Re: jba headers...no leaks

From: the bobster (charger69rt@inficad.com)
Date: Tue Aug 25 1998 - 20:22:59 EDT


HI List

We have installed the "doughnuts " on our 92 and the leak problem
where the JBAs couple to the Y pipe is solved.

Any sealer we had put between the header and Y-pipe had blown out.
the doughnuts filled this gap perfectly.

We pulled the entire exhaust system out from under the truck.The pipe
between the cat and muffler is about 2 5/8 inch id. We drove the truck
with the cat and this pipe only....good sound during WOT and more
rather than less torque(more wheel spin) from a standing start.The
resonance inside the cab was more than desirerable. The shaking of
dishes inside the kitchen cabinets was also commented upon.

We turned our attention to the muffler....we did a hack job with our
war surplus Wards 230A ac welder set to kill.Using the longest rods
we had we burned all the baffels we could reach from both the in and
out ports.The insides looked like something from Dante's inferno when we
finished.....but you could see clearly from the inlet to the outlet.

The tail pipe on our 92 is pure crap...the outlet looks good but the
last bend to swing it 90 degrees to the outside constricts the pipe
by almost 50%. Any money spent replacing only the stock muffler is a
fool's folly.

After re-installing the muffler and pipes, the exhaust note did not
seem any louder than what it was, and in fact; my" what did you do to
the truck now" wife, has not made any comment.

Some one on the list did a "Y-back" system in the last couple of weeks.

Patrick, was that one of the things you mentioned you could get a deal
on?????

I would like to put better Y-pipes on the truck but for sure a "Y-pipe
back" system would be an improvement.

As a side note...my old Formula S 340 would always run at least 4/10ths
quicker with open headers than thru dual 2 1/2 pipes with a crossover.

One would think that the lack of low-end torque from open headers
would cancel any benefit of a less restricted exhaust...the counter
point i guess is the 340 was a high rpm engine and the higher rpm
power would cancel out the losses.

I plan to put a dump in front of the cat for racing, I guess than will
answer the question on my 318 needing back preasure for torque....

rob
charger69rt@inficad.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:27 EDT