Subject	At the expense of back pressure...
Posted by	Only1Z on September 11, 2003 at 10:15 PM
	This message has been viewed 31 times.
In Reply To	Re: You will create way too much turbulence posted by tonydanza on September 11, 2003 at 08:30 PM
Message	You will lose low end performance by having a 3" downpipe. I have a physics degree so you're not going to convince me that it's better to have 3" downpipes over 2.5". :-) I know better...
Follow Ups	2.5 or 3.0 test pipes - robriw3 08:08:44 09/11/03 0.5in is the difference - JC_NS 08:28:04 09/11/03 Get the same size as the rest of your exhaust. (n/m) - Kenny 9 psi 08:29:33 09/11/03 2.5 supports huge amounts of power. (n/m) - BigTDogg 08:34:07 09/11/03 read this...greg dupree's take on this - genic 08:38:45 09/11/03 I agree with most everything except exhaust speed. - JC_NS 08:45:49 09/11/03 thats what greg said. 3 slows it down. 2.5 doesnt - genic 09:31:59 09/11/03 I don't agree with the 900 HP thing. - tonydanza 10:42:09 09/11/03 downpipes first "downpipes own, they own everything" - Scotts94z32 09:19:06 09/11/03 2.5 even if you went twin T88s. (n/m) - KàPPá¹ 09:29:57 09/11/03 Bad advice. - Chip(GinnMotorSports) 10:05:19 09/11/03 Sarcasm. Laugh a little. (n/m) - KàPPá¹ 10:10:04 09/11/03 2.5 x 2 > 3.5 x 1 ...*shrug* (n/m) - genic 10:11:37 09/11/03 Just barely though - U ZCREAM 10:16:46 09/11/03 "yea 2.5" is way more than enough for a Z32" - genic 10:23:21 09/11/03 yeah but to say that dual 2.5" is good for a 1799 hp Z - T0M 11:08:10 09/11/03 If he is using TWIN T88s, surely he would have 2 downpipes - Chip(GinnMotorSports) 11:03:48 09/11/03 dont fight with me...i have a mullet :) - genic 11:07:42 09/11/03 I shouls stop giving advice for "hypotheticals" - Chip(GinnMotorSports) 11:14:06 09/11/03 i want twin t88's on the bird (n/m) - genic 11:24:49 09/11/03 It helps if downpipes are larger than the rest o the exhaust (n/m) - tonydanza 10:43:26 09/11/03 Since the air there is a lot hotter. (n/m) - tonydanza 10:45:28 09/11/03 tell samantha hi and stick to your mid-80's day job (n/m) - genic 10:57:40 09/11/03 Do you have any empirical data to support this? - Kenny 9 psi 10:56:56 09/11/03 empirical data --> - genic 11:00:11 09/11/03 Re: empirical data --> - RobWR14 11:17:03 09/11/03 That doesn't make any sense. - tonydanza 11:18:13 09/11/03 You will create way too much turbulence - Only1Z 16:35:05 09/11/03 Re: You will create way too much turbulence - tonydanza 20:30:31 09/11/03 At the expense of back pressure... - Only1Z 22:15:29 09/11/03 Re: At the expense of back pressure... - tonydanza 10:06:23 09/12/03 use search ---this topic has come up a lot as - Slowninja(Delaware) 09:41:21 09/11/03 Stock turbo's 2.5 ( CFM dependant ) - ZBlacktt 11:57:08 09/11/03 I think you had an answer in mind when you asked this Q... - Boris 18:18:44 09/11/03
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.