ever tried the n1 muffler ebay special!

[supertouringmike]

Hey, I've got Flowmaster 40 on my Zetec is deep sounding and will rasp if you are revving it up in neutral.......................Little bitty Mustang Gt sound!

 

[DemonSVT]

edit: another question, anyone ever tried twin loop mufflers?

If it is not a "TRUE" straight through muffler then it sucks. no "iffs", "ands", "or", "buts" 'nuff said!

After that fact the sound takes precedent.

 

[2000SE]

If it is not a "TRUE" straight through muffler then it sucks. no "iffs", "ands", "or", "buts" 'nuff said!

After that fact the sound takes precedent.

Yes, twin loops cut down on noise a lot. This is also referred to as lame.

 

[DemonSVT]

Yes, twin loops cut down on noise a lot. This is also referred to as lame.

Twin loop means double flow reversion. Straight through = more power. It also equals more noise. There is a fine line between loud and max power. I prefer power myself. Others will prefer quiet or sound quality. It is a personal choice and there is no "perfect" answer except the one you chose...

 

[Harrry]

Twin loop means double flow reversion. Straight through = more power. It also equals more noise. There is a fine line between loud and max power. I prefer power myself. Others will prefer quiet or sound quality. It is a personal choice and there is no "perfect" answer except the one you chose...

Bah...i have the perfect setup. Im changing my true duals around again.:laugh:

Now that i found the cfm flow needed and volume from the mufflers i found.
It will be ready to rock and roll the way i like it. Nice and quiet and still flowing enough to make 200-400hp. Which is plenty for when i put in my 3L. No i won't be making 400hp but the mufflers will flow the cfm allowing me to produce that much before they become a restriction.

Anything with more cfms isn't needed. Balance is key here..... from the intake down to the exhaust.

Now i think about it i'm going to check out your site demon, i wanted to find the 2.5L svt head flow rate compared to the 3L.

 

[S2Knott]

stop gloating and just sell me your tru duals.... NOW!

 

[kw8z3boi]

That kw8ziboi guy had an n1. It was kinda of throaty with little rasp.

Yay atlease someone remember me haha j/k. Yeah I know what you talking about. The N1 exhaust you're talking about is a generic muffler. Is a "N1 Style" which is an immitation. It sound alright, doesn't sound ricey at all, JUST DON'T STRAIGH PIPE THE RESONATOR if you're going to get the ebay muffler. Well here's a video with my $150 Blitz Muffler and Replace resonator with Magnaflow. http://youtube.com/watch?v=ysY1MQqedvo

I know I know my car was ricey :shrug:

 

[2000SE]

Yay atlease someone remember me haha j/k. Yeah I know what you talking about. The N1 exhaust you're talking about is a generic muffler. Is a "N1 Style" which is an immitation. It sound alright, doesn't sound ricey at all, JUST DON'T STRAIGH PIPE THE RESONATOR if you're going to get the ebay muffler. Well here's a video with my $150 Blitz Muffler and Replace resonator with Magnaflow. http://youtube.com/watch?v=ysY1MQqedvo

I know I know my car was ricey :shrug:

Was there any sound dampening in that muffler? My setup sounds similar but i only have a single muffler and no resonator.

 

[Savior]

...The N1 exhaust you're talking about is a generic muffler. Is a "N1 Style" which is an immitation. It sound alright, doesn't sound ricey at all, JUST DON'T STRAIGHT PIPE THE RESONATOR if you're going to get the ebay muffler....

When you say "DON'T STRAIGHT PIPE THE RESONATOR", does that mean I should use a resonator with baffles with this N1 muffler as opposed to the much-beloved MagnaFlow res? Or would a MagnaFlow resonator be alright to use?

 

[2000SE]

When you say "DON'T STRAIGHT PIPE THE RESONATOR", does that mean I should use a resonator with baffles with this N1 muffler as opposed to the much-beloved MagnaFlow res? Or would a MagnaFlow resonator be alright to use?

He's saying don't run a straight pipe there, meaning just tubing instead of a resonator.

I personally run no resonator and a muffler and like it.

 

[SicSE]

No i won't be making 400hp but the mufflers will flow the cfm allowing me to produce that much before they become a restriction.

So what is your idea of a "restriction" Harry? Would you consider something that increases backpressure by 2psi to be a restriction?

