2.25" vs 2.5" on an N/A?

Nissan 300ZX technical discussion forum: Maintenance, performance, installations, modifications, how-to's and troubleshooting.
User avatar
a.p.barron
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 3:57 pm
Car: 1985 300ZX Turbo
1991 300ZX N/A *sold*

Post

So after finally taking care of all the maintenance stuff, it's time to upgrade the engine a little bit. I've been shopping around for an exhaust system for my N/A, and I'm having trouble finding a straight answer on which would be better between 2.25" and 2.5" piping. I was thinking about going with Specialty Z exhaust, and they "highly recommend" going with the 2.25" exhaust for the N/A. Any reason as to why they would suggest this? What say you N/A brethren 2.25" or 2.5"?


Just a little background on the Z: My N/A is 100% stock and is a daily driver, but I do like to fine-tune my driving skills in the mountains fairly frequently. I don't really have any horsepower goals (it's an N/A :-\), but I just want to get my Z running at its best. I'm more than likely not going to do anything more than your basic cost effective mods. I'm mostly going to concentrate on the suspension, since I want a well handling car, but having a little extra pep wouldn't hurt. :)


Z31toZ32
Posts: 1673
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 12:43 am
Car: 1999 Infinity QX4
Location: Denver, CO

Post

can't comment on the piping issue, but if SZ said something I'd go with it. those guys are pros.

User avatar
Ace2cool
Posts: 11650
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:21 pm
Car: 1991 Nissan 300ZX TT
1966 Datsun Fairlady 1600
2005 Suzuki GSX-R 600
1974 Honda CB550 Four
2009 Ford F150 Lariat
Location: Murfreesboro, TN

Post

The rest of the stock system is 2.25". This will just be more efficient. AZ ZBum had a good post a little while back regarding exhaust and explaining its dynamics. I'll see if I can find it. It had to do with the N/A exhaust being introduced as "pulses" from the heads, through the manifolds, and out the back, since there is no turbocharger or similar "smoothing" mechanism in the system. Therefore, too big, and the pulses will move too slowly, costing you power vs. a properly sized exhaust. Too small, and you're "bottlenecking" the flow, making it harder to evacuate the gasses. If SZ says 2.25" is the way to go, then 2.25" is the way to go. I trust their flow testing.

User avatar
Ace2cool
Posts: 11650
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:21 pm
Car: 1991 Nissan 300ZX TT
1966 Datsun Fairlady 1600
2005 Suzuki GSX-R 600
1974 Honda CB550 Four
2009 Ford F150 Lariat
Location: Murfreesboro, TN

Post

AZ-ZBum wrote: Exhausts are hard to optimize for a wide RPM range. Since most engines make most of their power in the upper RPM range, most exhausts are generally optimized for lower RPMs to help with low end power.

Exhaust gases come out of the engine in pulses. Depending on how long the valves are open and how many RPMs the engine is turning determines how much air and how fast it comes out. But once it's out, it has to stop since there isn't anything else to force it any longer. At least, not until the next cycle.

the exhaust between the exhaust valves and the turbo is highly pressurized. And since pressure acts in all directions equally, the engine has serious back pressure.

As for the size of the exhaust thing, remember that the exhaust is actually a series of pulses. A good exhaust will create an even flow of air. This is hard to do over a large RPM range though. So most exhausts are optimized for lower RPMs since engines typically can make more power at upper RPMs to compensate for the exhaust that's made for the lower RPMs.

Think about it. The more RPMs, the more air that flows. The more air that flows, the more space it takes up.

So why does the larger exhaust create a lower RPM loss? The pulsing action is magnified. So instead of one smooth flow, the air is started and stopped and started and stopped. Thus, the energy is used to start and stop the movement. That's why the low end loss.

And to answer the question "why doesn't it matter on turbos?"
Because the turbo takes those gases and smooths them out.

When the gases hit the turbo, they are pressurized because it takes energy to spin the turbo. And once the turbo starts spinning, the energy of the turbo is very smooth coming out of it. So the size of the pipe doesn't matter as long as it is big enough to flow the volume of air coming out of it.

For the NA Z31, it's been generally accepted to stay at the 2.5" size for a catback system. But to really see any benefits, you'll also want a good set of headers.
Just a better version of what I was saying.

