When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I doubt a 3" would be beneficial to an N/A S2000 as i was udner the impression that the 2.75 exhaust like J's are the best size for an N/A application.
Originally Posted by J'sBlackAP1,Jan 18 2008, 04:55 PM
I doubt a 3" would be beneficial to an N/A S2000 as i was udner the impression that the 2.75 exhaust like J's are the best size for an N/A application.
It made power, if someone in SoCal wants to dyno on their NA car (2004-2005 AP2 with F22C preferred) vs a stock exhaust and has an EMS on the car already, I would be willing to have this independently verified.
Originally Posted by MugenRioS2k,Jan 16 2008, 01:49 PM
never did get clarification on this.
My guess is that it is a 3"OD before and after the split with a reducing piece from 3" to 2.5" to feed each of the mufflers with the mufflers having a 2.5" perforated straight through core.
Asura not to suggest you try or change your design at this point (looks like you have a good system) however did you try a Magnaflow Muffler that is a 3" core.
It has a similar volume and should have similar sound dissipation properties assuming the packing materials are the same.
Using the Magnaflow mufflers would make this a true dual all the way out to the tips.
Depending on how it sounds and your clarification on the 2.5 or 3" mufflers is it possible to get the exhaust with out the mufflers attached so I can supply my own mufflers?
Our proprietary mufflers are quieter than 3" Magnaflow. Magnaflow makes nice mufflers, it was just not the exhaust note we were looking for on this system.
We do incorporate a 3" from the mid-pipe that is split after the center resonator into two mandrel bent 2.5"
Our proprietary mufflers are quieter than 3" Magnaflow. Magnaflow makes nice mufflers, it was just not the exhaust note we were looking for on this system.
We do incorporate a 3" from the mid-pipe that is split after the center resonator into two mandrel bent 2.5"
You can see it here somewhat.
Any benefit from going to a 2.5" split rather then staying 3" all the way?
Maximize exhaust velocity (constant speed) down the entire length from start to finish while mimizing back pressure.
However there is a inversely proportional relationship between induced backpressure due to pipe diameters and exhaust velocity.
Exhaust velocity is what you are looking for when trying to maximize exhaust gas scavenging.
However to get an increase in exhaust velocity (with a fixed amount of mass flow) one must decrease the pipe diameter to get more speed (ignoring the effects of increases mass due to gas cooling as it travels down the pipe) mass flow in must = mass flow out
The ideal goal of an exhaust system is have a high delta pressure and induce exhaust scavenging. When a cylinder fires it sends a pulse of exhaust gas down the piping that has a high pressure and directly following it is a low pressure which then helps to pull the next pressure wave behind it thus the exhaust diameter is picked so it has the greatest delta pressure where you want the most power. If the pipe is too small you will have too much backpressure and lose power and if the pipe is too large you will have low delta pressure and lose power.
spliting to a 2.5" instead of a 3" is one way to maximize this effect.
