[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: CGT 2.3L EM
> >BTW, while looking for the OXS, I noticed that it is in front of the
> >cat, is heated, and that the manifold/head pipe is a 5-2-1
> >configuration. The Bentley does'nt show this arrangement, just
> >5-1 for the coupe, and 5-3-1 for the quattro. Could this be a
> >contributing factor in the NG motor's 130bhp vs 110 for the KX?
> So I am not crazy! ;)
> I asked about this a while back, but no-one else confirmed that the 2.3L
> Coupe GT used a different EM/downpipe than the typical 5-1 on the N/A
> engines. I did not look at the EM closely enough, but it appeared to be
> a 5-1 unit, with this 2-tube downpipe bolted onto it. Next time I visit
> my brother, I will look to see if the EM is actually 5-2.
> I am sure this EM/downpipe helps the 2.3L breath a bit better, which in
> turn helps it make the 130hp that it produces. It seems that the 2.3L 80/90
> did not use this 2-tube downpipe, according to reports I heard last time.
> I don't know if the 4000q 5-3-1 EM/downpipe flows better, but I am curious
> about it.
This also sounds like the downpipe on the Canadian non Oxygen
sensored and non catalyst 5 cyl engines 1982-84.
They had a nice dual downpipe as well. I think the reason for
Audi to go to single downpipe was to avoid use of 3 wire (heated)
oxygen sensor. Otherwise it does not make sense to have a larger
2.22 motor with inferior exhaust.
1982 Coupe TURBO (473,150 km)
1984 4000s quattro (soon to be a rally car)
1986 4000s quattro (317,000 km) with four Nokia 10's
1982 Coupe (154,000) parts car
CEO of exam lastminute allniter rollthedice inc.