Straight pipes? - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1979-1995 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 01-10-2014, 05:00 AM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
Cblowe13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Region: South Carolina
Posts: 48
Straight pipes?

It's got a four eyed 83 gt and she ain't purty. But pretty dang quick. Has an exhaust leak at the moment. I love the sound of straight pipes. I have a set of shorty headers and was wondering of anyone had this set up? I like the crispy growl. Lol
Cblowe13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-11-2014, 03:03 PM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
TheRoadWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Shelbyville, KY
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 79
I wouldn't, losing back pressure all together loses low end power, and that's where majority of folks get their kicks! The top end gains to be had from straight pipes are too far up in the powerband of a street car to be useful unless you are driving it wide open throttle all day. my 0.2cents
__________________
1995 GT. HCI 3500stall 4.10 gears.
1986 SVO project.
TheRoadWarrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 03:12 PM   #3
slow281
Regular
Supporter
 
sixpac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Cedar Rapids
Region: Nebraska
Posts: 3,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRoadWarrior View Post
I wouldn't, losing back pressure all together loses low end power, and that's where majority of folks get their kicks! The top end gains to be had from straight pipes are too far up in the powerband of a street car to be useful unless you are driving it wide open throttle all day. my 0.2cents
Back pressure is a myth
__________________
Need more Horsepower? Add a sticker. Contact me for vinyl stickers pre-made and custom!
Stick on Horsepower <- Click Here and like my Page!
2001 GT - True Blue
2003 V6 - Zinc Yellow
1990 LX 2.3 - project
sixpac is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-11-2014, 03:33 PM   #4
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixpac View Post

Back pressure is a myth
Back pressure is a myth, but low end power losses can occur- usually not much. I don't fully recall exactly how it works, but not having the consistant flow does influence it. As long as emissions don't matter, shouldn't be an issue.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 03:36 PM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
Butch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Region: New Mexico
Posts: 1,653
4:10's or higher will take care of this "lost low end" ;ΒΆ
__________________
I love speed and Nascar driving,,,
killing gears and dodging traffic,,,
-----NEHP---
{Never Enough HP}
Butch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 05:45 PM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
ALMOST STOCK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Prunedale
Region: California
Posts: 366
BACH PRESSURE... myth or fact


Back pressure is a very misunderstood entity. The assumption is that larger pipes = lower back pressure and smaller ones = more back pressure. That is a simplistic view of things... but it is within that paradigm that the idea of "back pressure for torque, free flow for top end power" emerges.

It is not accurate.

At any given RPM, what is desired is the maximum flow. You want the gases to be moving out of the cylinders, through the exhaust system, and out the tailpipe as efficiently as possible. According to Bernoulli's law, we know that as pressure increases, flow decreases, and as flow increases, pressure decreases. So we want the lowest possible back pressure at any given RPM.

If you want an engine with stump-pulling torque, with peak power at 2000 RPM, you want an exhaust system that provides the least possible back pressure at 2000 RPM. Such an exhaust system is necessarily going to be smaller in diameter than one which is tuned for maximum power at 5000 RPM on an engine of the same displacement. That smaller diameter does not mean it "has" more back pressure than a wider diameter one! Back pressure is not a static measurement of a given exhaust system like tube diameter or wall thickness. It varies with RPM and engine load, and a tube that provides the least back pressure and the most flow at one RPM won't have the least back pressure or flow at other RPMs.

So, the exhaust that gives the stump-pulling torque has LESS back pressure than the wider diameter exhaust at low RPM. In the larger exhaust at low RPM, there is flow stagnation and turbulence, and the result is that there is more resistance to flow (back pressure) than the smaller exhaust... at that RPM.

Rev the engine toward the red line and the back pressure inside the small-diameter tube will increase, and flow will be restricted. However, in the wider tube, the previously stagnant flow will increase and become more laminar, and the back pressure will decrease.

So each of the two exhausts above has the least back pressure within the RPM range for which it is designed. "Back pressure" as a single number simply does not tell which exhaust is most suitable for any given application. It's all about flow... pressure is secondary to that. If you think in terms of matching the exhaust flow to the flow potential to the rest of the components in the engine, the confusion over back pressure becomes irrelevant.

So, go for the exhaust system that has its peak flow potential in the RPM range desired. If your engine is built for torque, you would want a smaller exhaust system; a revver will want a bigger one.

Also, flow stagnation sounds like drone! Many times you will hear about someone who had too wide an exhaust on his car, and it boomed like there was no tomorrow. Put in a narrower, more appropriate exhaust for the RPM (and displacement... talking NA vehicles here, as power adders act like bigger engines in terms of exhaust flow), and it quiets down noticeably. I had that happen with my Ford Ranger when the exhaust guy inexplicably decided to custom build me a 3" cat back on my 2.9 when I had asked for the Dynomax cat back. The noise was horrendous, and the low end was gone. I went back and got what I had actually wanted, and the bottom end was back, and it was near silent-- drone free, with the same type of muffler (Super Turbo).


Read this also.

http://www.veryuseful.com/mustang/te...Scavenging.pdf

Note this bit from the link above --

"However, Wollongong (Australia) mechanic Kevin Davis has done extensive testing of varying backpressure on a number of performance engines. These range from turbocharged Subaru Legacy RS flat fours to full-house traditional pushrod V8s. In not one case has he found any improvement in any engine performance parameter with increased exhaust backpressure."

A lot of folks interpret that result to mean that larger is better. Not so. You want the smallest system you can have that will still handle the peak exhaust flows with minimal back pressure. Going larger than you need to can have detrimental effects on bottom end torque without helping you any up top. Because it can hurt system velocities and interfere with effective scavenging.
ALMOST STOCK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 09:27 PM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
TheRoadWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Shelbyville, KY
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 79
"A lot of folks interpret that result to mean that larger is better. Not so. You want the smallest system you can have that will still handle the peak exhaust flows with minimal back pressure. Going larger than you need to can have detrimental effects on bottom end torque without helping you any up top. Because it can hurt system velocities and interfere with effective scavenging."

This makes sense. Thanks!
__________________
1995 GT. HCI 3500stall 4.10 gears.
1986 SVO project.
TheRoadWarrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 1979-1995 Mustang GT

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Straight pipes? Yes or no? thatmustangguy 2005-2010 Mustang GT 11 05-31-2012 05:40 AM
99-04 Straight pipes GP3GT 1996-2004 Mustang GT 10 01-29-2012 01:54 AM
straight pipes vs x kid_kash_00 1979-1995 Mustang GT 3 12-02-2011 09:26 PM
Straight pipes 96 stang 1996-2004 Mustang GT 23 09-21-2011 12:54 AM

» Like Us On Facebook



12:34 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.