using exhaust pipe for intercooler piping?
- Thread starter futeki_supra
- Start date
theKnifeArtist said:
There is a power increase! The amount will vary based on other supporting mods. (i.e. a 100% stock car will not gain as much as a car that has say a cat-back and so-on ect.)
You have to remember that power is generated by a system of components (motor, fuel, ignition, intake, exhaust, turbo, intercool, ect....) All the components working together is what dictates the power produced and variation of those components will vary the amount of power produced. So, there is no set number of increase or loose. Just because person X produced say 15 more hp, that doesn't mean that you are going to also. Thats the main problem with most performance enthusiasts, they take what the read or hear to set instone.
The other problem with your average enthusiasts is that manufactures take advantage of thier lack of knowledge and or lack of inquisitiveness in that they only quote hp numbers and mainly peak gained HP numbers. Peak HP is and means nothing. For that matter, HP really means nothing. Its all about torque. HP does not accelerate your car, torque does. The only way that HP is really ok for quoting is if its the average again throughout the usefull RPM range. But all in all, average torque gains are what should be published.
cjsupra90 said:
And you don't even drive a mkII. :icon_bigg
i did my lower pipe w/ 2 90 degree bends from advance. Works awesome and only set me back about $20 for the whole thing.
mkiiSupraMan18 said:
It has nothing to do with low numbers. Is a proven fact. Example, I can take you right now and show you a buddy's MKIV that is dynoing right at 892 RWHP and put it up against his brothers 587RWHP Mustang and the Mustang will kick the hell out of the MKIV the hole way down the track any day of the week. He has done it several times. This is because the mustang has more usuable torque and a higher average torque and a higher peak torque. Peak torque numbers for the MKIV is only 617 where as the mustang is 685.
Not only that but im sure the mustangs torque curve is like a pancake... while the supras is probably like the rockies...
I just bought a bunch of stainless piping, t-bolt clamps and silicone couplers... I have to say everytime i buy this shit i forget it adds up fast. I wish i would have just bought the kit instead. Though i do like stainless the best.
I just bought a bunch of stainless piping, t-bolt clamps and silicone couplers... I have to say everytime i buy this shit i forget it adds up fast. I wish i would have just bought the kit instead. Though i do like stainless the best.
cjsupra90 said:
This is a mighty bold statement. With 892 rwhp, he should be well into the 9's. However, so many times, import drivers will build HUGE power and then run on street tires, or not touch the rear end and suspension. That is unheard of on a mustang. Supra owners drop their cars 2" and then tell everyone that their car is so powerful that it spins through 3 gears. thats stupid. put some slicks on the car. get soft rear suspension, get a stutter box to build boost out of the whole, and most of all learn how to drive. Im not doubting that your friends brother doens't kill the supra, but hp has a meaning too. there is no way that the supra should be getting "killed", its just that guy needs to invest more wisely, and learn how to drive properly. this is why the supra is a great highway runner, everyone builds them with 1000rwhp, and doesn't worry about it hooking. So what if you can beat a busa on a roll, that doesn't mean anything if you are trapping 125 and running 12's....... sorry, i get pissed when i see this crap. ill get off my soap box now!!!!!
^Well spoken. I've never seen this mustang or the supra, but I'd bet the mustang is built to go down the quarter mile (suspension and tire wise) whereas the supra isn't. Put a good suspension in the back of that supra with some good tires (and a good driver) then see what the outcome of a drag race between those two cars are 
.
.
suprahero said:
When you used 2.5", were you using the stock intercooler and CT26? If so, what did you use to reduce appropriately at the connecting ends? So far I've just been using a cut off piece from the rubber intercooler pipe as an internal bushing between the 2.5" coupling and the IC/Turbo connections. With the SS band clamps, it cranks down tight enough I think, but I think it might be better with a reducer. If you used reducers, where'd you end up getting yours?
Reason I ask is, I thought that the stock connections were 2.5" (didn't measure, I know I should have), but when I got my 2.5" kit I ordered, the piping is quite a bit bigger than stock. I suppose it's possible they sent me 2.75 or 3, but I'd have to find my tape measure somewhere to confirm.