 

[Harrry]

So what is your idea of a "restriction" Harry? Would you consider something that increases backpressure by 2psi to be a restriction?

Once the available flow exceeds about 2.2 cfm per hp, the gains possible by increasing muffler capacity drop to less than 1 percent.

Seeing i don't measure ( i don't know who) in psi, i say no based on MY EXHAUST. Yet exhausts are measured in cfms, and are done so by pulse waves of 1/4, 1/2 3/4 1 etc.

What car would you be referring too?

 

[SicSE]

Once the available flow exceeds about 2.2 cfm per hp, the gains possible by increasing muffler capacity drop to less than 1 percent.

Interesting... how did you come up with those numbers?

What car would you be referring too?

None in particular. I was just curious of your idea of a restriction. You seem to focus on CFM more than I do. I focus more on back pressure.

 

[Harrry]

Interesting... how did you come up with those numbers?.

Those are just a rule of thumb. Per example that if you make 200hp at the motor you times that by 2.2 which means at 200hp you need atleast 440cfm flow+.

Its a universal rule of thumb! This has been posted and explained on many documented exhaust theories. I have all my notes and such if you want me to copy and send them :shrug:

None in particular. I was just curious of your idea of a restriction. You seem to focus on CFM more than I do. I focus more on back pressure.

Cfm is read more effecticly then back pressure. Back pressure really can't be measured because of the compressing air that is held back inside the cyl during the vacume...Logic would assume back pressure but it's inaccurate. Because when have you ever heard peope saying my car has a 57% back pressure? Yet when you buy muffler parts it states flows 1000cfm's

For example, lets say you have a stock se Stock tubing would be 2.25 all the way throughout the exhaust. Placing a 2.5 exahust on it is not the answer...the restiction of the exahust is not the 2.25. Because 2.25 will flow 800 cfms, so why do people order larger tubing???? Because Muffler companies sell back to the people restrictive mufflers to compensate the difference. Its kinda like a marketing gimmic. But people have the idea bigger is always better. That is why they have applications specified for certain cars that have STOCK EXHAUSTS. Or universal mufflers have really goo cfm flow because they know people will just replace the muffler and not the tubing.

That is why i always have kept my svt exhaust and just replaced the headers y-pipe and resoator and kept the stock tubing size and stock mufflers.


In the end, its having the appropriate amount of CFM flow that would balance the exhaust. For the sake of convo(pressure inside the tube) velocity keeping the cylinders filled.

You made a great comparison of the intake flow and compared it to the exhaust flow. Same thing, you just don't need to emptying the cyl soo fast.


in middle of class.....will clean up the rest in a bit if spelled wrong etc

 

[SicSE]

Its a universal rule of thumb! This has been posted and explained on many documented exhaust theories. I have all my notes and such if you want me to copy and send them

Yeah, I'd like to read them over if you have them handy. I've never bought into the numbers game with exhaust flow, but if your notes are good enough, today might be the day.

Cfm is read more effecticly then back pressure.

On a flow bench perhaps.

Back pressure really can't be measured because of the compressing air that is held back inside the cyl during the vacume...Logic would assume back pressure but it's inaccurate. Because when have you ever heard peope saying my car has a 57% back pressure? Yet when you buy muffler parts it states flows 1000cfm's

I have to say I disagree with most of what you said here. A backpressure gauge, IMO, is the most effective way of measuring how a given exhaust system works on a given platform. Tapping in and taking readings in different parts of the system gives you real-world numbers. Flow bench numbers only go so far.

 

[Harrry]

I have to say I disagree with most of what you said here. A backpressure gauge, IMO, is the most effective way of measuring how a given exhaust system works on a given platform. Tapping in and taking readings in different parts of the system gives you real-world numbers. Flow bench numbers only go so far.

You have to understand cars exhaust is set for pulse waves the pressure does not increase because the exhaust has an exit. Each component reflects differntly during cold or hot. Fiber matireal cat material etc. It won't be continuously accurate between readings. This isn't a supercharger.. These waves is critical per rpm and length of pipe. They must be able to reflect off one another at the rpm you are targeting. Reading the cfm flow betwen lengths and out of every part is what we are trying to maximize without interference.

Saying man i cut off my pipe after the cat and now i LOST BACK PRESSURE.

