perf-list-digest Wednesday, May 12 1999 Volume 02 : Number 113



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe perf-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE Perf - Borla exhaust system reverberating in cabin?
Re: FTE Perf - Borla exhaust system reverberating in cabin?
FTE Perf - H-Pipe or No H-Pipe??
Re: FTE Perf - H-Pipe or No H-Pipe??
FTE Perf - RE- 390 to replace the 302
Re: FTE Perf - RE: Ranger V8 Swap
Re: FTE Perf - Borla exhaust system reverberating in cabin?
Re: FTE Perf - RE: Ranger V8 Swap

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 19:57:16 -0600
From: "James Draughn"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Borla exhaust system reverberating in cabin?

You are correct about Dynamat being used to lower the DB noise floor of a
car, but when I said that Dynamat wouldint help him that much its because of
my own experience with my dads Van. Like I said before the sound that his
engine makes is very low, probably somewhere around 35hz or so. With all
the windows rolled up and everything sealed as best as it could be, the
engine is so lound in the van that you can't just talk to each other without
rasing your voice. I compared that to putting an actual sub in the car and
playing it. Why is it that car audio enthsiusts use dynamat? To absorb
noise, but doesant it also make you wonder if it doesant absorb the sound
from the music, making the music not as loud? Of course not, the music
doubles in volume (around 3db) because you are not losing sound to the
outside because the Dynamat deadens the panels to the point where they
hardly flex and vibrate, which in turns transmits that sound to the other
side of the panel. Low bass still flexes panels, even when done with
dynamat, but it's usually not too audible because of all the other bass from
the actual sub and other loud speakers. I am an avid car audio enthuisist
who has been studying and installing car audio for around 8 years now, and
have used dynamat. If you want this guy who has a loud exaust to fix his
problem by spending a few hundred dollers on dynamat, when it won't make a
damn good because he rolls his window down on a hot day, which lets all the
sound in then he could go ahead and do that. Or he could fix the exhaust
the way its supposed to be and save a few hundred dollars. Just so everyone
knows the going rate for dynamat, unless you buy it in exreme quanitites is
around 15 dollers a square foot. Dynamat will work awesome for quieting
road noise when your driving, and even the noise from the engine because
your engine vibrates and sends the vibrations through your whole car, while
dynamat absorbs all this vibration which makes the engine "quieter". I
myself love dynamat, and use it alot, but to fix a problem, you usually
well, look at the root of the problem. If you did use dynamat, your
"reverbrations" would probably go down a tad, but I don't think you would
find the improvement you where hoping for, and be dissapointed with the
results of spending a few hundred dollers for dynamat.



in threw the windows and every nook and cranny. It would be like putting in
an extremely loud sub in your car then putting in Dynamat to dampen the
sound.
It wouldn't help dampen the actually sound, just the rattling and squeaking
as the panels in the car are vibrated by the sound, or else car audio
enthusiast wouldn't use Dynamat. >>

James,
As an MECP certified installer I can tell you that you are WRONG about
Dynamat. Dynamat or any other type of sound deadening material keeps outside
noise out by changing the mass or sound properties of the material its
attached to. I have personally put the asphalt based material in several
vehicles, having run a decibel meter in the vehicle before and after the
install. In the instance of a Ch*tty Blazer, the "noise floor" (or
starting/stock) level was in the neighborhood of 12-14 dB. After installing
NoiseKill, the inside road noise dropped to 8-9 dB. That's a 4-5 dB decrease
in noise from the road. That alone can make a TREMENDOUS difference in the
talking and stock radio levels. To coin an old phrase, 3 dB decrease in
noise
will make your stereo sound 2x as loud. If this material can do that for a
stereo, it should make the exhaust tone bearable.
Now on the usage of whichever product you choose, of course follow the
manufacturers directions, but on the specific noise problem being talked
about, I believe that this is mostly caused by what is called "Transfer
Function". Basically what this means is that the vehicle design is
amplifying
the sound (noise) by just its basic design and sound flow characteristics.
You may have to start out dampening just the area over the offending
exhaust,
drive it with someone back there listening, the go back and either layer
more
of the mat (the spray in might also be a better method) spreading away from
the original area. This is a time consuming process but it will get the
noise
calmed down and not a whole heck of a lot of weight to the vehicle. I'm not
wanting to piss anyone off, but I had been skipping over this thread until I
saw a misinformation going on.
I hope I've helped,
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 08:51:45 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Borla exhaust system reverberating in cabin?