User avatar
DCaff300ZX
Posts: 4202
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:18 am
Car: .
1993 CRP TT- Modified
Location: Tacoma, Washington

Post

But at the end AZ Bum finishes saying 2.5" is best, not 2.25".
I had a high-flowing 2.5" system made for me at a local shop awhile back that took adding cats and resonators to make it work correctly at lower RPM's, and return torque to reasonable levels as otherwise there was very little torque and the rasp was obnoxious.
Recently I had it tucked more for my lower suspension and reworked somewhat with slightly smaller hi-flow cats and improved bends in the back, which further improved things by removing highway drone noise and even added more torque...so 2.5" is obviously very doable.

nissanfreak12
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:07 pm
Car: 92 300zx 2+2 TT
Location: Denver, CO

Post

DCaff300ZX wrote:But at the end AZ Bum finishes saying 2.5" is best, not 2.25".
I had a high-flowing 2.5" system made for me at a local shop awhile back that took adding cats and resonators to make it work correctly at lower RPM's, and return torque to reasonable levels as otherwise there was very little torque and the rasp was obnoxious.
Recently I had it tucked more for my lower suspension and reworked somewhat with slightly smaller hi-flow cats and improved bends in the back, which further improved things by removing highway drone noise and even added more torque...so 2.5" is obviously very doable.
You do also know he was talking about the Z31 with this statement......

User avatar
JaredM
Posts: 253
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:46 am
Car: 1990 z32-300zx
Location: Georgia

Post

I'd go with 2.25
you need optimal flow velocity. bigger pipes can slow down velocity which will cause restriction itself. Though I cant say i know the optimal FPM of a z32 myself.

I've heard of people using larger pipes and adjusting deflectors to reach good velocity though.

User avatar
ArticDragon192
Posts: 2767
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:35 pm
Car: 91 Z32 2+2

Post

I run 3". Makes me happy. Lol

User avatar
JaredM
Posts: 253
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:46 am
Car: 1990 z32-300zx
Location: Georgia

Post

Make you happy rong tiem?

User avatar
a.p.barron
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 3:57 pm
Car: 1985 300ZX Turbo
1991 300ZX N/A *sold*

Post

Thanks guys, 2.25" it is. I don't know if this will be helpful to any of you, but I found these sweet articles:

http://www.superchevy.com/technical/eng ... index.html

http://www.boyleworks.com/ta400/psp/exhaust.html

I also found a helpful post on another forum. Look at post #10 from this forum:

http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/h-pipe- ... 25941.html

User avatar
ArticDragon192
Posts: 2767
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:35 pm
Car: 91 Z32 2+2

Post

JaredM wrote:Make you happy rong tiem?
Very long time :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PecuME4in7A

User avatar
DCaff300ZX
Posts: 4202
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:18 am
Car: .
1993 CRP TT- Modified
Location: Tacoma, Washington

Post

JaredM wrote:I'd go with 2.25
you need optimal flow velocity. bigger pipes can slow down velocity which will cause restriction itself. Though I cant say i know the optimal FPM of a z32 myself.

I've heard of people using larger pipes and adjusting deflectors to reach good velocity though.
I agree...my 2.5" setup was "tuned" to perfection using cats and resonators, and then one final bend that put torque back into the mix.
Can't say I am a pro with exhaust either, but I knew that slowly adding backpressure to a more open system would end up with the best result of max flow for top end, while retaining correct velocity.

User avatar
DCaff300ZX
Posts: 4202
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:18 am
Car: .
1993 CRP TT- Modified
Location: Tacoma, Washington

Post

nissanfreak12 wrote:
DCaff300ZX wrote:But at the end AZ Bum finishes saying 2.5" is best, not 2.25".
I had a high-flowing 2.5" system made for me at a local shop awhile back that took adding cats and resonators to make it work correctly at lower RPM's, and return torque to reasonable levels as otherwise there was very little torque and the rasp was obnoxious.
Recently I had it tucked more for my lower suspension and reworked somewhat with slightly smaller hi-flow cats and improved bends in the back, which further improved things by removing highway drone noise and even added more torque...so 2.5" is obviously very doable.
You do also know he was talking about the Z31 with this statement......
...about NA engines with relatively similar characteristics...

User avatar
ArticDragon192
Posts: 2767
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:35 pm
Car: 91 Z32 2+2

Post


User avatar
AZ-ZBum
Posts: 1282
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 9:48 am
Car: 05 Nissan Murano
84 Nissan 300ZX Z31 AE
88 Nissan 300ZX Z31 Vert
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Contact:

Post

DCaff300ZX wrote:
nissanfreak12 wrote:You do also know he was talking about the Z31 with this statement......
...about NA engines with relatively similar characteristics...
Z31 is single exhaust.
Z32 is dual exhaust.


Return to “300ZX (Z32) Technical”