Unless you guys are engineers and have spent countless hours on the dyno with different exhaust setups you are just theorizing. I have seen the stock cat-back make over 300WHP on pump gas.
I know keeping exhaust gas velocity up is inportant and all, but is it really an issue with a turbo car thats forcing that much more air in the motor, hence its got that much more going out?
I understand keeping it up helps a NA car with reversion and all... But I dunno, turbo exaust.. go big or go home. *shrug*
__________________
*2003 SRT-4: 12.5 stock turbo- SOLD
*2002 ACR : Stone White 1 of 36
*2001 ACR : Silver Stripper model
*1997 ACR : 14.2s & 99.6mph NA
*1995 ACR : Celebrity Challenge #11
*1995 ACR : Celebrity Challenge #17
*1995 ACR : Celebrity Challenge #18
*1995 NYG : In the works.. SRT-4 eater
*2001 Dakota: Crap hauler 290k miles
how bout everybody keep their opinions to themselves untill we wait for actual Dyno sheets since everybodies is just theorizing! nobody knows exactly why and if sum1 does it won't matter because sum1 who doesn't will make it seem like thier wrong!
I do not need an degree in engineering to know that a 2.5" inch orrifice will not flow as much as a 3". And i know from my own experience that any amount of backpressure after the turbine is detrimental to performance.
Its just common knowlege among turbo enthusiasts that bigger is better when it comes to exhaust.... and if there is to be any change in diameter in the tubing, it should get LARGER as it goes back.
__________________
2004 Neon SRT-4
Mods: #2 Extra Power Combo with Fries (S2 w/toys)
1986 Plymouth Horizon "GLMF"
Mods: Super-50 trim, Spearco, Menegon head.
NEW Best ET: 11.43
NEW MPH: 119.9mph
Unless you guys are engineers and have spent countless hours on the dyno with different exhaust setups you are just theorizing.
Actually, I am! And dyno time and different exhaust setups have nothing to do with it. It's simple physics. Of course, if you want to see what someone with countless hours of dyno time with different exhaust setups has to say, go read Maximum Boost, by Corky Bell. That book got me going years ago, and although it's a bit outdated, it would explain all of this.
Quote: Originally Posted by ReDeFyNe
how bout everybody keep their opinions to themselves untill we wait for actual Dyno sheets since everybodies is just theorizing! nobody knows exactly why and if sum1 does it won't matter because sum1 who doesn't will make it seem like thier wrong!
That was barely understandable, but these aren't opinions. These are proven facts, laws of physics, things that have been proven time after time with turbocharged cars.
Quote: Originally Posted by SRT ACE
The taper will keep the exhaust velocity, not a matter of opening it up to the atmosphere early...
It may move faster after the taper, but it won't flow as much total air. Flowing air makes power. You could run it through a 1" exhaust and it will move pretty quick, but you sure won't make much power.
Quote: Originally Posted by contraption22
I do not need an degree in engineering to know that a 2.5" inch orrifice will not flow as much as a 3". And i know from my own experience that any amount of backpressure after the turbine is detrimental to performance.
Its just common knowlege among turbo enthusiasts that bigger is better when it comes to exhaust.... and if there is to be any change in diameter in the tubing, it should get LARGER as it goes back.
That was barely understandable, but these aren't opinions. These are proven facts, laws of physics, things that have been proven time after time with turbocharged cars.
I understand what your saying and yes I'm thinking the same thing. What makes me doubt myself is the fact that DC is actually making an exhaust like this! I believe they know what they are doing so their has got to be some false in your logic. Only way to know is to see the DYNO test they say will be provided.
I was making the degree comment based on someone saying this exhaust will hold you back. Theorizing is pure BS. Too many factors come into play. The car that made over 300WHP on the stock cat-back actually lost HP going to a 3" exhaust.
I was making the degree comment based on someone saying this exhaust will hold you back. Theorizing is pure BS. Too many factors come into play. The car that made over 300WHP on the stock cat-back actually lost HP going to a 3" exhaust.
How much HP did it drop 3-7 hp?? I'd give that up for 9-11 ft/lb gain of Torque! if not more. I don't think Vendors would work countless hours making exhaust products to lose HP. Besides it's not peak power.....I've heard people say "it's under the curve that really matters!"
__________________
2004 Silver SRT-4
AGP WGA
MBC
Mopar BOV
PSI-FI Motor Mounts
Injen Intake
PIAA 4000k Xtreme White Plus Headlights
Although I prefer constant diameter, I think you guys are reading too much into this. Plenty of turbo cars (including ours) have made solid power with 2.5 inch set ups. And plenty of people have made way more than we planned with 3 inchers too.
So, although the taper doesn't make sense to me (why make things more complicated than you need to?), I like the fact that the resonator is a decent size (hoping it will quiet things down) and I like the tips. There is more bends, but I really think adding 2 gradual bends is negligable for power. Once you ditch the stock cat back, it's a 7-10 WH gain, some more locked up in the O2 and downpipe. With the stock turbo, which 90% of us will probably have, this should be more than adequate.
I just don't want to be too negative about good quality products. I myself, am a little tired of seeing these aluminized, no muffler exhaust for a lot of money and am hoping for something serioulsy competitive.
How much HP did it drop 3-7 hp?? I'd give that up for 9-11 ft/lb gain of Torque! if not more. I don't think Vendors would work countless hours making exhaust products to lose HP. Besides it's not peak power.....I've heard people say "it's under the curve that really matters!"
It also lost power everywhwere. It lost torque as well. The exhaust was a homemade 3" with mandrel bends and no muffler. Basically what I was getting at is just making a LARGER exhaust will not ALWAYS net more HP.
The car that made over 300WHP on the stock cat-back actually lost HP going to a 3" exhaust.
That must have been an absolute fluke. There is no way on God's Green Earth a bigger echaust will hurt a turbo car. It's proven fact. Not a "theory" or a "guess" or anything.
There must have been other issues at play here.... fuel mixture, timing, temperature, tire pressure... 3 hp is only 1% on a 300hp car, which is MUCH smaller than the margin of error for chassis dynos.
If you guys wanna try to re-invent the wheel, be my guest. The truth remains, ANY backpressure after the turbine is detrimental to performance.
Myself and my colleagues have many many timeslips of testing under our belts. I am not new at this.
Last edited by contraption22 : 04-17-2004 at 05:34 PM.
I can't see any benefit to this sucker over the Mopar, unless your sticker count is low
Even flow? Yep, but those bends GOTTA slow it down. On a cold morning, guess which tip of my Mopar smokes more? Both. Don't know why, just is. I see that taper, must have some purpose, I would hope.
What size is that thing? I would have a slight concern over that flange joint being in the way, up in the up and over section in the back. It will be interesting to see some owner dynos. Have they posted any numbers?
__________________
I used to own one of the first SRT-4s sold, bought it new in Feb 2003, sold it Nov 2006 with 75K and Stage 3. Now I drive a 2006 SRT-8 Charger.
AutoForums.com is the premier network of enthusiast-owned
enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
We operate more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share
experiences and opinions as a community.
Linear Mode
