MSA Twice Pipes Installed

[datsun723]

Cost me $150 to install...well $250 really. The other twice pipes thread is mine and explains what happened. Beware 280Z owners lol. But Abraham at MSA set everything straight so i'm VERY pleased with this setup.

 

The gurgling and occasional backfire is just priceless

[datsun723]

I do want to mention though, I've had mine for about 3 1/2 weeks now and I've washed it once or twice since then...there is some type of surface rust on it...maybe oxidation?

 

[Tony D]

It's an untreated pipe. Raw Steel, you put water on hot steel and it rusts.

My advice is to quickly put some heavy coating of BBQ paint on it to try and stop the total 'rustification' of the piping where it's visible at least. Before long you will see that nice rust-coloring over the whole length of the pipe.

 

BBQ Paint, or any of the 1200F paints from Autozone will work fine if you follow their instructions for preparation TO THE LETTER and give it a SLOW curing as the instructions call for.

 

My twice pipes (JDM) have been under my 73 since 1985 and the paint I put on then still is there protecting them from corrosion.

 

High-Heat silver is also a choice many people like...

[Tony D]

You can order the twice pipes for various msa headers. It gives you the option when you order them. I wouldn't think you would benifit from this exhaust if you were turbo.. the pipes are quite small. Probably to much backpressure but would sound good im sure.

 

Poor guess. Check the flow math. Two 2" pipes flow better than a singel 2.5. Actually two 2" pipes flow about as well as a single 2.75" pipe, so for a turbo in an early car twice pipes would be an easier packaging exercise than a single 3", and flow just as well. Speaking as someone with twin 50mm pipes on a JDM setup that has spun 325+ Turbo RWHP, I think the system is viable in that application. And even packaging twin 2.5" pipes is easier than a 3" single...and outflows it as well!

[madkaw]

I wish I could contribute to these threads with some real experience, but I can hope that I get my project going by the end of the year. I have tried something different and I hope beneficial in my twice pipe quest. I am hoping the crossover pipe will help in the scavenging. I am running twin 2" with the X pipe-hope it sounds good!!!

[~KnuckleDuster~]

Poor guess. Check the flow math. Two 2" pipes flow better than a singel 2.5. Actually two 2" pipes flow about as well as a single 2.75" pipe, so for a turbo in an early car twice pipes would be an easier packaging exercise than a single 3", and flow just as well. Speaking as someone with twin 50mm pipes on a JDM setup that has spun 325+ Turbo RWHP, I think the system is viable in that application. And even packaging twin 2.5" pipes is easier than a 3" single...and outflows it as well!

 

I wasn't really looking for a flow vs pipe argument..but since you want to call me out on such a poor guess Ill have to retort. Until you dyno both the twice pipes and straight 3" piping I really don't care about your 0.2 cents. You can do all the calculations you want but actual numbers don't lie, and you can stop throwing the term "JDM" around.. it dosn't make you faster or better than anyone else sir.

[Tony D]

Er...

Well, my 73 240Zt has dynoed upwards of 325 to the rear wheels using the JDM Trust / Greddy dual pipe setup that is a mirror image of the OEM Z432 Exhaust System, only smaller.

 

The Design Impetus for the Twice Pipes in the JDM was the Z432, which had twin 60mm pipes to support a full-on 2-Liter running above 10,500 rpms in competition and restricted to standard componentry in it's racing class.

 

So Greddy/Trust simply copied that system since that is what the early 240's are designed to accept straight out of the box.

 

It's far easier to package that JDM system in an early car (see photos earlier in the thread for the obviousl 'twin humps' in the differential crossmember) than it EVER will be on a single 3" system!

 

Unless, of course you change to a later single-cutout diffy crossmember...

