Subject	first off, my post title was "food for thought" not "etched
Posted by	T0M on September 11, 2003 at 11:58 PM
	This message has been viewed 43 times.
In Reply To	You're missing all the flaws in this test posted by SeedyROM on September 11, 2003 at 11:32 PM
Message	in stone" I found it interesting the way they purposely transitioned to a larger size(3.5") past the x-pipe when everyone here says thats a no-no. You can find variables in everything. I was merely posting an interesting article I read. sorry. I know of the differences between x-pipe and h-pipe. I also know that reduction of bends is more important than x-pipes and h-pipes(hiper vs b$B), whos primary function is for lowend response and sound reduction anyway. as for the differences in NA and turbo exhaust systems, I think that setup would benefit a turbo car just as well if not better considering the lack of back pressure. I stated before there are a ton of things that sacrifice low end for high end. how would this be any different. I dont know why you want to attack sense of logic or reasoning just because you happen to disagree with me. sorry I messed up your whole day.
Follow Ups	Food for thought about 2.5" and 3" exhaust pipe sizing - T0M 22:23:48 09/11/03 It is NOT peak power, it is a smooth power band. Cmon people - SeedyROM 22:29:27 09/11/03 Oh and I don't mean to sound like a dick :) - SeedyROM 22:41:57 09/11/03 my traps were fast... 2.5" vs 3" proven wrong.. ;) (n/m) - Scotts94z32 05:04:58 09/12/03 they showed a 12 hp increase in a 300ish hp NA over - T0M 22:53:26 09/11/03 You're missing all the flaws in this test - SeedyROM 23:32:53 09/11/03 first off, my post title was "food for thought" not "etched - T0M 23:58:26 09/11/03 Understood...maybe if you had read my other post - SeedyROM 00:09:36 09/12/03 I didnt call you a dick. nor did I insult you once. (n/m) - T0M 00:13:33 09/12/03 hahah seedy you dick *GRIN* (n/m) - Silvrhand (pittsburgh) 08:04:18 09/12/03 test is more or less flawed. - zads 04:36:11 09/12/03 The 2.5 inch was w/ an H pipe. 3" was w/ X pipe. - Kenny 9 psi 23:21:02 09/11/03 Glad someone read the article. (n/m) - SeedyROM 23:33:34 09/11/03 the point was.... it didn't harm performance but in fact - T0M 23:38:37 09/11/03 Not to be the devil's advocate but two things: - SeedyROM 23:45:01 09/11/03 True not very scientific, but the 1/2" larger than 3" - T0M 00:08:43 09/12/03 Yeah, adding an X-pipe didn't hurt performance either. - SeedyROM 00:14:26 09/12/03 x-pipes are for low-to-midrange torque. - T0M 00:23:30 09/12/03 Intarwebb != real life. (n/m) - Kenny 9 psi 00:15:35 09/12/03 kinda funny - JunomeanGF 00:24:14 09/12/03 No doubt. I'll let someone else play with this. - SeedyROM 00:35:52 09/12/03 I walked my girl out mid-post so the window was open - T0M 00:43:12 09/12/03 Not trying to sound like a dick btw :) - T0M 00:45:25 09/12/03
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.