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

[Arith2]

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.

[SteelGreyM]

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

[digger]

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

[Arith2]

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.

[digger]

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.

[Arith2]

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.

[Obioban]

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

[digger]

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

[Tbonem3]

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)

[0-60motorsports]

Great review and information. I am planning on getting the resonated twin pipe part if someone buys my single resonated part locally.

[R60BBA]

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?

🙊

[Mike RT4]

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 .

[digger]

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 ?

[Tbonem3]

Coming from the euro setup I had.

[digger]

Coming from the euro setup I had.

I’m sure there are some gains, not sure I see the relevance to recent discussions though