...

Go Back   Lateral-g Forums > Technical Discussions > Engine
User Name
Password



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-15-2013, 10:51 AM
FETorino's Avatar
FETorino FETorino is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southern CA
Posts: 2,723
Thanks: 59
Thanked 63 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Hot gas needs more room than cool gas. Go 3" to the mufflers for sure. The restriction from the muffler back created by the 2.5" pipe won't be that bad. Of course if your 3" muffler's cfm rating (if it exists) is less that 750 each then that is your cork anyway.

From one exhaust article I read and saved a while back.

Once the available flow exceeds about 2.2 cfm per hp, the gains possible by increasing muffler capacity drop to less than 1 percent.


Knowing that 2.2 cfm per open-pipe hp means zero loss from backpressure allows us to determine how much muffler flow your engine needs. Just make a reasonable estimate of its open exhaust power potential and multiply by 2.2. For instance, a V-8 making 700 horsepower on open exhaust will require 700 x 2.2 = 1540 cfm.

A section of straight pipe the length of a typical muffler, rated at the same test pressure as a carb (10.5 inches of mercury), flows about 115 cfm per square inch. Given this flow rating, we will see about 560 cfm from a 2.5-inch pipe. Houston we have a problem.



Read more: http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...#ixzz2eyrgMmkk

__________________
Rob in SoCal

https://lateral-g.net/forums/show...10645&page=171

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-15-2013, 12:30 PM
Ron Sutton's Avatar
Ron Sutton Ron Sutton is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 2,422
Thanks: 45
Thanked 35 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FETorino View Post
Hot gas needs more room than cool gas. Go 3" to the mufflers for sure. The restriction from the muffler back created by the 2.5" pipe won't be that bad. Of course if your 3" muffler's cfm rating (if it exists) is less that 750 each then that is your cork anyway.

From one exhaust article I read and saved a while back.

Once the available flow exceeds about 2.2 cfm per hp, the gains possible by increasing muffler capacity drop to less than 1 percent.


Knowing that 2.2 cfm per open-pipe hp means zero loss from backpressure allows us to determine how much muffler flow your engine needs. Just make a reasonable estimate of its open exhaust power potential and multiply by 2.2. For instance, a V-8 making 700 horsepower on open exhaust will require 700 x 2.2 = 1540 cfm.

A section of straight pipe the length of a typical muffler, rated at the same test pressure as a carb (10.5 inches of mercury), flows about 115 cfm per square inch. Given this flow rating, we will see about 560 cfm from a 2.5-inch pipe. Houston we have a problem.



Read more: http://www.popularhotrodding.com/eng...#ixzz2eyrgMmkk

This is correct is you're looking for optimum power. If you're not looking for optimum power, what is the purpose of the question?
__________________
Ron Sutton Race Technology
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-15-2013, 12:39 PM
Vegas69's Avatar
Vegas69 Vegas69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,692
Thanks: 87
Thanked 215 Times in 120 Posts
Default

Drivability, dumps get old from a noise and dust perspective on a street car.

I take my previous statement back, 3" over the axle with modifications to your trunk or under with black powder coating is my pick with this hp level.
__________________
Todd
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-15-2013, 01:29 PM
DaleTx's Avatar
DaleTx DaleTx is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 486
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

X2 ^^^

My car has a 670HP 427” and makes peak power at 6,900 rpm. I ran 3" exhaust with 2.5" tail pipes at first, and then switched to 3" tail pipes. After having tried both set ups… I would recommend 3” all the way for sure. I didn’t think the 2.5” would restrict it that much but when I made the switch… there was a noticeable difference up in the higher rpm range. The engine responded well with the larger diameter tail pipes. I don’t have numbers to back this up… just seat of the pants feel. Also, the 3” tail pipes sound better and have a deeper tone than the 2.5".
__________________
"If you wait, all that happens is you get older"
Mario Andretti

69 Camaro-Nutter Racing Engines/427CI LS2 sleeved/LS7 CNC ported heads/Custom cam/T&D 1.8 rockers/Manley crank/Manley H-beam rods/Weisco pistons/NRC Pro Series dry sump/Kooks/NA,92 octane,11.5:1- 672HP @ 6,900RPM, 566TQ @ 5,500RPM
Build Thread- http://ls1tech.com/forums/generation...ine-build.html
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-15-2013, 03:24 PM
Flash68's Avatar
Flash68 Flash68 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NorCal
Posts: 9,180
Thanks: 58
Thanked 158 Times in 104 Posts
Default

No way I'd run a 2.5 inch exhaust on that engine with that power. I don't need science to tell me that.
__________________
2004 NASA AIX Mustang LS2 #14
1964 Lincoln Continental
2014 4 tap Keezer
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-15-2013, 04:08 PM
FETorino's Avatar
FETorino FETorino is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southern CA
Posts: 2,723
Thanks: 59
Thanked 63 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash68 View Post
No way I'd run a 2.5 inch exhaust on that engine with that power. I don't need science to tell me that.
But you're just more in tune with your emotional side than the rest of us. You just feel things.

The rest of us have to rely on hard facts.

__________________
Rob in SoCal

https://lateral-g.net/forums/show...10645&page=171

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-15-2013, 04:27 PM
GregWeld's Avatar
GregWeld GregWeld is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scottsdale, AriDzona
Posts: 20,741
Thanks: 504
Thanked 1,080 Times in 388 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash68 View Post
No way I'd run a 2.5 inch exhaust on that engine with that power. I don't need science to tell me that.


Agree....
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-15-2013, 04:25 PM
GregWeld's Avatar
GregWeld GregWeld is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scottsdale, AriDzona
Posts: 20,741
Thanks: 504
Thanked 1,080 Times in 388 Posts
Default

Gee ---- In the old days if we wanted max hp we uncorked the headers!


Seriously - how often do you need "max" hp on the street....
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-15-2013, 04:30 PM
Flash68's Avatar
Flash68 Flash68 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NorCal
Posts: 9,180
Thanks: 58
Thanked 158 Times in 104 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregWeld View Post
Gee ---- In the old days if we wanted max hp we uncorked the headers!

Sure, but then Rob will link some article that shows you that uncorked isn't always best for max power. You know, cold hard facts and stuff.

__________________
2004 NASA AIX Mustang LS2 #14
1964 Lincoln Continental
2014 4 tap Keezer
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-15-2013, 04:45 PM
FETorino's Avatar
FETorino FETorino is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southern CA
Posts: 2,723
Thanks: 59
Thanked 63 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash68 View Post
Sure, but then Rob will link some article that shows you that uncorked isn't always best for max power. You know, cold hard facts and stuff.


Next time I'll just post "I feel a 3" pipe will really wake that motor up" since that seems to be what you want.



__________________
Rob in SoCal

https://lateral-g.net/forums/show...10645&page=171

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net