 

So packaging an exhaust system that WILL NOT BOTTOM OUT (just like the OEM setup) and retains full flow capabilites more than sufficient to support over 300HP sounds like a good way to go to me. I guess you missed those dyno numbers the first time...as well as the PRIMARY reason for doing it in an EARLY CAR: PACKAGING EASE. It's what the freakin' designers of the vehicle intended for the chassis! Look at any number of 3" systems out there, and tell me they aren't scarfed where they pass beneath the differential...what good does a 3" Mandrel Bent system do you when it's smashed to 2.5" at the differential due to bottoming out. And if you haven't swapped to the later diff member, chances are good you're crushed more than that! Your comment is foolish on the face---it's like saying there is no difference in dyno numbers between a 3" Mandrel and 3" Crush-Bent system---simple cross-sectional diameters will show you there is a flow difference, and flow means HP---ESPECIALLY on a turbo engine. Now, if you are talking on a bone stock N/A engine, sure you may not flow enough to have it make a difference, and threfore use the dyno numbers to 'prove' the mandrel bent system is 'useless' compared to crush-bent. But even on a stock turbo the addidion of a 3" mandrel bent tube exhaust is worth 20HP on a ZXT... But then we come full-circle to packaging again don't we? And the argument of 'how good is a 3" exhaust if it's crushed 1/2"?'

 

With your retort, you really need to read a bit more to realize people posting here aren't blathering out mindless drivel. You made a bad guess, the supporting documentation was posted earlier in the thread as well. Live with it and drop the attitude. It's not a Honda Forum.

 

Oh, on the JDM thing...er, what 's your point. I lived there at the time I bought it...and let me say that the development level currently being experienced in the USA on the street is only now approaching the level of Japanese Street Tuners of 20+ years ago. So I proudly state I have a JDM Aftermarket exhaust system that has been on my car since 1985, and was almost 7 years old when I bought it. Never used a 'special header gasket'

never had a tube rust through. Sometimes quality counts, son, and these are quality parts, well thought out and engineered far better than their counterparts available in the USA for years...

 

As far as 'faster or better' than anybody else...I think I am faster than any other F/PRO competitior in the world as certified by the SCTA/BNI, amongst other classes. Never said I was better. But I damn well am certified faster than anyone else on the planet competing in that classification...

 

I digress...

[~KnuckleDuster~]

You still provide no actual proof that twice pipes are just as good or better as a 3" mandrel bent set-up. So just stop using up your finger strength here because I for one could care less about whats you "think"

 

 

And honestly I don't even care. You started off by calling me out on a bad guess in my own thread when I was just giving my thoughts unlike you who thinks you know everything. I don't assume to know everything but I have built and owned turbocharged cars before and been on other car forums for quite sometime. So feel free to go on rambling about the off topic subject. Better yet go start your own thread and you will get more views on your debate. Im not here to bicker and quite frankly I don't have time to read your giant posts.

[Tony D]

All I can say is you can't change the rules of physics, and common sense dictates the flow numbers speak for themselves. Added to packaging ease it's a no-brainer...

 

Our Bonneville Car runs twice-pipes and I can show even with twin mandrel-bent 2.5" straightpipes, you loose horespower from flow restriction on an N/A L28. And packaging on a car with 1.5" of ground clearance is kinda critical...a single 3.5" or 4" pipe would not package nearly as efficiently in the package. "Stock" ITS 2.4's run at least a 3" mandrel bent exhaust to cut the power losses in the exhaust end...so obviously a 3" mandrel bent exhaust is a hindrance. How do you get more flow through the same available space? Double Up smaller pipes for a flow equivalent. It's not rocket science.

[~KnuckleDuster~]

Ok. Your 100% correct.

 

 

So how bout those twice pipes..

[Daeron]

Knuckle Duster, whats the deal?? Tony is just giving a real-world anecdote to support the mathematic evidence I just posted up..

 

The ONLY issue inherent in running a twice-pipe exhaust system is a theoretical lack of scavenging caused by FULLY divorced exhaust pipes.. ie, one pipe fed by the front three cylinders, and one pipe fed by the back three. Having a collector/Y-pipe completely integrates the exhaust pulses of all six cylinders, eliminating that issue.

