Triumphrat

maxed66 · 05-21-2006

Has anyone ever modified the stock cans?

How much does the stock cans weigh? Is there really a significant weight loss with slip-ons?

I love the look of the stock cans, short and stout. Most slip-ons resemble Jap bike add ons, which is ok, but as for style I just can't stand turn-down spouts. To each their own. TORs would be the key but at a cost.

Has anyone ever tried to modify the stock cans? I have considered buying an old set and then experimenting. You know, drill out the rivits, take apart and redesign the guts, then bolt together.

It seems to me if the cans are the basis of the restriction, then a larger inlet and louvered tube would be the key. Just a future thought. Anyone ever tried this???

BUCKET · 05-21-2006

.If you lived in Australia there is a bloke where i live that specializes in that.He can actually make you brand new cans that are better qaulity than new.He did mine in a couple of stages,first stage was still to quite so we took them off and he worked his magic again and got them just right.Just a little bit quieter than the Triumph race can i had on my 98 Daytona.He left the baffle in when you look down the hole but drilled it out(took pipes apart first) and made a bigger exit pipe and flared the back plate to suit.All looks very standard.Got it remapped but probably didn't have to.Look for anyone that works with sheet metal in your country and they might be able to help you. :hammer:

maxed66 · 05-22-2006

Cool! I did this once with a cheap frankenstien exhuast I had on an old GPZ 1100. I was modifyig ports and altering the louvered pass through pipe until I got the power near the "no baffle" system and the somewhat quiet system. Poverty is the root of ingenuity!!!!

J

Martin_R · 05-22-2006

Quote:

On 2006-05-22 10:40, maxed66 wrote:
Cool! I did this once with a cheap frankenstien exhuast I had on an old GPZ 1100. I was modifyig ports and altering the louvered pass through pipe until I got the power near the "no baffle" system and the somewhat quiet system. Poverty is the root of ingenuity!!!!

maxed66, in the stock Triumph cans the gases do a U shaped detour (search this forum for a diagram) and the TORs are just your regular straight through mufflers.

So if you were going to modify the stockers to TOR status you have two options.

El Cheapo: just take a bigass drill and drill as many holes to the baffle that sits in the middle of the stock cans as you can -> you will end up with a conventional straight through muffler.

El Elegant: disassemble the stockers, remove all the innards, pack your average holed muffler pipe with muffler wool and weld it in instead of the stock guts.

On option two you would have a stock exterior with the TOR innards. Which might be a good thing, depending on where you live. In some of the more tightassed countries having the TORs with the stamped NOT FOR ROAD USE might get you into trouble at the blue-man-checkpoints.

cheapbastard · 05-22-2006

If you're looking at weight saving issues though, the aftermarket really does offer a huge weight savings!!! I would guess I lost at least 15lbs going from my stock setup to the Eagle 3into1 exhaust I have. And it has no turn down spout. Personally, I think it looks pretty good, and all for under $400!!!

[ This message was edited by: cheapbastard on 2006-05-22 12:25 ]

maxed66 · 05-22-2006

Just my personal opinion, but I absolutely hate most ricer exhausts, stock or aftermarket. Underseat is soooo eurotrash, but it at least hides the ***** things. I moved out here to le Swiss and decided I need a 2 wheeler, bad! But looking at the Euro-sold jap bikes really discusted me from their style. Then I walked into a Triumph/KTM dealer and rode both. I will have to say, the S3 had pipes that looked, well, TOUGH! Soooo much better than the previous styles.

So, I just cannot leave that look, because it was the first thing that I saw that made me fall for the bike. BTW, road both the S3 and the SuperDuke. The KTM is a really cool bike, but I am not tall enough for it and it is not so good around town. The S3, on the other hand, was PERFECT! So, they have my down payment, and I pick her up in 2 days.

Yeah, the stock exhaust looks great (to me) but they are a bit quiet. I don't have the need to be louder than everyone else (had the Harley for 6 months..... POS!!!), I just like to hear the throaty sound of a performance engine.

I have found and read the posts about modifying the stockers. Ouch! A metal cat within!!! I might have to go with the TORS, or I did see some Shark oval CF cans that look good (Ok, that is soooooo 2k!!!). I am in no hurry. The noise laws here are extremely stiff....

Jerry

cheapbastard · 05-22-2006

well maxed66, I can tell you from experience that the TOR's give awesome results! I had those before my Eagle. They sound awesome and do add some performance with the remap, I just wanted something a little different looking. You can't go wrong with the TOR's though.

Geof3 · 05-22-2006

Yea, as CB said, the TOR's are the easy, out of the box deal... You can modify the stack cans, but you don't get much more out of it than going with the TORS, as they are a straight through pipe... They are quite a bit lighter. To date, my Zard exhaust is the lightest of the bunch, weighing in at about 12 pounds for the full system (it is a true full system), headers and all...

Legman · 05-22-2006

A good reaqson for going with the Tors instead of modifying the stockers is that if you do get monstered by the sound police and have to quieten the bike down you have the stockers intact to return to.

Avi8or · 05-23-2006

To be quite honest I did not find the TORS all that much noisier than the stock cans. And I dislike the cast bits on the stock headers. Guess ZARD figures in my future.