remote turbo hot pipe size?
#1
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
..i was wondering how much of a spool improvment was reducing the hot side from 3" to 2.5"???...anyone go smaller,2.25"?? or 2"??
#4
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
#8
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#9
10 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
the reason I went 2.5" over 3" was to reduce overall surface area for heat retention. Heat is what is the most important. Volume of the pipe, velocity and pressure are minor compared to heat retention. 2.5" pipe has 15% less surface area than 3" pipe.
How large the exhaust pipe is doesn't really matter as long as you can keep the heat in.
How large the exhaust pipe is doesn't really matter as long as you can keep the heat in.
#10
TECH Resident
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: On the coast of somewhere
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Since a couple of questions are similar, I was wondering since the manifold outlet is 2" i.d. wouldn't 2.25" pipe from both sides into a single 2.5 be sufficient to the turbo? As you have preached to many, heat retention is key so, the outlet is 2" and my theory is going bigger than 2.25 from each manifold to the y just wastes the heat energy through more surface area. Yes? No? These manifolds support 400 hp from the factory with that small exit opening. Thanks for any input.
#11
10 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Since a couple of questions are similar, I was wondering since the manifold outlet is 2" i.d. wouldn't 2.25" pipe from both sides into a single 2.5 be sufficient to the turbo? As you have preached to many, heat retention is key so, the outlet is 2" and my theory is going bigger than 2.25 from each manifold to the y just wastes the heat energy through more surface area. Yes? No? These manifolds support 400 hp from the factory with that small exit opening. Thanks for any input.
It was fun to experiment, but it certainly wasn't cheap (well it was sorta cheap because I have a good fabricator who likes to experiment too). My car has had around 10 different configurations.
#12
Launching!
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern, OH
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
my application is much different, but the heat properties are the same. I used a 2.5" pipe for the Y-pipe, then a Flowmaster y into 3 inch, all the way to the turbo. The whole hot side is wrapped in DEI header wrap, then used their black silicone coating on it. My engine displaces 6.5L but only spins to 3400 rpm. I have no problem hitting 18 psi under WOT. The turbo is rear mounted, and had a front mount intercooler. Cold side charge pipe is 2.5" all the way. There is about 16 feet of cold piping.
I agree with Zombie. If I had to do it again I would prob go with 2.5" all the way to the turbo. But I am not sure if my EGT's would be ok. I am sure with a gas engine and the right turbo, the 2.5" setup would be great. hope this helps. car is in sig.
Cody
I agree with Zombie. If I had to do it again I would prob go with 2.5" all the way to the turbo. But I am not sure if my EGT's would be ok. I am sure with a gas engine and the right turbo, the 2.5" setup would be great. hope this helps. car is in sig.
Cody