By opening the cut out, you have changed the tuning of the exhaust for the RPM range you are using. Think about a pipe organ. Wonder why each note on the pipe organ has a DIFFERENT LENGTH of pipe?


So how is this back pressure read? How do you measure backpressure to give me power? So how much back pressure does my exhaust have to have for me too satisfy my 5krpm range?

Will a 30 inch pipe have more back presure than a 15 inch?

 

[SicSE]

You have to understand cars exhaust is set for pulse waves the pressure does not increase because the exhaust has an exit.

Pulsing or not, the basics are still the same - flow through a tube. Take two similar engines with simliar power outputs, and put two similar exhaust systems on them. Both exhaust systems have the same size piping and components "rated" at 300CFM. Now, say one system has only 2psi of backpressure at 3K RPM, while the other has 6psi. Since the back pressure is only going to go up as the RPM's raise, which do you think would make more power? The one with less backpressure, obviously.

Old school beliefs say that back pressure is good, or even needed in certain circumstances. Back pressure was associated with better cylinder scavenging and torque numbers at lower RPM's. However, it wasn't the backpressure, but the tubing that caused the back pressure that was providing the good numbers down low. Today we know that by stepping piping and using anti-reversion techniques, we can get the cylinder scavenging affects that smaller piping provides, while using larger pipe to allow the engine to breathe better in the higher RPM's.

So how is this back pressure read?

With a backpressure gauge tapped into a given spot of an exhaust system, at a user-desired RPM, preferably under load.

How do you measure backpressure to give me power?

Less backpressure = more power potential

So how much back pressure does my exhaust have to have for me too satisfy my 5krpm range?

Zero. Back pressure is a negative side affect of muffling the exhaust note and the distance exhaust gases have to travel to exit the system.

Will a 30 inch pipe have more back presure than a 15 inch?

That depends on the efficiency of the 15" pipe at a given RPM.

 

[1FASTDAD]

Zero. Back pressure is a negative side affect of muffling the exhaust note and the distance exhaust gases have to travel to exit the system.

are you trying to say that no back pressure is a good thing?

 

[Harrry]

Pulsing or not, the basics are still the same - flow through a tube. Take two similar engines with simliar power outputs, and put two similar exhaust systems on them. Both exhaust systems have the same size piping and components "rated" at 300CFM. Now, say one system has only 2psi of backpressure at 3K RPM, while the other has 6psi. Since the back pressure is only going to go up as the RPM's raise, which do you think would make more power? The one with less backpressure, obviously..

Well yeah at upper rpms, and infact you might be losing power in the upper rpms due to poor wave length deflection.

Old school beliefs say that back pressure is good, or even needed in certain circumstances. Back pressure was associated with better cylinder scavenging and torque numbers at lower RPM's. However, it wasn't the backpressure, but the tubing that caused the back pressure that was providing the good numbers down low. Today we know that by stepping piping and using anti-reversion techniques, we can get the cylinder scavenging affects that smaller piping provides, while using larger pipe to allow the engine to breathe better in the higher RPM's..

Larger pipe isn't always needed. Please look back at my prior post.

Less backpressure = more power potential.

False, all your doing is moving your hp numbers higher at a certain rpm. Because of wave tunning lengths.

Zero. Back pressure is a negative side affect of muffling the exhaust note and the distance exhaust gases have to travel to exit the system..

There is no back pressure, the ultimate goal is to make the tune waves affect one another. We do that by mating up proper length tubing with size to get the best benefits at certain rpms.

That depends on the efficiency of the 15" pipe at a given RPM.

I'm sorry my firend but that is false, the pipe length has no effect on back pressure. It will flow the same.

 

[SicSE]

are you trying to say that no back pressure is a good thing?

Absolutely.

False, all your doing is moving your hp numbers higher at a certain rpm. Because of wave tunning lengths.

Your statement is true about torque and it's curve. I disagree, when talking power.

There is no back pressure

Then what is it that a back pressure gauge measures?

the pipe length has no effect on back pressure. It will flow the same.

But you just said there IS no back pressure? Seriously though, you're talking CFM and for CFM, I concur. However, concerning back pressure, I disagree, as this is what my experiences have shown me. So, short of a video test with readings proving me wrong, I'm sticking to my guns.