 

From that point, it is a simple physics excercise in flow capacity and resistance.. Twin pipes offer *slightly* more surface area per cross sectional area, so there is a slightly increased resistance, to be countered by adding cross sectional area. Yes, two 2 inch pipes offer less flow capacity than a single 3"... but there is more difference between one 2.5" and two 2", then there is between two 2" and one 3".

 

The numerical difference between cross sectional area numbers and circumference numbers (the added resistance from twin 2" as compared to one 3") is a comparison of a square factor to a linear factor.. in other words, a .25 numerical difference in the cross sectional area, is FAR greater than a .25 numerical difference in circumference.

 

I had typed up a post and was putting the finishing touches on a diagram illustrating the difference between one 3" and twin 2", when a friend called and I was pulled away from my PC. A power outage later, and all was lost.. and I don't feel like going through it again. But in the grand scheme of things, if a single 2 1/2 inch exhaust is a 5, then a single 3" is a 7, a single 4" is a 12.5, and twin 2" is 6.25.

 

The total circumference of pipe in a single 3" system is about 9.5"; the total circumference on twin 2" is about 12.25". One 2.5" pipe is about 7.9", and a 4" system is 12.6. Again, that similarity in resistance from suface area of pipe is a linear modifier, where the corss sectional area is a square modifier.. so the cross sectional area makes far more difference than the resistance from surface area of tubing. Only if we were dealing with very LOOONG exhaust systems would multiple tubes start becoming a fundamental impedance.

 

 

Keep in mind, TonyD was trying to SUPPORT the use of this type of system first and foremost... "twice pipes" are a subject of more misinformed blabber ("It costs you horsepower!!!" Not if done properly, by calculating your pipe sizes correctly) than almost anything else Z-related, and in case you hadn't noticed, our Dear Little Friend has a WHOLE lot of experience with a world of tuning that did not exist in the united states until recently; bascially, until the Internet gave ALL of us normal people the opportunity to chew the fat with people who had been in the Home Islands, and people who had been on top-competing race efforts with these cars, and KNEW how to get 400 hp out of a stock motor by blinking at it the right way.

 

This isn't random BS; it is logic, supported by mathematics, and backed up by anecdotal evidence. There are many other discussions where these points have been made, by other people.. Recently I have shown up as a voice of summary for alot of those who don't feel like repeating themselves, but what more can you want on a quest for automotive truth? Logic, empirical theory, and anecdotal evidence all support these ideas on exhaust tubing size.. Search in other car forums, search this forum, or, don't, and choose to stay obfuscated, but the Truth Is.

[pch]

blah blah....who cares if it flows better or not. They look hella cool and that's that. When I was running 452whp in my s14 did I care if my 3inch exhaust flowed better then my 4 inch or 3.5? Answer is no! I had 400 plus horsepower to the ground on a 2650lbs car...I could care less if I gained or loss some.

 

 

Anyways truth to the matter is it is always about prefrence. In this case you bring knowledge to the table and its appreciated by some of the members. But let's get back on topic and this is more or less of an update and what he has done to the car. Let's not ♥♥♥♥ in the thread anymore.

 

Hey by the way I will be passing by temecula tomorrow...would love to see the car

[datsun723]

i'm in temecula too ;_;

 

but yea...his Z is nice lol

[~KnuckleDuster~]

The deal is you guys are trying to have a debate about something I don't care to debate about. This thread was made to show off the new exhaust not to have a pissing match about how 2 smaller pipes are just as good as one big pipe. I simply made a comment that I didn't think these would be good for a turbo set-up just trying to stay active in the conversation going on, and I get called out for it. Sure I may be wrong but I never said I knew what the hell I was talking about. With all that said I know you guys know what your talking about, and im not saying your wrong, I just like proof aka dyno proven results.

[~KnuckleDuster~]

Hey by the way I will be passing by temecula tomorrow...would love to see the car

 

Texted you

[datsun723]

It's an untreated pipe. Raw Steel, you put water on hot steel and it rusts.

