Available options to silence Peco (Cybox) exhaust

[HJ2]

5 years later...

I am about to order the PNM additional silencer and will post to let you know how it is.
Geoff, any last pointers perhaps, as you are the only one using it in the same configuration as I do?
(Straight downpipe, pre-cat removed, 2.25" PECO exhaust with one silencer currently)

[Rusty Wishbone]

I'm going to order one of these too. The noise is too annoying. But I'm not going to have time to fit it before I do a track day. Has anyone failed the noise test at a track day with the single silencer Peco exhaust?

The rear mounting strap on mine has broken too, so I'm hoping that PNM can sell me a replacement. Has anyone else had to buy one?

[HJ2]

I'm going to order one of these too. The noise is too annoying. But I'm not going to have time to fit it before I do a track day. Has anyone failed the noise test at a track day with the single silencer Peco exhaust?

The rear mounting strap on mine has broken too, so I'm hoping that PNM can sell me a replacement. Has anyone else had to buy one?

Mine is still like new.
How are the other rubbers? If they are old, the stress on the rear hanger increases…

The additional damper is in Belgium now, allmost there!

[Rusty Wishbone]

The rubbers look OK - a few cracks, but nothing significant.

One other things. The exhaust touches the steering rack, so that you get some exhaust vibration through the steering wheel. I can't see any obvious way to adjust it.

[Rusty Wishbone]

I installed the extra silencer box this weekend and am very happy with the result. The exhaust is still pretty noisy, but it takes enough noise away that it is much less tiresome. The chance of failing the noise test at this week’s track day is much reduced. Replacing the rubber exhaust hangers now means that the exhaust no longer rubs on the steering rack. PNM also sold me a new hanger for the rear box, so the exhaust pipe now exits the centre of the gap in the bumper.

It was a bit of a risk buying all this stuff because I didn’t actually know if it was a Peco exhaust on my car. Happily, it all fitted.

[HJ2]

Great news!
All problems solves then

[Rusty Wishbone]

Great news!
All problems solves then

Fingers crossed!

[Rusty Wishbone]

It passed the noise test at Brands today, but not by that much: 88dB at 4800rpm

[HJ2]

Close call, congratulations!

[GeoffSmith]

It passed the noise test at Brands today, but not by that much: 88dB at 4800rpm

Oh bugger!
https://www.confused.com/car-insurance/ ... -crackdown

[Rusty Wishbone]

Oh bugger!
https://www.confused.com/car-insurance/ ... -crackdown

I'm sure that the nice policeman will understand that this rule is for ordinary cars. like BMWs and Hyundais, not for Lotuses. Besides which, applying a rule like this to a Lotus would interfere with the creative integrity of the car, like breaking the arms off Michelangelo's statue of David to stop the pigeons roosting on them.

[muley]

...trouble is that the automated revenue gathering tool has a threshold of 80db.


Damn and blast

[dapinky]

...trouble is that the automated revenue gathering tool has a threshold of 80db.


Damn and blast

As it is a general principle of UK Law that legislation cannot be applied historically (otherwise we'd all have to have ridiculously low emissions and airbags everywhere!), I see no problem.

At the time our cars were made they passed the 'Type Approval' of the day, so they cannot (or will not) apply today's standards to older vehicles.

As all such cameras are linked to the DVLA database, it won't take a very spectacular piece of software to sort out if a particular car breaks a limit or not. Okay, the trigger may be at 80db, but it doesn't follow that if triggered, a fine will automatically be issued,

[MPx]

And how would that apply to afternarket exhausts? Although by no means anti-social, my 2.25 Piper is louder than the factory 2inch systsem....

[dapinky]

With a quick bit of help from Mr Google (and knowing roughly where to look!) I can link to the relevant legislation - here.

Basically, for our cars (reg after April 1990) there is a limit of 89db....... before that, it merely has to comply with whatever Directive was in force at that time (since 1983)......

[Rusty Wishbone]

With a quick bit of help from Mr Google (and knowing roughly where to look!) I can link to the relevant legislation - here.

Basically, for our cars (reg after April 1990) there is a limit of 89db....... before that, it merely has to comply with whatever Directive was in force at that time (since 1983)......

Having 'scored' 88dB at Brands Hatch, I clearly have nothing to worry about!

[dapinky]

I don't have a clue about the 'cameras' that they use for these things, but I would expect that it will need a clear line of 'sight' to the target car with no other ambient noise about..... I also can't see how they can possibly say that a reading of 90db (or whatever) is attributable to a single car in a group.

What about if your stereo is on loud?

How can they say that a test is accurate if the test is done during a gear change where the result will change? Will it need a 'constant' reading over a set period of time, or a momentary snapshot? What sort of tolerance will there be?

Just too many variables to consider.

I would suggest that the target of this legislation is those people with ridiculous systems, not those of us with a 'standard(ish)' system.

[MPx]

I agree Dave but can only hope that the legislation is well written to that effect. I think the law tends to be a blunt weapon with unintended consequences which can lead to absurdity like coffee cups emblazoned with "contents may be hot", a bag of Peanuts with "May contain nuts", a bus lane camera issuing fines for cars going around an accident blockage in the adjoining car lane, etc. A friendly Rozzer would be one thing but a mechanical intervention is just a non-interpretive revenue gatherer. Hopefully the thresholds will be set with the primary purpose in mind.

[dapinky]

Mike, I find myself having to agree with your sentiments, and much as I'd love to think otherwise, I strongly suspect that this is just another revenue generator which will churn out paperwork in the interests of saving the environment.

I'm pretty sure that your analogies to other automated enforcement will be followed, and it will be for the suspect to show that they should not have to pay the fine, rather than the 'correct' way of them saying that you should.

One thing I notice is that (at the moment) these devices are situated in ULEZ zones where I can't drive anyway, so I'm alright

[GeoffSmith]

I'm looking forward to borrowing an electric car with a good stereo. Or this baby…