![]() |
2 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by CPPerformance
(Post 2721579)
It is nearly impossible remember I said "nearly" to run any wet style tail pipe exhaust system at 900plus horsepower. Lightning makes a system with a water jacketed "Dry" tail pipe that will accommodate this application with no problems.
|
Right know, and i dont mean to pi$$ anybody off.
I think the SM HT III is the best on the market, lightweight big runners ,dont break. I have seen them on 1400 HP blowermotors working great. I have seen them in blown up engines hot ass hell and still run with no leaks, act. mine :eek:. The looks of them ,,,,,,,,,,,,,i think they look great, they also make the same header for a 34 centerline , so you can fit them in there. $$$$ wise they are very in expensive too, so what is there to think about ? + Brownie at SM and everybody else there are bretty cool and help where they can. Just my 2 C, but i have seen alot of the others break. Most of them due to not enuff cooling SS needs cooling aluminum needs it also but not that much since its getting ridd of heat alot faster. Damn i'm smart. LOL:drink: |
Probably the bottom line in this decision is what are you trying to accomplish and at what cost. If you are looking at maximizing hp then in a naturally aspirated application you should be looking towards a "tuned" exhaust with at least equal runner length? To say all are created equall is BS. There have only been a couple actual comparisons done and that was back in the 97-98 time frame. I believe Fountain hired Innovation to look at some different offerings as did Volvo. That was when Volvo had the 600 hp packages back in 97 or 98? There was maybe 40 hp difference between good and bad and that was only looking at hp 500's up to 5200 rpm or so. There would have been a bigger difference yet if they would have looked at applications in a higher rpm range. Eickert's website had some of the data and Hot Boats did a couple comparisons. What I found interesting was when you looked at some of the IR 4 into 1 configs due to the large difference in their runner length, they really didn't do all that well.
|
Originally Posted by ZXXX Donzi
(Post 2721959)
Heck, I think that Kennyo's motor was reverting pretty bad at 800hp or so with standard Lightnings.
|
Originally Posted by bob
(Post 2722125)
Probably the bottom line in this decision is what are you trying to accomplish and at what cost. If you are looking at maximizing hp then in a naturally aspirated application you should be looking towards a "tuned" exhaust with at least equal runner length? To say all are created equall is BS. There have only been a couple actual comparisons done and that was back in the 97-98 time frame. I believe Fountain hired Innovation to look at some different offerings as did Volvo. That was when Volvo had the 600 hp packages back in 97 or 98? There was maybe 40 hp difference between good and bad and that was only looking at hp 500's up to 5200 rpm or so. There would have been a bigger difference yet if they would have looked at applications in a higher rpm range. Eickert's website had some of the data and Hot Boats did a couple comparisons. What I found interesting was when you looked at some of the IR 4 into 1 configs due to the large difference in their runner length, they really didn't do all that well.
The runners are ( i think 22" long ) and have all the same volume. |
1 Attachment(s)
I know of a lot of big power boats running wet exhaust. I even run downturns on my 1400's CMI headers are the way to go. Manifolds are for cars.
|
Originally Posted by stormbauer
(Post 2718988)
Looking to upgrade Headers from Cast IMCO Powerflow. Running Blown 540 at 900 HP. Any opinions on CMI versus Lightening versus anything else? Also if any suggestions what model?
|
|
Originally Posted by boss27
(Post 2722551)
|
Can anyone tell what is a CMI Elbow Split Top?
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:17 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.