Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Mustang Forums
2011-2014 Mustangs
Exhaust
Long tube headers, which Primary size is 'best'?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CPRsm" data-source="post: 14790951" data-attributes="member: 81705"><p>Some I agree with, some I don't. That's not to say I know which is best here for N/A. </p><p></p><p>I don't think you can compare turbo headers, only because they are pressurized. You can make anything flow with enough pressure. That's why log manifolds "work."</p><p></p><p>But I don't think you would want to limit header size by exhaust size or volume. Makes sense at first glance, but there is no account for drop in EGT and there for less need for volume. By the time it gets from head to exhuast it has dropped enough temp the volume has dropped. We've seen it said our 5in down pipe is overkill especially when routing back to dual 3in exhuast, when dual 3.5 is closer to 5in in area. We have the benefit of not needing the right size for scavenging, but going into 5in exhuast drastically cools the exhaust, and from there doesn't need 3.5 all the way out the back. This is why we can clear 1000rwhp thru full exhuast and no cutouts.</p><p></p><p>I do think 1 7/8 is going to be pretty damn hard to get the volume high enough for the exhuast pulse to seal and create scavenge. It's still a small engine in the end.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CPRsm, post: 14790951, member: 81705"] Some I agree with, some I don't. That's not to say I know which is best here for N/A. I don't think you can compare turbo headers, only because they are pressurized. You can make anything flow with enough pressure. That's why log manifolds "work." But I don't think you would want to limit header size by exhaust size or volume. Makes sense at first glance, but there is no account for drop in EGT and there for less need for volume. By the time it gets from head to exhuast it has dropped enough temp the volume has dropped. We've seen it said our 5in down pipe is overkill especially when routing back to dual 3in exhuast, when dual 3.5 is closer to 5in in area. We have the benefit of not needing the right size for scavenging, but going into 5in exhuast drastically cools the exhaust, and from there doesn't need 3.5 all the way out the back. This is why we can clear 1000rwhp thru full exhuast and no cutouts. I do think 1 7/8 is going to be pretty damn hard to get the volume high enough for the exhuast pulse to seal and create scavenge. It's still a small engine in the end. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Mustang Forums
2011-2014 Mustangs
Exhaust
Long tube headers, which Primary size is 'best'?
Top