The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > 47 - Current classic GM Trucks > The 1967 - 1972 Chevrolet & GMC Pickups Message Board

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-27-2007, 03:08 AM   #1
GREASEMONKEY72
Registered User
 
GREASEMONKEY72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bakersfield,CA
Posts: 7,893
worse MPG with open exhaust??????

now ive got the stock ramhorn manifolds with glasspacks and theres about 2ft worth of pipe inbetween the manifolds and the packs and my question is if i cut the glasspacks off and leave it open will i get worse mpg? or will it be the same? its true duals with no crossover

cause i know the glasspacks do give some back pressure which helps with mileage but is it enough to where ill get worse mpg with open pipes?

how bout it andy?

__________________
-steven
Alte Seele S.S.

"Allison" '72 C/10 LWB 350SB/TH350 - DD

PITBULL IS NOT A CRIME
GREASEMONKEY72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 09:08 AM   #2
Huck
Senior Member
 
Huck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Shelbyville, KY
Posts: 3,261
Re: worse MPG with open exhaust??????

My experience---new 350 crate motor--added edlebrock intake==lost 2mpg. added hooker headers==lost 2mpg. went back to stock intake with edelbrock 1406 carb---regained 2mpg. went back to stock dual exhaust using ramhorns--regained 2mpg. In both cases, might have gained higher rpm horsepower but lost low end torque. Trucks like low end torque much more then high rpm horsepower. Huck
Huck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2007, 05:54 AM   #3
GREASEMONKEY72
Registered User
 
GREASEMONKEY72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bakersfield,CA
Posts: 7,893
Re: worse MPG with open exhaust??????

its the stock engine with stock intake/carb just with dual 26in glasspacks with about 2 1/2in pipe, about 2ft of pipe from the manifold to the glasspack with no crossover and it dumps out of the glasspack at the back of the cab

i know that the glasspacks do offer some back pressure but is it enough to lose mpg without them?
__________________
-steven
Alte Seele S.S.

"Allison" '72 C/10 LWB 350SB/TH350 - DD

PITBULL IS NOT A CRIME
GREASEMONKEY72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2007, 03:03 AM   #4
GREASEMONKEY72
Registered User
 
GREASEMONKEY72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bakersfield,CA
Posts: 7,893
Re: worse MPG with open exhaust??????

__________________
-steven
Alte Seele S.S.

"Allison" '72 C/10 LWB 350SB/TH350 - DD

PITBULL IS NOT A CRIME
GREASEMONKEY72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2007, 09:29 AM   #5
mplex2000
Registered User
 
mplex2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: DFW
Posts: 463
Re: worse MPG with open exhaust??????

If you are using louvered glasspacks, yes, they give tons of backpressure. Typically the ID of the inner piping (the part that holds the glass inside the outer shell, with the louvers sticking out) is quite small. Not to mention the louvers themselves, resticting the ID an disturbing airflow. They're some of the worst mufflers you can use performance wise, but for gas milage and tq might be ok.

If you ever saw one of the "old" 5.0 Mustangs, those people would get the off-road H pipe with no cats, they'd sit there wondering why they lost all their low end punch....well, their exhaust was TOO free flowing
mplex2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2007, 09:55 AM   #6
mplex2000
Registered User
 
mplex2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: DFW
Posts: 463
Re: worse MPG with open exhaust??????

If you are using louvered glasspacks, yes, they give tons of backpressure. Typically the ID of the inner piping (the part that holds the glass inside the outer shell, with the louvers sticking out) is quite small. Not to mention the louvers themselves, resticting the ID an disturbing airflow. They're some of the worst mufflers you can use performance wise, but for gas milage and tq might be ok.

If you ever saw one of the "old" 5.0 Mustangs, those people would get the off-road H pipe with no cats, they'd sit there wondering why they lost all their low end punch....well, their exhaust was TOO free flowing
mplex2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com