I think its the word "restrictive" I have a problem with. The exhaust
doesn't need to be restrictive in the first place, but have a smaller
diameter to increase velocity of the exhaust passing through it. Yes in turn
a smaller exhaust is more restrictive, but that's not what you are shooting
for. Put 8 mufflers in a row to get the ultimate in restrictedness, and that
won't help your torque too well.
The dual intake runner concept is kind of neat too. Allot of modern
manufactures are trying to get the best of both worlds (low end torque, hi
end HP) with insane valving systems to give the engine the best breathing at
different RPMS. Interesting stuff. Personally I can't wait until they try my
idea of a trombone exhaust system. It gets longer or shorter depending on
rpm to shock wave tune the exhaust system for every possible RPM!... Fun
crazy stuff. "Its too complicated it'll never work."
Toby
who hopes one day he can play "la cucaracha" with a cars exhaust note.
>
>Hey Daniel, If you have an opinion on something, just let us
>know. No need
>to hold back. ;-)
>
>Larry
>
>At this exact moment in time 11/15/00 12:51 PM, "Daniel1312@aol.com"
><Daniel1312@aol.com> made the profound statement:
>
>> I have heard of some rubbish in my time but this is
>incredible - absolute
>> rubbish.
>>
>> In a message dated 15/11/00 04:20:16 GMT Standard Time,
>sfooshee@home.com
>> writes:
>>
>> << The generalization
>> is that you want a more restrictive exhaust and a smaller
>carb/intake for
>> higher
>> velocity at low engine speeds. >>
>
>Larry B. Macy, Ph.D.
>macy@bblmail.psycha.upenn.edu
>System Administrator/Manager
>Neuropsychiatry Section
>Department of Psychiatry
>University of Pennsylvania
>3400 Spruce St. - 1015 Gates
>Philadelphia, PA 19104
>
> Ask a question and you're a fool for three minutes; do not ask a
>question and you're a fool for the rest of your life.
|