Welcome to the SR20 Community Forum - The Dash.
Register
SR20 forum logo

Thread: Question on 3" setups

+ Reply To Thread
Posts: 41-50 of 82
2008-11-29 07:54:05
#41
That question is retardedly vague to be answered accurately. If you want to know, why not do it for yourself?

EVERY engine responds to mods differently, there are almost infinite factors that affect the power, even down to the temperature and humidity during the test. In fact, anything less then a 5-10hp difference could be accounted for in dyno error.

On the question of the exhaust valves, running without an exhaust manifold can crack valves. This is because, if ran long enough, you can heat up the valves a decent amount, if you then shut off the motor, cool air can reach the valves, and possibly crack them due to rapid temperature change. The susceptibility comes down to port and head design, as well as valve placement.
2008-11-29 08:04:24
#42
The Power gains from the Exhaust size will be more related to camshaft design than anything else. Engines with more duration and overlap will be more susceptible to reversion from back pressure
2008-11-29 17:12:59
#43
Again, the question has been diverted by someone who has no answer. Gains were to be had on stock cams with basic bolt-ons. So , the question is what are the gains of a 3 inch over the traditional 2.5 or 60 mm catback? I know 3 inch makes the most power, but how much? I'm not trying to justify keeping a smaller exhausts, but want the information out there besides " go 3inch, it makes most power".
2008-11-29 18:10:29
#44
Originally Posted by se-riousclassic
Again, the question has been diverted by someone who has no answer. Gains were to be had on stock cams with basic bolt-ons. So , the question is what are the gains of a 3 inch over the traditional 2.5 or 60 mm catback? I know 3 inch makes the most power, but how much? I'm not trying to justify keeping a smaller exhausts, but want the information out there besides " go 3inch, it makes most power".


Originally Posted by Doctor


When you guys say you run a 3" exhaust, does that mean it's only 3" from behind the cat and backwards? or is the cat also 3"? or does the 3" piping start further forward?

So should I have the exhaust fabricated in 2.5" up to (and including?) the middle silencer, and then go 3" from there back? or 3" from behind the motor all the way back?



To be fair; These were Ronnie's 2 basic questions. You can go read dyno charts anywhere on the internet.
2011-07-21 15:07:34
#45
Originally Posted by BenFenner
Somewhere along the line the information related to header tech (smaller pipes are better for low end power all else being equal) got improperly placed on the entire exhaust. This may have gained popularity in the V8 world as back-to-back dyno sessions with and without an exhaust after the headers can show loss of low end power without an exhaust, or with a larger exhaust connected. This is due to the fact that most V8s (non flat plane V8s) see low end gains with an "X" pipe coupled with a smallish exhaust as scavenging effects take place all the way until you finally completely merge the exhaust. This does not translate at all to flat plane crank (all inline cylinder engines and some rare "V" configuration engines) header/exhaust design but that didn't stop the information from being carried over.
This of course is my own theory, and there's probably more to it.


More on the "backpressure is good" myth.

Originally Posted by http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showpost.php?p=22384105&postcount=29
As with a lot of mis-information, the root of this goes back to the dark ages of carburettors. The carbs were tuned (jetted) to the intensity and duration of the vacuum pulses through the venturi. If you change the dynamics of the flow through the engine system, you change the shape of the vacuum pulses. So a bigger exhaust would run worse because the jetting was no longer correct. Thus, "back pressure is good and necessary".
2011-07-21 15:27:53
#46
Originally Posted by SGTSR20
I'm getting mine this week and I can't wait! I currently choking the VE with 60MM.


I wouldn't say you are choking the setup. I am running a 2.5" SSAC and a 60mm Greddy catback/stockcams/popcharger/ss/prothanes/lightweight flywheel vs n1 cammed/b15 trans/pop charger(basically same setup minus cams and trans. Welll, we did a second gear roll and i got the jump and stayed ahead even in fourth gear. Either I have a freak motor or 60mm isnt choking it.
2011-07-21 16:25:52
#47
Its documented by the Honda guys. Go search honda-tech I've seen a few stock block h22s making low 200s test 2.5 vs 3 in and there are very clear gains.
2011-07-21 16:30:37
#48
Maybe I should have mentioned when I bumped this thread that it is 2.5 years old. =/
I was merely trying to keep historical theories (read: crap) I've posted up to date.
2011-07-21 16:38:48
#49
I'm about to go with a 3" system, my car at the moment is running a 2.5" mandrel bent system using 2 Magnaflow resonators to keep it quiet.

My header is a 2.5" SSAC and I will keep one of my current 2.5" resonators, then I'll go 3"

Since the diameter will be increasing I will be ok right? I just don't wanna ditch the 2 resonators and have a significantly louder system.

I will be going 3" just after the O2 sensor is bolted (shown in picture)





And this will be the tip, 75mm HKS Hi Power

2011-07-21 17:14:42
#50
not much point keeping the 2.5 reso, 3" all the way
+ Reply To Thread
  • [Type to search users.]
  • Quick Reply
    Thread Information
    There are currently ? users browsing this thread. (? members & ? guests)
    StubUserName

    Back to top