Last edited:
starscream5000 said:^Well spoken. I've never seen this mustang or the supra, but I'd bet the mustang is built to go down the quarter mile (suspension and tire wise) whereas the supra isn't. Put a good suspension in the back of that supra with some good tires (and a good driver) then see what the outcome of a drag race between those two cars are
I know that I am new here, but I come from both communities, and a current owner of a supra (dead right now) and a mustang GT. I have built the hell out of mustangs which are torque monsters. In the mustang circles we have a little saying "gears and the rears" meaning that building power with those cars is easy, getting the power to ground is tricky. Gears and the Rears, ring and pinion 3.73's or 4.10's are useless without control arms and shocks, 4 links or whatever. Even after that you need weight in the back, they actually make a WT box for the trunk that shifts weight back when you stomp it. Every mustang driver I know builds their car for the 1/4. running 4.10's eats up the top end big time.
Regardless of all of the above, if you can't drive, you can't drive. Experience is the key. I have seen a guy with a fast car who could not break into the 12's. A friend got into it at the track, and drove the car to 12.6...
Actually the supra is built to drag to a point, I am not sure of what all suspension work is done, and I am sure that more could be done and the mustang is mildly built for draging also, but nothing major. I do know for a fact they are both running slicks (not D.O.T drag radials but full on slicks) and they are both great drivers. Example, they switch cars and still run almost identical times in that respective cars.
HP is what is needed to sustain a particular speed not accelerate a load. Look at your average semi truck engine. They produce between 300 and 500hp and yet produce between 1000 and 2000 lb/ft of TQ plus the extensive number of gears with in the drivetrain. Try hooking your a 1000hp supra up to a fully loaded truck and trailer and try towing it (not going to happen). Ask any mechanical engineer whether gearing is a multiplier of torque or horsepower and they will all tell you that is torque. Here is another example of torque Vs Horsepower, look at your average F1 car, they produce almost a 1000hp and weight in at under 1600lbs (half that of an MKIV) and yet only average 9 1/2 sec. 1/4 mile times. This is because they only produce between 300 and 400 lb/ft of torque.
Im not trying to argue with anyone, just giving proof positive examples. Anyone who doubts me should go and do more research on HP and TQ
HP is what is needed to sustain a particular speed not accelerate a load. Look at your average semi truck engine. They produce between 300 and 500hp and yet produce between 1000 and 2000 lb/ft of TQ plus the extensive number of gears with in the drivetrain. Try hooking your a 1000hp supra up to a fully loaded truck and trailer and try towing it (not going to happen). Ask any mechanical engineer whether gearing is a multiplier of torque or horsepower and they will all tell you that is torque. Here is another example of torque Vs Horsepower, look at your average F1 car, they produce almost a 1000hp and weight in at under 1600lbs (half that of an MKIV) and yet only average 9 1/2 sec. 1/4 mile times. This is because they only produce between 300 and 400 lb/ft of torque.
Im not trying to argue with anyone, just giving proof positive examples. Anyone who doubts me should go and do more research on HP and TQ
Now I will agree fully that a major part of the problem is that the motor is not built right in the MKIV for racing and thats where the problem is (basically a dyno queen). He cant even come close to getting full boost until the top of third gear and between 1/2 and 3/4 track. Yeah, on the highway, the supra will run the mustang down and pass by him but that doesn't mean that it is a very fast car. My whole point was to show that people that worry about HP numbers and mainly peak number are looking in the wrong direction if they want an all around fast car.
I'll completely agree. Everyone talks HP, everyone. Easiest example I can think of: run a stock 98 stang with the stock 2.73's/3.27's (depending on year/tranny) they all run about 14.9, completely stock. Put in 4.10's, and shave several 10th's possbily 7/10ths second with good DR's. Been there done that. its all in the tranny/gears baby, and it's a beautiful thing. We tested this out, and it is by far th biggest underrated bang for the buck. a ring and pinion set is about $200 nice!!
When some supra ppl say putting the 4.30 dif. in the car is "spin city" they just don't know how to put the power down. I think there was a good little pun about supras from a mustang guy one time that was something like, "I've got XXX HP and this guy in the supra has XXX HP (typically at least 100 HP more than the stang) and he's still running 12's, lol".
Old joke:
Q-> What's the difference between a 300RWHP and a 700RWHP MKIII?
A-> About half a second. :biglaugh:
Q-> What's the difference between a 300RWHP and a 700RWHP MKIII?
A-> About half a second. :biglaugh:
Just so everyone knows. (those defending tq already know this) Horsepower is a measure of torque at a given RPM nothing more if you have more torque at this rpm your going to have more power 500ft/lb of torque at 2k rpm is not the same as 500ft/lb at 6k rpm