View Poll Results: What you like better?
Magnapack with o/r H
20
54.05%
Magnapack with o/r X
17
45.95%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll
Help settle a debate!
08-25-2010, 08:02 AM
#22
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: KY, was MA
Posts: 2,797
Ohh stop your whining....you're just upset because as of 9am today it's tied lol.
This can also serve as an example/comparison of exhaust setups (maybe people will make less of those threads, search more and come across this to make a decision on their own....MAYBE)
This can also serve as an example/comparison of exhaust setups (maybe people will make less of those threads, search more and come across this to make a decision on their own....MAYBE)
08-25-2010, 09:11 AM
#23
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,994
Ya about that tie....
I only listened to the 45 sec O/R H and the first O/R X vids, not the one of your ride or the one that made you decide, as I can't watch them on my comp at work, so i have to do it on the crackberry in the car lol.
Regardless...the H isn't nearly loud enough, not by a longshot. In fact...the O/R x is still quieter than my loudmouths, so it's not loud enough either for me. But the X DEFINITELY sounds better. I like to hear the cackling on the downturn of the rev, unlike other people. But that is just my opinion. Then of course there is the fact that the X provides a better performance gain than the H. So ya, my vote went for the X.
Purp-don't hate me lol
I only listened to the 45 sec O/R H and the first O/R X vids, not the one of your ride or the one that made you decide, as I can't watch them on my comp at work, so i have to do it on the crackberry in the car lol.
Regardless...the H isn't nearly loud enough, not by a longshot. In fact...the O/R x is still quieter than my loudmouths, so it's not loud enough either for me. But the X DEFINITELY sounds better. I like to hear the cackling on the downturn of the rev, unlike other people. But that is just my opinion. Then of course there is the fact that the X provides a better performance gain than the H. So ya, my vote went for the X.
Purp-don't hate me lol
08-25-2010, 09:19 AM
#25
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,503
Im votin H...just sounds meaner to me...like a lot deeper and more aggressive.
Def o/r h w/ either packs or LM2s is def my new fav!!
EDIT: And performance guys? Really? How much is it like 2hp? Come on...
Def o/r h w/ either packs or LM2s is def my new fav!!
EDIT: And performance guys? Really? How much is it like 2hp? Come on...
08-25-2010, 09:29 AM
#26
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 6,028
Saying there is a 1whp difference between the X and H and trying to justify it as a performance difference, is like walking 100 feet to your car and eating a cheeseburger while saying its fine because you just did "cardio".
It's a sound preference. Plain and Simple. IMHO if anyone tells you different, they are either f'n with you or talking out of their *** because they don't have any clue what they're talking about.
It's a sound preference. Plain and Simple. IMHO if anyone tells you different, they are either f'n with you or talking out of their *** because they don't have any clue what they're talking about.
Last edited by PurpleIcedGT; 08-25-2010 at 09:32 AM.
08-25-2010, 09:31 AM
#27
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,503
08-25-2010, 09:33 AM
#28
5th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: KY, was MA
Posts: 2,797
I'm running the X now and won't mind kicking down the rasp a bit, and if it gets a tad quieter I wouldn't mine either (I'm guessing lol) I thought to throw cats on my X to accomplish this but after chatting with Purple, I'm looking into the H.
When at the top of your shifts ~2K rpm, the X starts to get popy and rasp while the H remains more tame and deep.
I would love to design my own midpipe with an X and H lol. Why? Just becasue, but I don't have the money to waste and to throw at a shop to make one ahaha
My only problem with the X (again with the Magnapacks) after having it for some time is the large amount of 2K poping/rasp. If it was reduced a tad I would be happier than pig in ****. The drone is a diff story LOL
08-25-2010, 09:43 AM
#29
I'd like to come up with a midpipe like the prochamber...minus the packing inside the prochamber. lol btw, has anyone ever tried using resonators in the midpipe or something like dynomax bullet mufflers to reduce noise? I know I'm going to get flamed for saying this, but in import exhaust they use resonators to reduce sound a little bit but never knew if anyone tried this. And then you might be able to pass a visual inspection for cats 
08-25-2010, 09:44 AM
#30
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 1,452
maybe that sound is a bit diff around certain rmps bc of the design and scavenging affect. read this from ppl that have tested it instead of going off our opinions.
