[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: Factory exh performance?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org (Non Receipt Notification Requested) (IPM Return Requested)
- Subject: Re: Factory exh performance?
- From: email@example.com
- Date: 10 May 1995 12:32:20 -0400
- Autoforwarded: FALSE
- Importance: normal
- P1-Content-Type: P2
- P1-Message-Id: US*ATTMAIL*SMCLAN;X400ATT May 10 12:32:20 1995
- P1-Recipient: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Priority: normal
- Sender: email@example.com
- Ua-Content-Id: 203212100595
- X400-Trace: US*ATTMAIL*SMCLANarrival 10 May 1995 12:32:20 -0400action Relayed
Perhaps I was not clear; I was trying to contrast Scott's position that a
sleeved cat flows enough better Vs an *empty* cat that the sleeving is
worth the effort with Scott's statement that replacing the stock mufflers
with straight pipes provides no better flow Vs with the stock mufflers.
If sleeving the cat to provide equal cross-sectional area and minimum
turbulence and therefore maximum flow and minumum backpressure, then I'd
expect similar of greater results from eliminating the even greater
relative change in diamater and turbulent flow that would result from the
much larger difference in cross-sectional area that exist between the
multiple pipe-muffler-pipe interfaces.
I question why maintaining the cross-sectional area before, within and
after the empty cat offers substantial benefits, but maintaining the
cross-sectional area before, within and after the multiple mufflers and
eliminating any restrictions that might be presented by multiple mufflers
by replacing the mufflers with straight pipes offers no benefit.....
Sure, flow testing would be the real way to go here, or even better,
direct 1/4 mile time comparisons.