Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys im a noob at this so please excuse me if its already been discussed. searched and couldnt find an answer.

atm my R33 has a 3" cat back exhaust and im guessing into a high flow muffler.

now i want to finish of the exhaust system so obviously i need a bigger dump pipe and a highflow metal cat.

now my question is if i get a 3" dump pipe into a 3" high flow cat would that be good or would it be to much of a free flow??? the car is running stock boost, stock BOV, Stock cooler and panel filter in stock box so the exhaust is the only performance mod done so far.

also the dump pipe would bold straight onto the turbo im guessing???

also coz of the full exhaust done would the stock boost go up a tad or will it still remain at 7psi??? iv been told coz its more free flow now my boost will be raised to prob 8psi or so. is this correct???

im still in the learning process of how it all works so please excuse the noodness :blink:

thanks

Ash

Edited by ashneel
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/177347-exhaust-question/
Share on other sites

now my question is if i get a 3" dump pipe into a 3" high flow cat would that be good or would it be to much of a free flow???

also the dump pipe would bold straight onto the turbo im guessing???

also coz of the full exhaust done would the stock boost go up a tad or will it still remain at 7psi??? iv been told coz its more free flow now my boost will be raised to prob 8psi or so. is this correct???

A 3" hi flow cat and 3" dump/front pipe is all you need to finish the exhaust off.

If you just get the dump pipe the front pipe will still be restricting the flow. So what you would ideally be looking for is a 3" dump/front pipe.

Yes the dump will bolt straight onto the stock turbo.

You will see greater power gains with the exhaust system finished off, and will get more boost yes. 8-9psi

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...