G
Guest
Guest
Now call me an old fart if you like (my girls have for 35 years now)
but I cannot understand why an aftermarket manufacturer charging a
not unreasonable price for the job would want to fly in the face of
the wisdom of the OEM manufacturer.
In my days training as a diesel engineer, I was taught that all
components were made to a specification that was nearly always a
trade-off between ultimate performance/quality and budget
requirements. But the final arbiter was providing good life and
performance for an appropriate price which represented value.
So if Toy say it should be 60mm OD why would this manufacturer be
happy at making it at 51mm OD (rounded-up) ? Or even more pertinent,
why would anyone want to buy a replacement system which was at least
20% smaller?
To confuse me even more, my basic HZ non-turbo has a system that has
an OD variable between 59-62mm - according to my vernier tonight. Yet
this current debate refers to higher powered (higher exhaust volume
throughput?) engines with either an additional turbo, or a turbo plus
another 12 valves. Maybe an example of where the diameter should be
larger still; but there again, it might be a good example of the
balance between performance versus budget requirements in the OEM's
mind. Though still puzzles me why a smaller replacement system should
even be considered.
When I first got my 80 and needed a new system I went along to an
alleged 'specialist' who showed me in great detail exactly what he
would do to make me a new system. But when I asked why he was showing
me 50mm tube, and he replied it was the largest he could work with, I
politely thanked him and walked away, later buying OEM of the correct bore.
Am I missing something here ?
Sorry to interrupt.
Jon
Tring, Herts
'92 HZJ80 ex UN Bosnia surplus - with OEM exhaust but soon needing a downpipe.
but I cannot understand why an aftermarket manufacturer charging a
not unreasonable price for the job would want to fly in the face of
the wisdom of the OEM manufacturer.
In my days training as a diesel engineer, I was taught that all
components were made to a specification that was nearly always a
trade-off between ultimate performance/quality and budget
requirements. But the final arbiter was providing good life and
performance for an appropriate price which represented value.
So if Toy say it should be 60mm OD why would this manufacturer be
happy at making it at 51mm OD (rounded-up) ? Or even more pertinent,
why would anyone want to buy a replacement system which was at least
20% smaller?
To confuse me even more, my basic HZ non-turbo has a system that has
an OD variable between 59-62mm - according to my vernier tonight. Yet
this current debate refers to higher powered (higher exhaust volume
throughput?) engines with either an additional turbo, or a turbo plus
another 12 valves. Maybe an example of where the diameter should be
larger still; but there again, it might be a good example of the
balance between performance versus budget requirements in the OEM's
mind. Though still puzzles me why a smaller replacement system should
even be considered.
When I first got my 80 and needed a new system I went along to an
alleged 'specialist' who showed me in great detail exactly what he
would do to make me a new system. But when I asked why he was showing
me 50mm tube, and he replied it was the largest he could work with, I
politely thanked him and walked away, later buying OEM of the correct bore.
Am I missing something here ?
Sorry to interrupt.
Jon
Tring, Herts
'92 HZJ80 ex UN Bosnia surplus - with OEM exhaust but soon needing a downpipe.