would you want twice the weight with cast or twice the chance for cracks with tubular?

With the VTA, is it not better than recirculated because there's less turbulence in the downpipe?

 

AMS's larger opening also decreased temps allowing cooler gases thus more flow.

If I was in the market at this price range, AMS is what I would choose. Others are good as well the MAP I believe is $100 less. It's up to the OP, but I believe that the AMS is the best design.

I went with the rexspeed personally and I think that it is an increadible peice for the price.

 

I've yet to see a MAP or ETS downpipe crack on an VIII, IX, or X. I'll take half the weight.

An external dump would yield less turbulence, but at the price of obnoxious noise. ETS' and MAP's divorced design provide less turbulence vs. AMS' design since they have separate pipes that merge together downstream rather than everything just dumping into the same opening.

Hotter gasses = less dense = faster flowing
This is also one of the benefits a quality ceramic coating can help provide.

 

how about rexspeed? best bang for the buck. just as good as ams

 

Anyone have experienece with the UR downpipe? I want to eventually get a DP and HFC and think it would be wise to stick with the same brand and UR has exactly that at a relatively fair deal.

 

I'd get anything with an external dump. You won't hear it unless you are WOT.

 

I've got the AMS dp. Pure sex

 

Is there any benifit to be had from the shorter dp that does not include the bell housing over stock?