cats= more hp?
#1
cats= more hp?
i always thought no cats = less back press. which = more power, a few mechanics told me that these trucks have more "get up an go" with a cat installed
can someone please explain this?
can someone please explain this?
#2
Sonic exhaust pulses bounce off the cat and the sound wave "pushes" unburnt fuel that escaped during valve overlap back into the cylinder. The Honda S2000 even came from the factory with dead end branches in the exhaust plumbing for tuning purposes. Cats are basically a free flow design, it's a straight through shot, so I see no reason why people are so eager to gut a perfectly operational one anyway - getting a proper exhaust with nice bends in an appropriate size will yield better results.
#3
Any engine will run better with a straight pipe exhaust given the proper A/F ratio. Anything that restricts flow, such as a muffler or catalytic convertor, will produce power robbing backpressure. Backpressure = resistance against the crankshaft spinning = loss of torque. On an EFI motor, that can automatically adjust it's fuel delivery, any and all reduction in backpressure is a good thing.
Why?
Some say that "an engine needs backpressure to work correctly." Is this true?
No. It would be more correct to say, "a perfectly stock engine that cannot adjust its fuel delivery needs backpressure to work correctly." This idea is a myth. As with all myths, however, there is a hint of fact with this one. Particularly, some people equate backpressure with torque, and others fear that too little backpressure will lead to valve burning.
The first reason why people say "backpressure is good" is because they believe that increased backpressure by itself will increase torque, particularly with a stock exhaust manifold. Granted, some stock manifolds act somewhat like performance headers at low RPM, but these manifolds will exhibit poor performance at higher RPM. This, however does not automatically lead to the conclusion that backpressure produces more torque. The increase in torque is not due to backpressure, but to the effects of changes in fuel/air mixture, which will be described in more detail below.
The other reason why people say "backpressure is good" is because they hear that cars (or motorcycles) that have had performance exhaust work done to them would then go on to burn exhaust valves. Now, it is true that such valve burning has occurred as a result of the exhaust mods, but it isn't due merely to a lack of backpressure.
The internal combustion engine is a complex, dynamic collection of different systems working together to convert the stored power in gasoline into mechanical energy to push a car down the road. Anytime one of these systems are modified, that mod will also indirectly affect the other systems, as well.
Now, valve burning occurs as a result of a very lean-burning engine. In order to achieve a theoretical optimal combustion, an engine needs 14.7 parts of oxygen by mass to 1 part of gasoline (again, by mass). This is referred to as a stochiometric (chemically correct) mixture, and is commonly referred to as a 14.7:1 mix. If an engine burns with less oxygen present (13:1, 12:1, etc...), it is said to run rich. Conversely, if the engine runs with more oxygen present (16:1, 17:1, etc...), it is said to run lean. Today's engines are designed to run at 14.7:1 for normally cruising, with rich mixtures on acceleration or warm-up, and lean mixtures while decelerating.
Getting back to the discussion, the reason that exhaust valves burn is because the engine is burning lean. Normal engines will tolerate lean burning for a little bit, but not for sustained periods of time. The reason why the engine is burning lean to begin with is that the reduction in backpressure is causing more air to be drawn into the combustion chamber than before. Earlier cars (and motorcycles) with carburetion often could not adjust because of the way that backpressure caused air to flow backwards through the carburetor after the air already got loaded down with fuel, and caused the air to receive a second load of fuel. While a bad design, it was nonetheless used in a lot of vehicles. Once these vehicles received performance mods that reduced backpressure, they no longer had that double-loading effect, and then tended to burn valves because of the resulting over-lean condition. This, incidentally, also provides a basis for the "torque increase" seen if backpressure is maintained. As the fuel/air mixture becomes leaner, the resultant combustion will produce progressively less and less of the force needed to produce torque.
http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/html_pr...torquemyth.htm
Why?
Destroying a myth.
Some say that "an engine needs backpressure to work correctly." Is this true?
No. It would be more correct to say, "a perfectly stock engine that cannot adjust its fuel delivery needs backpressure to work correctly." This idea is a myth. As with all myths, however, there is a hint of fact with this one. Particularly, some people equate backpressure with torque, and others fear that too little backpressure will lead to valve burning.