!!!!!For any performance exhaust system, some type of crossover connecting the two sides of a dual exhaust system is important because it acts to balance the two banks of the engine. The common H-style crossover is good at balancing sound pulses between the two halves, but does little to promote scavenging because the exhaust gases tend to follow the path of least resistance, which is straight through each pipe rather than taking the 90-degree turn through the H-pipe into the other half of the system. In an X-pipe system, however, where the two sides of the system intersect, the gasses have no choice but to intermingle as they pass through the junction. This promotes improved scavenging effects by smoothing out uneven exhaust pulses from the engine’s firing order. It also helps quiet down the exhaust, resulting in a mellower, less raspy tone. According to Magnaflow, the faster acceleration of the gasses through an X-pipe causes them to flow in a linear fashion parallel to the walls of the tubing rather than tumbling. This “laminar” flowing gas is much quieter than tumbling gas, resulting in an exhaust tone up to 8 decibels quieter than a traditional H-pipe
We left the car at Magnaflow for about a week, and when we came back we found that after some preliminary testing, the guys had built a really trick system consisting of 2-½-inch tubing from the header collectors into the X-pipe, 3-inch out of the X flaring into 3½-inch tubing running for about 26 inches before necking back down into a pair of 3-inch mufflers with turn-downs. The theory behind this design is that it will keep the velocity of the exhaust gases moving quickly through the headers into the X-pipe to maximize the scavenging effect, while the larger-diameter tubing ahead of the mufflers prevents the gasses from stacking up as they pass through the mufflers to avoid excessive backpressure in the system.
Sounds good, but would it work? To find out, we tested three exhaust-system configurations on Magnaflow’s in-house Dynojet. For a baseline, we ran the car with open headers and saw 333 hp at 6,300 rpm and 304 lb-ft of torque at 5,200 at the rear wheels. Next, we ran a 2-½-inch bolt-together system consisting of a BBK short off-road H-pipe designed to fit the company’s full-length headers connected to a set of race-type 2-½-inch welded mufflers with turndowns. Our Mustang’s carbureted 302 didn’t like this combo, as power fell to 323 hp at 6,300 rpm and 295 lb-ft of torque at 5,200. The increased backpressure also richened up the air/fuel mixture by about two carburetor jet sizes.
Finally, we swapped on the stepped X-pipe setup and were impressed to see power levels equal to the open headers: 335 hp at 6,300 hp and 302 lb-ft at 5,200. That’s a gain of 12 rear-wheel horsepower, although it turns out we weren’t really giving anything up or gaining anything extra from the open headers. So the car’s happy, and our ears are even happier
!!!!!For any performance exhaust system, some type of crossover connecting the two sides of a dual exhaust system is important because it acts to balance the two banks of the engine. The common H-style crossover is good at balancing sound pulses between the two halves, but does little to promote scavenging because the exhaust gases tend to follow the path of least resistance, which is straight through each pipe rather than taking the 90-degree turn through the H-pipe into the other half of the system. In an X-pipe system, however, where the two sides of the system intersect, the gasses have no choice but to intermingle as they pass through the junction. This promotes improved scavenging effects by smoothing out uneven exhaust pulses from the engine’s firing order. It also helps quiet down the exhaust, resulting in a mellower, less raspy tone. According to Magnaflow, the faster acceleration of the gasses through an X-pipe causes them to flow in a linear fashion parallel to the walls of the tubing rather than tumbling. This “laminar” flowing gas is much quieter than tumbling gas, resulting in an exhaust tone up to 8 decibels quieter than a traditional H-pipe
We left the car at Magnaflow for about a week, and when we came back we found that after some preliminary testing, the guys had built a really trick system consisting of 2-½-inch tubing from the header collectors into the X-pipe, 3-inch out of the X flaring into 3½-inch tubing running for about 26 inches before necking back down into a pair of 3-inch mufflers with turn-downs. The theory behind this design is that it will keep the velocity of the exhaust gases moving quickly through the headers into the X-pipe to maximize the scavenging effect, while the larger-diameter tubing ahead of the mufflers prevents the gasses from stacking up as they pass through the mufflers to avoid excessive backpressure in the system.
Sounds good, but would it work? To find out, we tested three exhaust-system configurations on Magnaflow’s in-house Dynojet. For a baseline, we ran the car with open headers and saw 333 hp at 6,300 rpm and 304 lb-ft of torque at 5,200 at the rear wheels. Next, we ran a 2-½-inch bolt-together system consisting of a BBK short off-road H-pipe designed to fit the company’s full-length headers connected to a set of race-type 2-½-inch welded mufflers with turndowns. Our Mustang’s carbureted 302 didn’t like this combo, as power fell to 323 hp at 6,300 rpm and 295 lb-ft of torque at 5,200. The increased backpressure also richened up the air/fuel mixture by about two carburetor jet sizes.
Finally, we swapped on the stepped X-pipe setup and were impressed to see power levels equal to the open headers: 335 hp at 6,300 hp and 302 lb-ft at 5,200. That’s a gain of 12 rear-wheel horsepower, although it turns out we weren’t really giving anything up or gaining anything extra from the open headers. So the car’s happy, and our ears are even happier
