Vibrant Performance Sedan Exhaust (Finally)
I wonder why they chose to go with a single 3" over a dual 2.5" or even 2.25". Plus the additional turbulent air from the merging. Maybe the dyno testing will show the extra back pressure helps on N/A applications.
The overall flow is much less.
Dual 2.25" = ~31.79 sq in
Dual 2.5" = ~39.25 sq in
Single 3" = ~28.26 sq in
The overall flow is much less.
Dual 2.25" = ~31.79 sq in
Dual 2.5" = ~39.25 sq in
Single 3" = ~28.26 sq in
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
From: Calgary, Canada / Southampton, UK
Originally Posted by DieselX
Maybe so you don't lose bottom end like I did on my Stillen v2. But then again I also have all the intake mods and test pipes haha.
I was kinda wondering the other day if you guys with TT/SC setups might realise some substantial gains with a one off setup. Sorry to go off topic
Yeah, that resonator on the mid-pipe looks too short. My magnaflow #10436 resonator is 22" in length and has very little drone in a short 300 rpm range. Otherwise the system looks good. It'd be nice if you could post some sound clips as well.
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
From: Toronto, Canada
Originally Posted by bigwilly
Donavan,
I have an X and in the GTA, and definately wouldn't mind a free exhaust
Let me know.
I have an X and in the GTA, and definately wouldn't mind a free exhaust
Let me know.
I wonder why they chose to go with a single 3" over a dual 2.5" or even 2.25". Plus the additional turbulent air from the merging. Maybe the dyno testing will show the extra back pressure helps on N/A applications
Like I said in the earlier email, the dyno testing will be done on Monday afternoon
Thanks everyone for the comments! Once the dyno testing is done and the new pics are taken, it will all be uploaded asap! Thanks again.
Donavan
Last edited by jdm4eva; Dec 8, 2006 at 09:29 AM.
Originally Posted by jdm4eva
Leave me a number where I can reach you and we can go from there
The reason was we wanted to try something a bit different. Most of the other companies have dual 2.5" into a single cannister. We wanted to go with a 3" system to see if we could offer one system to the N/A and the FI guys..
The reason was we wanted to try something a bit different. Most of the other companies have dual 2.5" into a single cannister. We wanted to go with a 3" system to see if we could offer one system to the N/A and the FI guys..
Like I said before, I don't see how this would be a good FI choice due to less flow capability than a dual 2.25 or 2.5 kit? I may be wrong but it seems like between the additional turbulence of merging the two and the lower total area it would not be a good choice for FI.
Time will tell.
While I might agree in part with the size thing, I don't agree with the merging turburlance thing. If merging is really that much of a problem, then wouldn't X and H pipes also pose a "merging" problem? As flow goes past each other there.
Also each manifold is a 3 into 1 merge collector. Even headers do this. If anything the merging would help scavanging, not hurt it.
Also each manifold is a 3 into 1 merge collector. Even headers do this. If anything the merging would help scavanging, not hurt it.
Originally Posted by ttrank
Like I said before, I don't see how this would be a good FI choice due to less flow capability than a dual 2.25 or 2.5 kit? I may be wrong but it seems like between the additional turbulence of merging the two and the lower total area it would not be a good choice for FI.
Time will tell.
Time will tell.