Performance and Accessories 2nd gen only Talk about Dodge/Cummins aftermarket products for second generation trucks here. Can include high-performance mods, or general accessories.

Advice for my Stacks......

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 6, 2006 | 03:12 PM
  #1  
Diesel-Dan's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
Advice for my Stacks......

OK....personal truck time.....I have been batting this around in my head for the last few weeks.....

I want stacks....i will have stacks...and i am going to build my own set-up. I have all the stuff (OR access to it) needed to do it. What i want to know is this:

Should do the split for the stacks with 4" pipe (Y-Pipe) or just do a 2"x4" (I think this is as good as 4” pipe volume wise??? Yes?) square tubing manifold with the stacks welded to that? I can make it so the smoke is distributed equally no prob either way...

Is the square tubing rout going to be too restrictive (Going from round to square then back to round again....not good for flow).........or just look at it in the sence that stacks don’t flow very well anyway and just do it. (Lots of 90* Bends in the stack setup.) I think my losses would be very marginal...and i think that i can cover up the square tubing easier than the round pipe.....i don’t know...what are your thoughts? I have seen this done very cleanly…..but....i missed out on my class on Thermodynamics....so any with better knowledge chime in please!

If the gains of going to round pipe over square tubing is very marginal, I think I will do the square tubing………for ease of building……
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 03:31 PM
  #2  
Forrest Nearing's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,800
Likes: 0
I've built both, and the square/rectangular tubing is much easier to build, and I saw no difference in spool-up or EGT's
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 03:32 PM
  #3  
BigBlue's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
I don't think it'd be a big problem. I'd personally do a 4"x4" square tube instead of a 2"x4". Just to try and keep everything the same size. Also, are you doing 5" stacks or 4"? 4" is going to be to small and dorky looking. And don't worry about the smoke coming out equally, you don't have any anyways.
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 03:36 PM
  #4  
Diesel-Dan's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
Originally Posted by BigBlue
I don't think it'd be a big problem. I'd personally do a 4"x4" square tube instead of a 2"x4". Just to try and keep everything the same size. Also, are you doing 5" stacks or 4"? 4" is going to be to small and dorky looking. And don't worry about the smoke coming out equally, you don't have any anyways.


I have SOME!!! I do have 105 HP sticks in there! I was going to run 2" stacks........thought that would be unique ........what the heck do you think i am going to run! 5"! I dont know...but i think 4x4 would be too big.......cool off the flow too much.......
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 03:40 PM
  #5  
BigBlue's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
It can't be that big of a deal on cooling off. I'm running a 5" y-pipe to 5" stacks and it hasn't affected spoolup or EGT's. Dan, my truck puts out more smoke when I fire it up than yours has ever dreamed of.
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 03:40 PM
  #6  
graphitecumnz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 0
From: Wichita, Kansas
2"x4" square tubing provides 8 square inches of cross sectional area while 4" round tubing provides 12.57 square inches of cross sectional area. Hydraulically speaking, that's a significant difference but since you'll be splitting the flow I couldn't see it being a big issue.... you'll be taking the full flow through the 4" (pre-split) and then you'd be taking around half the flow through the each side past the split. The 2"x4" is probably sufficient for that as long as you keep the flow on each side of the split to around 50% of the maximum flow. Anytime you abruptly change the cross section(4" round dead headed into 2"x4" square tube) you introduce expansion/contraction losses in your flow regime. Of course, it's probably not nearly as big of an issue when dealing with gases as it is with liquids.....

Thermodynamics probably wouldn't have helped as much as fluid mechanics....
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 03:51 PM
  #7  
Diesel-Dan's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
Originally Posted by graphitecumnz
Thermodynamics probably wouldn't have helped as much as fluid mechanics....

Yeah....missed that class too.......

Blue.......

OK...i feel better......im just going a differant rout.......i useing caps too! haha.......*DING, DING, DING*
Reply

Trending Topics

Old May 6, 2006 | 04:12 PM
  #8  
graphitecumnz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 0
From: Wichita, Kansas
Originally Posted by Diesel_Dan
Yeah....missed that class too.......
I'd be better off had I missed that class... I didn't learn much if anything from my teacher who couldn't speak english as I have since working as a bridge engineer and actually doing open channel modeling.
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 04:28 PM
  #9  
Forrest Nearing's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,800
Likes: 0
I used 3x6... the 5" pipe sat perfect on it
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 05:59 PM
  #10  
blackdiesel's Avatar
Registered
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, AR
im going with forrest. i used 4x6 and the 5" pipe fit nice and square on it. you'd be dealing with a reducer if you went with a 2x4 or a 4x4.
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 06:26 PM
  #11  
Diesel-Dan's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
Originally Posted by blackdiesel02
im going with forrest. i used 4x6 and the 5" pipe fit nice and square on it. you'd be dealing with a reducer if you went with a 2x4 or a 4x4.
I got a 4" to 5" reducer......didnt think that would hurt since the rest of the exhaust is going to be 4" anyway......
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 06:52 PM
  #12  
blackdiesel's Avatar
Registered
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,173
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, AR
Originally Posted by Diesel_Dan
I got a 4" to 5" reducer......didnt think that would hurt since the rest of the exhaust is going to be 4" anyway......
true. if you already have the reducer, it should be easy.
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 07:02 PM
  #13  
Diesel-Dan's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
WELP...i guess i will go with the Tubing.......any suggestion on gauge....i thought about 1/4"...and then hit it with some BBQ Paint. Then get some Diamond plate broken to cover up the manifold, and to act as an heat sheild....i do have a drop in bed liner........huh....never gave that much thought.........
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 07:34 PM
  #14  
BigBlue's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
1/4"? Are you kidding me? Mine's like 1/16". The BBQ paint is a nice idea. It would help hide all of the burnt on stuff that my "friends" have put on. Mine haven't hurt my spray in liner.
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 07:50 PM
  #15  
Diesel-Dan's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,534
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
My only issue with a lighter gauge metal....is that the flow is going to have "Hot Spots" with the Square tubeing....i can lessen these with some angle iron and such...but...still...i dont want to have any burn through......
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:04 PM.