need a muffler?
#1
#2
![Default](https://dodgeforum.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Its your dual exhaust is why you lost the bottom end torque. This was from another forum and I felt it explains best why you lossed the torque.
As far as best sound, I like the setup I have on my truck. I used to have magnaflows and they were alittle over bearing IMO. Right now, the setup I have is Single in -> CherryBomb Pro Series Exhaust ->Single out. I removed the huge *** exhaust and deleted the rear resonator topping it off with a stainless tip. The 07s only have one resonator if you are wondering why I only took one off.
IMGP6588.jpg
IMGP6589.jpg
IMGP6590.jpg
and heres what it sounds like:
I'm going to be towing as well...over Colorado's high passes so torque is also supremely important to me. I've done hours and hours of research on this issue to see how I can optimize the torque on my Tundra in that all-important-for-towing 2500 to 3500 RPM range.
From my research, I've concluded the key to getting maximum mid range torque is to maximize exhaust energy (heat) and velocity all the way to the end of the tailpipe...at the exhaust volumes and flow rates the engine produces in the mid range.
Furthermore, if possible, the pulses (from the exhaust valve openings) in the exhaust flow should be maintained...the low pressure on the back edge of one pulse helps pull along the high pressure on the leading edge of the next pulse. This is the principal of a scavenging exhaust.
The reason that dual exhausts...or overly large (like 2.5 inch and larger) single exhausts reduce low to mid range torque is they allow the exhaust gasses to expand (which cools them) and to lose velocity. The cooled air is denser/heavier...and the exhaust pulses more or less are merged together further losing their velocity and scavenging action. The net result is the larger exhaust pipes become essentially long tanks of semi-stagnant gas which has to be pushed out by the incoming exhaust...it's no longer self-scavenging. Or, in other words, a larger or dual exhaust has higher effective backpressure than a smaller, single exhaust at mid-range RPM . Yes, the larger/dual pipes have less wall friction on the gasses than the smaller single pipes but this effect is nullified by the loss of energy/velocity in the larger or dual pipes. It's very important to note this situation applies to the mid-RPM ranges...at very high RPM (like near redline), there's enough energy, volume, and velocity in the exhaust gasses to maintain scavenging all the way to the end of the pipes (even duals) and the lower wall friction of the larger pipes does come into play.
Bottom line: for mid RPM ranges, intuition is wrong...there's more effective back pressure (or less scavenging) in large or dual exhausts; for top end RPM, intuition is right...large/dual exhausts have lower backpressure. And at any RPM, backpressure is just plain bad for torque. There's a myth out there that engines need backpressure to make more torque. This is wrong. Backpressure is resistance and you want the least resistance. If you look at the dyno results and comments posted by V8toilet about his various systems you'll see that he got noticeably better mid range torque than stock by using a single 2.25 pipe running through a fairly low restriction Spintech muffler...and much, much better mid range torque than with either 2.5 inch single pipe or with dual exhausts.
From my research, I've concluded the key to getting maximum mid range torque is to maximize exhaust energy (heat) and velocity all the way to the end of the tailpipe...at the exhaust volumes and flow rates the engine produces in the mid range.
Furthermore, if possible, the pulses (from the exhaust valve openings) in the exhaust flow should be maintained...the low pressure on the back edge of one pulse helps pull along the high pressure on the leading edge of the next pulse. This is the principal of a scavenging exhaust.
The reason that dual exhausts...or overly large (like 2.5 inch and larger) single exhausts reduce low to mid range torque is they allow the exhaust gasses to expand (which cools them) and to lose velocity. The cooled air is denser/heavier...and the exhaust pulses more or less are merged together further losing their velocity and scavenging action. The net result is the larger exhaust pipes become essentially long tanks of semi-stagnant gas which has to be pushed out by the incoming exhaust...it's no longer self-scavenging. Or, in other words, a larger or dual exhaust has higher effective backpressure than a smaller, single exhaust at mid-range RPM . Yes, the larger/dual pipes have less wall friction on the gasses than the smaller single pipes but this effect is nullified by the loss of energy/velocity in the larger or dual pipes. It's very important to note this situation applies to the mid-RPM ranges...at very high RPM (like near redline), there's enough energy, volume, and velocity in the exhaust gasses to maintain scavenging all the way to the end of the pipes (even duals) and the lower wall friction of the larger pipes does come into play.
Bottom line: for mid RPM ranges, intuition is wrong...there's more effective back pressure (or less scavenging) in large or dual exhausts; for top end RPM, intuition is right...large/dual exhausts have lower backpressure. And at any RPM, backpressure is just plain bad for torque. There's a myth out there that engines need backpressure to make more torque. This is wrong. Backpressure is resistance and you want the least resistance. If you look at the dyno results and comments posted by V8toilet about his various systems you'll see that he got noticeably better mid range torque than stock by using a single 2.25 pipe running through a fairly low restriction Spintech muffler...and much, much better mid range torque than with either 2.5 inch single pipe or with dual exhausts.
IMGP6588.jpg
IMGP6589.jpg
IMGP6590.jpg
and heres what it sounds like:
![](http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj175/lghtngblt02/2007%20Dakota/th_IMGP6586.jpg)
#3
![Default](https://dodgeforum.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
i have a single 3 inch catback on my 05 dak. it has more low end grunt now then with the stock set up. all resonators were removed. the y-pipe was opened up just a bit. was running the newer inco set up but over time it rotted out. i now have the newer flowmaster and it is terrible sounding. so raspy it just doesnt sound right. i did have the cherry bomb dual on my fullsize and was very happy with it. but flowmaster sounds junky.
#4
![Default](https://dodgeforum.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
![Big Grin](https://dodgeforum.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](https://dodgeforum.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Last edited by lghtngblt02; 10-13-2008 at 07:02 PM.
#6
#7
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Eastern Washington State
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Trending Topics
#8
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Turn down the heat please
Posts: 11,333
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
![Default](https://dodgeforum.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I'm very happy with my Cherry Bomb (Vortex). Nice deep tone, decently loud when you're in the throttle, a little more reserved at idle and cruising speed, not raspy like flows but it definitely has an aggresive sound to it. I'm thinking of going louder when I get more engine stuff done but I will probably stick with Cherry Bomb, maybe move up to an Extreme (though I have a feeling it would be hard to pass inspection with that one).
#10