The first reason why people say "backpressure is good" is because they believe that increased backpressure by itself will increase torque, particularly with a stock exhaust manifold. Granted, some stock manifolds act somewhat like performance headers at low RPM, but these manifolds will exhibit poor performance at higher RPM. This, however does not automatically lead to the conclusion that backpressure produces more torque. The increase in torque is not due to backpressure, but to the effects of changes in fuel/air mixture, which will be described in more detail below.
The other reason why people say "backpressure is good" is because they hear that cars (or motorcycles) that have had performance exhaust work done to them would then go on to burn exhaust valves. Now, it is true that such valve burning has occurred as a result of the exhaust mods, but it isn't due merely to a lack of backpressure.
The internal combustion engine is a complex, dynamic collection of different systems working together to convert the stored power in gasoline into mechanical energy to push a car down the road. Anytime one of these systems are modified, that mod will also indirectly affect the other systems, as well.
Now, valve burning occurs as a result of a very lean-burning engine. In order to achieve a theoretical optimal combustion, an engine needs 14.7 parts of oxygen by mass to 1 part of gasoline (again, by mass). This is referred to as a stochiometric (chemically correct) mixture, and is commonly referred to as a 14.7:1 mix. If an engine burns with less oxygen present (13:1, 12:1, etc...), it is said to run rich. Conversely, if the engine runs with more oxygen present (16:1, 17:1, etc...), it is said to run lean. Today's engines are designed to run at 14.7:1 for normally cruising, with rich mixtures on acceleration or warm-up, and lean mixtures while decelerating.
Getting back to the discussion, the reason that exhaust valves burn is because the engine is burning lean. Normal engines will tolerate lean burning for a little bit, but not for sustained periods of time. The reason why the engine is burning lean to begin with is that the reduction in backpressure is causing more air to be drawn into the combustion chamber than before. Earlier cars (and motorcycles) with carburetion often could not adjust because of the way that backpressure caused air to flow backwards through the carburetor after the air already got loaded down with fuel, and caused the air to receive a second load of fuel. While a bad design, it was nonetheless used in a lot of vehicles. Once these vehicles received performance mods that reduced backpressure, they no longer had that double-loading effect, and then tended to burn valves because of the resulting over-lean condition. This, incidentally, also provides a basis for the "torque increase" seen if backpressure is maintained. As the fuel/air mixture becomes leaner, the resultant combustion will produce progressively less and less of the force needed to produce torque.
#5
+1. Bouncing exhaust pulses pushing fuel back into the combustion chamber is absolutely false on a 4-stroke engine.
So yes, the term "backpressure" being used in a good way is incorrect. BUT, the effect is similar.
I skimmed over what MudHippy posted, and it seems pretty much correct. By reducing the back pressure, the old exhaust gases (most of the oxygen used up) escapes the combustion chamber more efficiently, and therefore you get more fresh air (more oxygen) on the intake stroke. If you don't get the extra fuel to match, you get less power.
Also, there are temperatures and exhaust gas velocity things that I don't understand well enough to attempt explaining. But think of it this way, no exhaust = no backpressure, right? Well, no. By containing the exhaust and keeping the temperature up, the exhaust gases can exit the engine much faster. A factory exhaust is designed to utilize the nature of a cat (restrictive, but contains a lot of heat).
So, if you're prepared to completely redesign your exhaust, and then tune for it. No cat is better. But if you just want to crawl under your truck with a sawzall.....you'll be better leaving it on.
So yes, the term "backpressure" being used in a good way is incorrect. BUT, the effect is similar.
I skimmed over what MudHippy posted, and it seems pretty much correct. By reducing the back pressure, the old exhaust gases (most of the oxygen used up) escapes the combustion chamber more efficiently, and therefore you get more fresh air (more oxygen) on the intake stroke. If you don't get the extra fuel to match, you get less power.
Also, there are temperatures and exhaust gas velocity things that I don't understand well enough to attempt explaining. But think of it this way, no exhaust = no backpressure, right? Well, no. By containing the exhaust and keeping the temperature up, the exhaust gases can exit the engine much faster. A factory exhaust is designed to utilize the nature of a cat (restrictive, but contains a lot of heat).
So, if you're prepared to completely redesign your exhaust, and then tune for it. No cat is better. But if you just want to crawl under your truck with a sawzall.....you'll be better leaving it on.
Trending Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dzldust
General Vehicle Related Topics (Non Year Related)
7
Oct 6, 2015 05:39 AM




