| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
9 members (Wayne67vert, DaveV, Phak1, Eisenholtz, Ponchogl, Bill Hanlon, 55shaker, Rusty Rod, TUTS 59),
159
guests, and
1
robot. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,049 Posts1,055,546 Members48,425 | | Most Online14,466 Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down with Ads! Again, thanks! | |
#56869 02/22/2006 1:31 AM | Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 25 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 25 | The word back pressure is used a couple of times in this thread.My opinion is there should be little to no back pressure in the exhaust system. The pipe should be small enough to maintain exhaust velocity to help evacuate the cylinder. I think when you went to the larger pipe it probably slowed the exhaust gases down enough to effect low end torque by not evacuating the cylinders as well at low RPM. When the exhaust valve opens the gases escape at a high rate of speed as the piston rises to near TDC the gases start to slow down. If the pipe is small enough or large enough to maintain velocity it will help to pull the remaining gases from the cyl. I also believe that a cam with a lot of overlap and an exhaust system piping to small will lead to over scavaging the cyl.(pull to much of the incoming charge thru the exhaust valve)leading to poor performance. I guess what I am trying to say is the pipe dia. should match the RPM range you want run. My opinions only Arnie | | |
| |
| |