>Function". Basically what this means is that the vehicle design is amplifying
>the sound (noise) by just its basic design and sound flow characteristics.

The vehicle is amplifying the sound, or the exhaust is ? If the vehicle
was, then even the stock system would seem fairly loud. If its truly a
resonant sound like the flowmasters have, then the problem is the exhaust
itself, not the vehicle. This would mean that the pulses from the motor
set up a harmonic that is based on the size of the muffler, or the
intermediate pipe, or something is setting up the harmonic. I would think
the goal would be to kill the harmonic rather than just band-aid over it ...



Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 08:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bill
Subject: FTE Perf - H-Pipe or No H-Pipe??

In the on going saga of my engine swap, I am having an entirely new
exhaust system built (manifolds to tail pipe tips). Going to go at
least 2.5 inches all the way on the duals... anyone have any
comments/suggestions on having a H-pipe added between the exhaust
pipes? Doesnt cost me anymore to have it done while the system is
being built.. just dont know if it is necessary or provides any benefit
for the 351W.. had it done on a 64 thunderbird (390 of course) because
the old system had one and had read a thread on a vintage t-bird list
that I subscribed to as being necessary to get the most out of the
system..

Also, I have a set of shorty headers (Hedman) that I still cant decide
on using... have to get them ceramic coated to keep down the underhood
heat... otherwise, I am using stock manifolds off a 69 mustand mach I
(351W 4V engine). Just not sure if I want to put up with the typical
header problems.. any comments??

If all the parts arrive in time, work begins this weekend...

Thanks,

Bill in Texas
'64 F100 Shortbox (351W/C4)
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 10:45:19 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - H-Pipe or No H-Pipe??

>In the on going saga of my engine swap, I am having an entirely new
>exhaust system built (manifolds to tail pipe tips). Going to go at
>least 2.5 inches all the way on the duals... anyone have any
>comments/suggestions on having a H-pipe added between the exhaust
>pipes?

I've heard this thing going both ways... if you have a 4x4, then the duals
will be intereting to route, but will be cool sounding. As for the H pipe,
from what I hear the debate isn't h-pipe or not, its x-pipe or h-pipe.
I've got a catalog from a company called Dynatech, they sell racing systems
and they have the x piece that you can buy separately. There are also
other companies out there making them, still not sure on the proper install
procedures though. Seems like someone said you draw lines on the exhaust,
and wherever the lines disappear first is where you need an equalizer ? I
dunno ... Mine's currently true duals, we'll see what happens when I get
the headers for it, I may go to an x setup.


>Also, I have a set of shorty headers (Hedman) that I still cant decide
>on using... have to get them ceramic coated to keep down the underhood
>heat... otherwise, I am using stock manifolds off a 69 mustand mach I
>(351W 4V engine). Just not sure if I want to put up with the typical
>header problems.. any comments??
>
The 'stang manifolds are very restrictive, they have a much more limited
space than the trucks do with the narrow shock towers. I'd go for the
shortie's myself. A few years ago I would have never looked twice at a
header, just pitched it, lately though, with all the stainless and ceramics
and shortie's I've switched my view on these things. the stainless/coated
ones should last you forever (or at least a really long time), and they
don't hang down with the shorties so you dont' have any clearance problems.
As long as you get a good seal you'll be fine, and if its a rebuild, I
would think you could get away with no gaskets ... maybe headers still need
them now that I think about it, but I had my heads surfaced on the exhaust
side, so I can just bolt my manifolds up without gaskets I think the same
can be done with some headers, depening on header design


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 08:47:51 -0700
From: "Vierra, William BGI SF"
Subject: FTE Perf - RE- 390 to replace the 302

Thanks for the input on the 390 to replace the current 302 I have. After
looking at the engine (its fun to use a putty knife and screw driver just to
find the valve cover bolts) and the amount of modification necessary to put
it in the 51, I am going most likely back to my original plan of rebuilding
the 302. Besides I really like small blocks, I don't know why I just do.

Robert F. Davis" had asked what's
wrong with the 302. Well its compression is 160 to 175 on seven cylinders
and 120 on the last. In adding oil to that cylinder and rechecking it went
to 100. It also has a knock in the lower end of the motor which started me
on this task of deciding what to do. I would really prefer a 351W but I
have not been able to spend much time in finding one. The one I did look at
was actually a Cleveland impersonating a Windsor in the owners mind. This
week I am going to look at a late 70's 302 to replace the 71 302 with 66 289
heads that I have. If that motor is as bad as the three others I have seen
its probably time to give up trying to find a decent used motor and rebuild
the one I have. I had wanted a four bolt main block but prior input from
the list and reflection on what I am really after in the motor have
convinced me a two bolt main will be fine.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 17:18:42 EDT
From: FLR150 AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - RE: Ranger V8 Swap

There is an article in the latest issue of Sport Truck magazine that lists
the different companies that make and sell kits just for these
swaps....really informative article to. Check it out.
Later,
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC
"Hazardous Material"
Wayne's Flareside
and Ford Page (Page 1)

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 17:34:40 EDT
From: FLR150 AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Borla exhaust system reverberating in cabin?

In a message dated 5/11/99 9:53:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time, wish iastate.edu
writes:


the goal would be to kill the harmonic rather than just Band-Aid over it ...
>>

Gents,
I was offering a viable opinion and a variable for which the guy could make
his decision. I personally would not want to hack up my $600 exhaust system
and pay MORE labor to try to cover the exhaust note I bought it for in the
first place. I have installed the single in/dual out Flowmaster on my truck.
The reverb effect is only really noticeable at lower speeds, hence lower
tones. And since the actual muffler itself is placed right under the rear of
the Supercab, it does reverb a bit under the back seat. I can live with it.
And regarding transfer function, it is basically as you stated Wish, except
that when I did the trunk and interior of my car in Dynamat, I could not hear
my loud (read custom header, freeflow cat, 3" pipe out to a Supertrapp)
exhaust on my grand am. Yes I could hear it with the windows down (DUH) but
my driving was done with the windows up since I wore a suit to work...and the
heat in Daytona beach would stain a nice dress shirt with your sweat in a
matter of minutes. Enough of this bantering,
Later,
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC
"Hazardous Material"
Wayne's Flareside
and Ford Page (Page 1)

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 23:10:07 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - RE: Ranger V8 Swap

PitStop Performance wrote:
>

> and plan on using
> the stock EFI (in the tank) fuel pump with a regulator (for the carb).

Dont do it! It WILL not work. (If you mean the inline regulator like
you see for carb. use) It's not designed to drop a 40 PSI pressure to
3-5 PSI. Better to swap in an EFI engine or disable the in-tank unit.

> Those Mitshu 5-speeds are not
> that strong to begin with.

Just dont abuse it after the swap. ;-)

>
> >I would really use an automatic for this combo...

A pox on automatics!

>
> Nope. I want to stay with the manual for several reasons. First, the
> 5-speed was just rebuilt last fall. Plus, changing over to an auto is
> a real pain. And buying another trans would just add to the cost. And
> since this is a 4x4 an auto (or a different [say--T5]) manual will
> push the transfer case back. That would mean modifying the drive
> shafts. That would put this project into the cannot afford category.
> No, we are keeping the stock 5-speed and swapping in a 255 V8.

Dont blame you a bit. Might want to start saving for a T-5 afterwards
just in case though. If the original gear box holds up then use the $$....

---

To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.