Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Is 3" cat back big enough for 240-250rwkw?

I hae a 3.5" SS Kakimoto catback but now with the highflow a little noisier and around 2-2500rpm if loaded a little up a hill it gets a little droney.

Was thinking 3" mild steel might be quieter. It has 2 mufflers on it.

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

When I first got my car was told it was 3" from the cat back into a jasma muffler and compliance cat and it was a tad loud but not booming loud. Sounded just right.

Last weekend I installed JJR split front/dump pipe and Xforce high flow cat and also noticed my exhaust is 3.5" from the cat back into some kinda resonator then into the jasma muffler and now its sounds good. Not loud at all and not quite. Id prob be a lil under the DB limit and I love it.

I have the exact same system as you and I can tell you that its way over the db limit. I got epa'd for it and had to fit a standard system for the test, which still came in at 90.4 db for a 90 db limit. The standard system was a lot quieter than the one you have.

  • 4 weeks later...

Anyone know if a silencer will get rid of a bit of drone.

My kakimoto 3.5" is a little droney when you back off or go up a hill pulling 2500rpm.

Thinking of making a silencer to add for longer drives. Will this reduce the drone at all?

It has got a little louder since the hi flow turbo.

It has a big centre muffler..and rear

I'm running the same exhaust on the R32 gts-t. It is indeed very quiet and full stainless steel. The exhaust is 3.5".

For what it's worth I run an HKS Silent Hi-Power system and was very surprised at how quiet it was. The 'Silent' in the name isn't just a marketing ploy. It seems they are rated at 98dB but I would be very surprised if it's louder than 90dB.

This is on a GTT with HKS dump and Front pipes as well... x-force cat. It sounds wicked as hell when you open it up. Surprised no one else is running this system.

  • 1 year later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...