Backpressure and cutout "theory"
#31
Originally Posted by parish8
together with the track times i have seen from more than one car it is enough for me to wonder if there is anything to the "to little back presure and lose low end" theory. what is low end anyways?
"what is low end", indeed.
#32
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (28)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,277
Likes: 1
From: Ham Lake, MN
Originally Posted by An11secRanger
If you're referring to back pressure, I already answered that. "Velocity".
However, even if we didn't care about performance, we'd still need exhaust manifolds. Without manifolds, the exhaust valves would bend on a very regular basis.
Headers help keep the gas hot (which makes the gas flow better) while providing a better path for the gas to flow through than manifolds. Stainless steel allows better flow than mild steel or cast iron. Coated SS headers flow best because they are SS and (because they are coated) they keep in the most heat. All this promotes VELOCITY. <~~KEY Imaginge that. If the tube is too large, the velocity will not be optimum. If the tube is too small, it creates back pressure which, by definition, is a restriction (bad), slowing the exit of the gas, forcing the engine to work more (that's a loss of power).
But hey, I don't know anything about this stuff. I've never built headers and I'm not building a custom turbo set-up any time soon, either. WAIT! That's not right.
No matter how you look at it, your theory is probably correct. Like it or not!

For the rest of the crap you posted what is the need to be a *****? I have never claimed to know exactly what will happen, if you know something I don't why not help us all out and share the knowledge... isn't that what this whole forum(PT.net) is for???
#33
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (28)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,277
Likes: 1
From: Ham Lake, MN
Originally Posted by jmproductions
Well we don't really except to keep cool air away from the extremely hot exhaust valves which could be damaged by being cooled off too quickly coming into contact with outside air. If you notice top fuel dragsters use just small lengths of pipe.
#34
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (28)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,277
Likes: 1
From: Ham Lake, MN
Originally Posted by parish8
i dont feel like the one graph i have is enough to conclude much of anything but together with the track times i have seen from more than one car it is enough for me to wonder if there is anything to the "to little back presure and lose low end" theory. what is low end anyways?
#35
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (28)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,277
Likes: 1
From: Ham Lake, MN
Here's one of them;
https://www.performancetrucks.net/fo...ferrerid=44477
MPH improves... 60' suffers.
I can't seem to find the rest, maybe it was on one of the other forums... I'll see if I can dig up the others I've seen. I'm not saying it's conclusive just one the ones I was talking about.
https://www.performancetrucks.net/fo...ferrerid=44477
MPH improves... 60' suffers.
I can't seem to find the rest, maybe it was on one of the other forums... I'll see if I can dig up the others I've seen. I'm not saying it's conclusive just one the ones I was talking about.
#37
Before that night (month ago), I tried it back to back on two
all-motor passes. One thing different was my exhaust system
at the time. It consisted of a gutted 2.5'' y, w/ a 3'' muffler.
The link which gave reference to this thread was done on back
to back passes with a 50 shot of nitrous and true dual, 2.5''
exhaust. (app. 330rwhp)
Anyways, on the back-back all-motor passes, I gained 1mph
and 1 tenth on the SAME 60'. It was 13.9 @ 95 vs. 13.8 @ 96
(app. 270rwhp all-motor).
I think a high flowing exhaust system (LTs, Duals, no cats) in
an appropriate diameter tubing has A LOT of flow potential. If
you mat up a shitty exhaust system and compare times to dual
cut-outs, then the ET/MPH will most definetly drop.
I personally think it would take an unusual setup to gain ET by
a closed exhaust system at lower RPM and gain on the top end
(MPH) due to you opening the cut-outs. Maybe a 230/190 reverse
split cam or somethin.
all-motor passes. One thing different was my exhaust system
at the time. It consisted of a gutted 2.5'' y, w/ a 3'' muffler.
The link which gave reference to this thread was done on back
to back passes with a 50 shot of nitrous and true dual, 2.5''
exhaust. (app. 330rwhp)
Anyways, on the back-back all-motor passes, I gained 1mph
and 1 tenth on the SAME 60'. It was 13.9 @ 95 vs. 13.8 @ 96
(app. 270rwhp all-motor).
I think a high flowing exhaust system (LTs, Duals, no cats) in
an appropriate diameter tubing has A LOT of flow potential. If
you mat up a shitty exhaust system and compare times to dual
cut-outs, then the ET/MPH will most definetly drop.
I personally think it would take an unusual setup to gain ET by
a closed exhaust system at lower RPM and gain on the top end
(MPH) due to you opening the cut-outs. Maybe a 230/190 reverse
split cam or somethin.
#38
Originally Posted by parish8
"to little back presure and lose low end" theory
#39
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (28)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,277
Likes: 1
From: Ham Lake, MN
Originally Posted by jmproductions
I think the "back pressure" theory is just a matter of people observing something and making assumptions about what is causing it.
Either way my exhaust will be completed soon and I will post results of all tests. Because after all I am just trying to get down the track faster in anyway that'll help. And I was hoping for input from you all that can explain any of your own results to the rest of us.
#40
Originally Posted by Z06 DREAMING
I don't see why you didn't explain your point like this in the first place istead of putting up something you were thinking. This post can add to the thread and that is what I wanted in the first place... go see it, I asked for experiences.
By just saying I think you have a good theory and thanking some for mentioning the facts about back pressure, you think I'm a *****, anyway.
Not to mention, my experiences do not include cut-outs. Due to this, I didn't feel the need to add them.
Originally Posted by Z06 DREAMING
For the rest of the crap you posted what is the need to be a *****?
Originally Posted by Z06 DREAMING
I know this, my statement was aimed to be sarcastic so Ranger could elaborate on his statement.
Anyway, I wasn't being a *****, so much ... I was laughing, afterall.
But, I do know a thing or two about this stuff and it's difficult to appreciate being told my post is worthless by the guy who freely admits he doesn't know that much about it.
Plus, my "information" had already been mentioned to some degree.
By the way, why didn't you just ask me to elaborate, rather than saying, if I can't show proof, my post is worthless?
Hell, I don't have proof. I did all this research years ago. And I never was one to worry about showing proof about what I know. I just raced.
Originally Posted by Z06 DREAMING
if you know something I don't why not help us all out and share the knowledge... isn't that what this whole forum(PT.net) is for???
If all my posts from the old board were still there (I can't find'em), maybe I would have felt a bit more free to "post away." But, they're not.
Oh, and



