Re: [Amc-list] scavenging in a stock exhaust system?

[Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx]

I've got 2.5" on my 4.0L, but it is not mandrel bent so compares to 2 1/4" mandrel, IIRC.
The 4.0L does not lack in low end torque so it seems fine to me.
Gas mileage is good, so I really have no idea as to what a 196 would or would not like!

--
Mark Price
Morgantown, WV
1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrac II
" I realize that death is inevitable.
I just don't want to be around when it happens! "

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Peter Marano <pmarano@xxxxxxxxx>
> Message: 16
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:11:10 -0700
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] scavenging in a stock exhaust system?
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans." <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <490A855E.20607@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> 
> > > I've heard different theories.
> >   
> 
> Well from the resounding silence, I think I'll go with 2.25" front to 
> back with a good muffler. I didn't really think there was much to be 
> done but hey,...
> 
> I think I've heard that too big an exhaust may be counterproductive 
> though, even though that's counterintuive in some ways since it's not 
> like there's any tuned resonance going on in systems like this.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> > Check the pressure in the exhaust system?  Recheck with the new larger system?
> >   
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list

_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list