Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Review: SuperSprint Twin tube (2x 2.5") Section 2

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • digger
    replied
    Originally posted by Tbonem3 View Post
    IDK Digger, I'd say getting SS v1 parts (increased dia) made way more power than going catless did (stock H in sect 2 for both)
    Ssv1 vs stock headers ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike RT4
    replied
    Originally posted by R60BBA View Post

    Fancy seeing you on here haha.

    Thinking of swapping out your SS X pipe for this more mooted centre section?

    🙊
    I've been on here ages .

    It's already on order . I must be getting old, as like Ian, I find the non-resonated centre section too loud now, so the fact that he says it mutes the sound will be a huge bonus to me as well as maybe allowing more access to tracks that I can't currently get on because of the noise .

    Leave a comment:


  • R60BBA
    replied
    Originally posted by Mike RT4 View Post

    You could say that about any upgrade - unless you have carried out NO mods to your car, your comment is a moot point .
    Fancy seeing you on here haha.

    Thinking of swapping out your SS X pipe for this more mooted centre section?

    🙊

    Leave a comment:


  • 0-60motorsports
    replied
    Great review and information. I am planning on getting the resonated twin pipe part if someone buys my single resonated part locally.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tbonem3
    replied
    IDK Digger, I'd say getting SS v1 parts (increased dia) made way more power than going catless did (stock H in sect 2 for both)

    Leave a comment:


  • digger
    replied
    some calculations using https://vannik.co.za/EngMod4TDetails.htm

    dual 2.5" with H-vs-dual 2.5" with X-vs-Y single 3"-vs Ysingle 3.5"

    All are within about a hp everywhere

    for a street car use the smallest size that gets the job done. Its not the pipe size you need to worry about its the "other" components

    Last edited by digger; 10-03-2020, 09:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Obioban
    replied
    Exactly. The chart isn’t a hard limit— it’s where the system becomes a restriction.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arith2
    replied
    Originally posted by digger View Post

    I’ve seen 290rwhp through single 2.5” on a 6-2-1 system so 3” easily works. You don’t need a massive pipe size for a single exhaust it’s constant flow all the pulses use the same pipe it just needs to be designed and built properly with the bits flowing well ( cats, muller, resonator) it’s bits that hurt power not the pipe size.
    At top end is where it really matters. I don't think a car making 1 hp more than the chart will cap out. I do believe a car can exceed 371 crank horsepower on a stock exhaust. The backpressure will just cut some horsepower top end whereas a larger pipe wouldn't. That 290whp car could probably get another 5 or 10whp in theory. I think if someone is really trying to squeeze efficiency it matters but it's not absolutely needed.

    Leave a comment:


  • digger
    replied
    Originally posted by Arith2 View Post

    Nothing you're saying adds any value to this thread. It's also objectively false. 371 crank horsepower is not hard, just a little expensive. There are plenty on here that have more than that. If you have data that contradicts the chart, share it.
    I’ve seen 290rwhp through single 2.5” on a 6-2-1 system so 3” easily works. You don’t need a massive pipe size for a single exhaust it’s constant flow all the pulses use the same pipe it just needs to be designed and built properly with the bits flowing well ( cats, muller, resonator) it’s bits that hurt power not the pipe size.
    Last edited by digger; 10-02-2020, 08:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arith2
    replied
    Originally posted by digger View Post

    i highly doubt that if youre staying NA
    Nothing you're saying adds any value to this thread. It's also objectively false. 371 crank horsepower is not hard, just a little expensive. There are plenty on here that have more than that. If you have data that contradicts the chart, share it.

    Leave a comment:


  • digger
    replied
    Originally posted by Arith2 View Post

    I think of the future. If I do any more mods, I'll be at the limit of the stock exhaust size.
    i highly doubt that if youre staying NA

    Leave a comment:


  • SteelGreyM
    replied
    Originally posted by Obioban View Post

    I think when people watch the video of my car with that setup, most of what they're actually hearing is CSL airbox.
    Not from the back. That’s pure exhaust

    Leave a comment:


  • Arith2
    replied
    Originally posted by digger View Post

    Sounds a bit big tbh
    I think of the future. If I do any more mods, I'll be at the limit of the stock exhaust size.

    Leave a comment:


  • digger
    replied
    Originally posted by Arith2 View Post

    I'll just get the 3.5" pipe then. Probably weighs less and has better flow. My car will only ever breath atmospheric pressure.
    Sounds a bit big tbh

    Leave a comment:


  • Obioban
    replied
    Originally posted by SteelGreyM View Post

    The only e46 m3 exhaust note I’ve ever liked was your JVT/scorza setup.

    I think a similar thing would be achievable with ssv1 + scorza (and ar25 of course).

    But yes, I realized it’s the engine that sounds good, not the exhaust.
    I think when people watch the video of my car with that setup, most of what they're actually hearing is CSL airbox.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X