased with the performance. why does it have to be that way? i like shearers better the cpi for drag racing(and any 2 names could be put in place here),always make more hp on the dyno and better runnin in the dunes. should i post in every thread that mentions cpi pipes in the persons setup and tell them they need such and such pipe these kinda reeds etc etc, that its proven that cpi makes less power and generally just try to make the person feel is if there bike is not up to snuff, that theyve been wasting time and money in what they're doing? He literally, in the post your quoting, says it interests him and you are still trying to argue otherwise? Snop has a very good point, most people give their opinion based on a very small testing group of product then go so far as to claim whichever out performed the other is the best out there and all of a sudden swear by it. That is why there is so much misinformation out there. I've been around the forums for a while; reading more than posting obviously, I see this all the time, I also see the more experienced members post their opinions, and testing history on set ups along with facts about the physics of a 2 cycle engine and still are argued or lashed out against as if the less experienced who originated the thread asking "which is better" or some other question is some how edified after the fact. It can sometimes be hard to differentiate between someone's opinion and fact but usually the person with the facts posts are better put together. Edited February 2, 2011 by Trick2stroke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcalsv02 Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Why hasn't anyone brought up Paul turners? Very good pipe all around. They don't over rev your motor like top end pipes, and they have snappy bottom end. You can lug them down at the bottom and still have good mid and top. Not two into one, but who cares when the performance is there. Not sure what the big deal is about single pipes anyways. Ask cascade what pipes they reccomend for bottom end. I'll bet their answer starts with a p, and ends with an aul turner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopczynski Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 Why hasn't anyone brought up Paul turners? Very good pipe all around. They don't over rev your motor like top end pipes, and they have snappy bottom end. You can lug them down at the bottom and still have good mid and top. Not two into one, but who cares when the performance is there. Not sure what the big deal is about single pipes anyways. Ask cascade what pipes they reccomend for bottom end. I'll bet their answer starts with a p, and ends with an aul turner. Cascade has also openly admitted to me that they have never even tried pro circuits. So not sure how they come to the conclusion that the pt mids are the best pipe if they haven't tested all the pipes available for low-mid power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcalsv02 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 I never mentioned anything about pt's being the best pipes, or that cascade said they were the best pipes. I simply asked why hasn't anyone brought them up since they are a great bottom end pipe/ mid pipe and explained benefits. Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Even if cascade said they haven't used pro circuits, I bet they have their reasons why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopczynski Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 I never mentioned anything about pt's being the best pipes, or that cascade said they were the best pipes. I simply asked why hasn't anyone brought them up since they are a great bottom end pipe/ mid pipe and explained benefits. Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Even if cascade said they haven't used pro circuits, I bet they have their reasons why. Cascade had told me they found through testing that pt mids worked the best. I actually do a lot of business with them, so I am not talking trash. I am just saying, that there are pipes out there that even they have not tested. I dont really like the pt mids from all the testing I have done on them. In some cases, I have seen as much as 5 more hp across the board on the dyno with the pro circuits over the pt mids on the same motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcalsv02 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 But what about tq numbers? That's what we are wanting right? I know the pt's are a great pipe for bottom end without sacrificing too much top end. Guess what pipes I run lol. Maybe I'm a little biased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopczynski Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 But what about tq numbers? That's what we are wanting right? I know the pt's are a great pipe for bottom end without sacrificing too much top end. Guess what pipes I run lol. Maybe I'm a little biased. Torque was increased as well. It wasn't as drastic as the HP increrase, but it was more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.