04-28-2011, 07:32 AM
|
#31 (permalink)
|
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: nj
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
#4 post
|
|
|
|
 Today
|
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:33 AM
|
#32 (permalink)
|
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: nj
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
#5 post
|
|
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:33 AM
|
#33 (permalink)
|
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: nj
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:37 AM
|
#34 (permalink)
|
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: nj
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:39 AM
|
#35 (permalink)
|
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: nj
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I stand by my statement that a high flow low back pressure exhaust like a magnaflow WILL save fuel.
|
|
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:43 AM
|
#36 (permalink)
|
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,519
Thanks: 4,076
Thanked 6,964 Times in 3,606 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by incautious
|
That may look interesting, but it proves nothing. It's just a chart, with no supporting data or methodology. (In other words: where's the beef?)
It would be great to see some actual experimentally valid information on the subject, because this is one of those topics that perpetually comes up. |
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to MetroMPG For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:46 AM
|
#37 (permalink)
|
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,519
Thanks: 4,076
Thanked 6,964 Times in 3,606 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by incautious
I stand by my statement that a high flow low back pressure exhaust like a magnaflow WILL save fuel.
|
With all due respect, statements are a dime a dozen.
Quality data is what most people here would prefer to see. |
|
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:47 AM
|
#38 (permalink)
|
|
needs more cowbell
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: ÿ
Posts: 5,038
Thanks: 158
Thanked 269 Times in 212 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by incautious
I stand by my statement that a high flow low back pressure exhaust like a magnaflow WILL save fuel.
|
And there is a MAJOR discrepancy, the one article says 2.6% improvement (background noise for the type of test they did) and your picture shows a 25% improvement in some cases.
The picture is complete bullcrap, guaranteed. If you want to be taken seriously, be more careful with your research.
__________________
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!!!
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dcb For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 07:49 AM
|
#39 (permalink)
|
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,519
Thanks: 4,076
Thanked 6,964 Times in 3,606 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by incautious
|
Again, methodology not presented. Just claims.
Maybe the claims are valid, but we have no way to judge them without the testing details. |
|
|
|
|
04-28-2011, 08:57 AM
|
#40 (permalink)
|
|
Cyborg ECU
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Coastal Southern California
Posts: 6,299
Thanks: 2,373
Thanked 2,172 Times in 1,469 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertwb70
I ran some numbers through one of the on-line calculators before my last exhaust mods to my Geo Metro, results are posted here- Robertwb70: Exhaust size |
I read your good short post and your fuel log. It looks like you might have experienced a dip in FE after the new pipe, but maybe not. Clear it up for me? If you did install the pipe you estimated... any indication of how it has performed?
__________________
See my car's mod & maintenance thread and my electric bicycle's thread for ongoing projects. I will rebuild Black and Green over decades as parts die, until it becomes a different car of roughly the same shape and color. My minimum fuel economy goal is 55 mpg while averaging posted speed limits. I generally top 60 mpg. See also my Honda manual transmission specs thread.
|
|
|
|
|
