Header sidepipes
-F




-F





I like it!
-F

I have come to the following conclusions. Please correct me where my assumptions are in error.
Hooker Quiet side pipes:
The Quietest and the most restrictive
Hooker Glass Pak:
Louder and less restrictive
Sweet-Thunder 2” insert:
Similar to above
Sweet-Thunder 2.25” insert:
Louder and less restrictive than 2”
Sweet-Thunder 2.5” insert
Louder and less restrictive than 2.25
Spiral Turbo Baffles (undrilled)
About the same a the 2.5 above
Hooker 4” Max Flow:
Louder and less restrictive than above
Spiral Turbo Baffles (drilled):
Louder and less restrictive than Max Flow
Open Tubes:
Loudest and least restrictive
Anyway, you mentioned you would like numbers . Check out the data from a dyno run in a post from ZL1powr. Here is the link. Be sure to click also click on the Video of dyno runs
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c3-t...-carlisle.html
Hope this helps.
HTTP 404
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c3-t...-carlisle.html





-F





Actually I don't have "real" numbers and it would have been more acurate to say "based on what has been posted on this forum it seems that uncapped STS baffles offer the least power loss". When you do a search in this forum using "baffles" there is lots of reading and many of those threads have dyno numbers for STS baffles. Here's one http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c3-t...vs-spiral.html I thought it would be easier to decide which insert suits you/your car best if the 3 major players were tested on the same 500+ horsepower motor with a sound clip so you could weigh the pros and cons of both. I'm leaning towards Max-Flo's also. Last edited by 3JsVette; Jan 18, 2011 at 10:22 PM. Reason: added content
I also have a hi pitched chirp out my passenger side with the max-flows that I put started a post on last week. Still not sure what that is.
I also have a hi pitched chirp out my passenger side with the max-flows that I put started a post on last week. Still not sure what that is.
When I bought my '69 in 1979 it had a '70 LT-1 motor and sidepipes with glasspacks. One day I removed the side tubes and took it for a ride. What a difference! It had to have gained 50 hp, and this was only 350 cid. With glass packs on, the motor would quit pulling at 6000 rpm. Without the side tubes it was still pulling at 7200 rpm. Of course max flos didn't exist then.
The chirp is probably the insert moving around slightly.
Compare Hookers with 2 90* bends per pipe vs Stahls with none save the 4" one that points the gases down the side of the car, I don't think an engineering degree is required to say that the Stahls are less restrictive freeing up more hp/torque to the rear wheels. There are some under car headers that might show more gains, but to tie them in to side exhaust usually results in a big S pipe and that will take away any efficency you might have picked up. Is a high lift cam less restrictive than a stock one? Are aluminum tall runner angle plug heads less restrictive than stock iron ones? You go faster by doing one of two things, remove weight (anywhere you can) or make your motor more efficent (by removing restrictions). More hp to the rear wheels has and still is what it's all about. /:\
Compare Hookers with 2 90* bends per pipe vs Stahls with none save the 4" one that points the gases down the side of the car, I don't think an engineering degree is required to say that the Stahls are less restrictive freeing up more hp/torque to the rear wheels. There are some under car headers that might show more gains, but to tie them in to side exhaust usually results in a big S pipe and that will take away any efficency you might have picked up. Is a high lift cam less restrictive than a stock one? Are aluminum tall runner angle plug heads less restrictive than stock iron ones? You go faster by doing one of two things, remove weight (anywhere you can) or make your motor more efficent (by removing restrictions). More hp to the rear wheels has and still is what it's all about. /:\
















