Thanks: 0
Likes: 0
Konig pipe stingers
Here's a question I bet some of you don't know the answer to:
You will notice on Wayne's pictures showing Konig Outboards that some of the pipe stingers were straight, and some were curved downwards. Anyone want to take a guess?
Most of us older (Ahem) Konig guys should know, let's see what kind of guesses we get.
Lift ?
As the boats got bigger and faster, we thought we could keep the nose down by creating more lift at the transom.
So some copied what Hubbell had done much earlier with his 'B' Wildcat stacks and pointed them downwards.
PS; -spoke to Ernie Wilson at the Gravenhurst, ON, ACBS show last week.He could answer this.
Also saw this Schutze CRH 'laydown' with a FB Konig on it that looked very familiar.
well when myVB72149 Konig came in from Scott Smith in 72 it had the turned down stingers on it, asked him why and he said it had to do with the UIM rules overseas, odd that several other new V series engines of that year all had the same stingersOriginally Posted by BRIAN HENDRICK
As the boats got bigger and faster, we thought we could keep the nose down by creating more lift at the transom.
So some copied what Hubbell had done much earlier with his 'B' Wildcat stacks and pointed them downwards.
PS; -spoke to Ernie Wilson at the Gravenhurst, ON, ACBS show last week.
Also saw this Schutze CRH 'laydown' with a FB Konig on it that looked very familiar.
Correct, it was a UIM rule originally...............But what did the bent stinger do that the straight one did not?
Cool!Also saw this Schutze CRH 'laydown' with a FB Konig on it that looked very familiar.
About the spitters on the Konigs, if water injection was being used, the aerosol of water, oil, fuel would be sprayed over anyone behind the boat. Pointing the spitters down would at least partially eliminate that.
I supposed it was about noise suppression, aiming it into the spray . . . . Additional effects of the curved pipe, complete with wrinkles an the inside of the bend, would be to raise back-pressure, increase piston crown temperature a little, and effect the reflected waves in the same manner as a smaller diameter straight pipe. Okay, tech gurus, did I get that about right?
Considering UIM's tight noise rules, that would be a good reason for pointing the exit tubes downward. I think they (UIM) at one time required something like no more than 85db (or 90, maybe) on a drive-by test at max speed in both directions.
I've never seen one of the subject engines, but I'm guessing that any wrinkles are the consequences of a simple mandrel bend. I would be surprised if the engine performance was enhanced by the wrinkles and/or bends.
I wasn't a UIM member in those days so I can't say conclusively about the DB's because that is certainly something they might do, but it's not what I was told at the time that was the reason for the bend. So let's hear some other ideas about why the downward bend. UIM rules are correct though.
A side note to Frank. Good thought, but the first time Dieter ever experimented with water injection was in 1976.
ADD: The cans in 1966 WERE the result of noise and they were the interim between open megaphones and sliding pipes. It was during the time of the cans that Harry Pasturczak came out with his ZAK STAKS.
I believe the reason why UIM moved to require expansion chamber stingers to be in a downward arching position was to lessen the impact of the engine/pipe/stinger assembly in racing accidents. In other words, to soften the intensity of the impact of the force of the stinger during racing contact in collisions.
thanks,
Paul A Christner
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks