Just wanted to see what you guys thought of this.

Would this large of a diameter kill the low end toque?

Would it even clear the front sway bar?

 

no

 

Why would you need 3.5"? Are you planning on making 700+ WHP?

 

Well that is exactly why I posted this thread.
I was just curious to see if there was a benifit from 3 to 3.5.

 

It's more important to have a true 3" from the turbo back to keep the flow even without necking down along the way.

Do you realize how much flow can go through a 3" pipe? More than you will ever need.

 

Technically the best exhaust for a turbo engine in no exhaust at all.

Since there is a turbocharger between the engine and the exhaust, the cylinders won't see nay difference in backpressure if you remove the exhaust.
On teh otehr hand if you remove teh exhaust the turbo will be bale to discharge gasses faster because it has much less backpresure, therefore spooling faster (but still limited by the design of the turbo).

In practical terms this means that the larger the exhaust diameter on a turbo car, the better.

 

i have been told by someone who actually removed his turboback from his subaru and he lost practically all torque... a super freeflowing straight pipe is best.. not zero pipe in my opinion

 

i know what magazine sickdriver is quoting from but this idea is only theoretical. His point is only the case when there is alot of restriction... too much of anything is a bad thing.. including too much flow, too much fuel, too much oxygen etc etc

 

On an f-body, a 3-1/2" or 4" exhaust makes a dyno/track proven improvement once you're running trap speeds over 130 mph.