My advice is to quickly put some heavy coating of BBQ paint on it to try and stop the total 'rustification' of the piping where it's visible at least. Before long you will see that nice rust-coloring over the whole length of the pipe.

 

BBQ Paint, or any of the 1200F paints from Autozone will work fine if you follow their instructions for preparation TO THE LETTER and give it a SLOW curing as the instructions call for.

 

My twice pipes (JDM) have been under my 73 since 1985 and the paint I put on then still is there protecting them from corrosion.

 

High-Heat silver is also a choice many people like...

 

i will definitely take your advice as i dont want a rusty exhaust....eww...lol.

 

I do have a question though. The paint takes care of the outside, but what of the inside?

[Daeron]

The deal is you guys are trying to have a debate about something I don't care to debate about. This thread was made to show off the new exhaust not to have a pissing match about how 2 smaller pipes are just as good as one big pipe. I simply made a comment that I didn't think these would be good for a turbo set-up just trying to stay active in the conversation going on, and I get called out for it. Sure I may be wrong but I never said I knew what the hell I was talking about. With all that said I know you guys know what your talking about, and im not saying your wrong, I just like proof aka dyno proven results.

 

Hey man, no malice here.. "I'm Just Sayin'" is all.

 

Sorry to piss on the parade, FWIW... but in the end, alot of BS flies around about twice pipes and I appointed myself Defender of the Truth on this subject about a year ago... so any time the discussion comes up, I like to make the mathematical and theoretical facts known for posterity's sake. Once in a blue moon, someone signs up to HybridZ with the intent of using the Search feature, and it is nice to have a couple voices out there that keep that in mind.. the more definitive, logical, and fact-based answers we have in threads out there, the more useful the search function is.

 

So, once again, apologies for any affront, and TWICE PIPES SOUND THE BESTESTEST!!!!

[Tony D]

You got 'called out' because you made a bad guess.

 

Live with it. You got dyno results, you just chose to ignore them.

 

Like I said initially, this isn't a Honda Forum, expect to be bluntly presented with information by knowledgable individuals....who may or my not answer your beck and call to present empirical evidence when they are 11 Time Zones from where all their sh*t happens to be stored.

 

If you make a boneheaded comment, don't get defensive when you're informed it's incorrect. It's that easy. You simply got well over the edge on sarcasam for no good reason.

 

If someone makes a bad, incorrect statement, should they NOT have the correct information posted? Kinda goes counter to what this site is all about, doesn't it?

[~KnuckleDuster~]

Hey man, no malice here.. "I'm Just Sayin'" is all.

 

Sorry to piss on the parade, FWIW... but in the end, alot of BS flies around about twice pipes and I appointed myself Defender of the Truth on this subject about a year ago... so any time the discussion comes up, I like to make the mathematical and theoretical facts known for posterity's sake. Once in a blue moon, someone signs up to HybridZ with the intent of using the Search feature, and it is nice to have a couple voices out there that keep that in mind.. the more definitive, logical, and fact-based answers we have in threads out there, the more useful the search function is.

 

So, once again, apologies for any affront, and TWICE PIPES SOUND THE BESTESTEST!!!!

 

No worries, I had no idea there was a bunch of controversy on the subject.. explains why you guys were getting so serious haha.

[JMortensen]

You got 'called out' because you made a bad guess.

 

Live with it. You got dyno results, you just chose to ignore them.

 

Like I said initially, this isn't a Honda Forum, expect to be bluntly presented with information by knowledgable individuals....who may or my not answer your beck and call to present empirical evidence when they are 11 Time Zones from where all their sh*t happens to be stored.

 

If you make a boneheaded comment, don't get defensive when you're informed it's incorrect. It's that easy. You simply got well over the edge on sarcasam for no good reason.

 

If someone makes a bad, incorrect statement, should they NOT have the correct information posted? Kinda goes counter to what this site is all about, doesn't it?

Tone it down Tony. We want accurate information, but we also don't want flame wars here.