Clamping on a glasspack will cost you power. Not enough back pressure for the motor to run efficiently. Stainless is nothing but a look what I have. 10 hp is a honest gain for a exhaust. Exhaust intake and tune all done is the best bang for the buck minus nitrous . Doing a intake and exhasut with no tuner will not helo that much. The ECM will not adjust anought to compensate and possibly cost you power. IF YOU DO ONE DO THEM ALL. If you can only afford one do the tuner. Since you can adjust it for stuff later on down the road, or send it to a tuner and have him do a dyno tune to it , so it runs the most efficient.

 

Facts
+6HP Any Air filter
+11HP MBRP Exhaust
+25HP rear wheel HP (WHP) & 30ft/lbs or Torque RIPP Long Tube Header
+100+ WHP RIPP Supercharger
A Hemi cost 20k


Fiction:
Throttle body spacer
Short tube headers
Chrome
Stickers
Cutting the rear cats off making your own cross over and dumping the exhaust early
Supercharger any car 69.95
Chip any car Ebay style
The Easter bunny

RIPPTECH

 

Are you kidding me????
KNOWN FACTS:
Stickers add 1.75 hp each (ask any Ricer)
$69.95 Superchargers won't but the $79.95 TWIN Charger WILL

And THE FRIGGIN' EASTER BUNNY????
What's next, NO Sanite' Cluas either?

 

MBRP Cat-back will make your JK noticeably more responsive, and is completely bolt on with a lifetime warranty on our stainless systems. If you are looking for an exhaust that looks better than stock, sounds deep and rich, and adds HP and torque throughout the RPM, let me know.

We have dealers with some great pricing on our exhaust systems.

Steve

 

Well flowmaster generally sounds better, but flowmaster doesn't really flow. Magnaflow has that glasspack crackle sound which would be pretty awful on a 3.8L v6, but it will flow somewhere around 4x the cfm that a flowmaster would. Will it make any difference in performance ? I doubt it, since exhaust isn't the major bottleneck in these engines.

 

Borla started the whole 'cat-back' thing back in the day. Nowadays almost all factory exhausted is mandrel bent (so why replace it). The factory pipes should be covered for 100k miles (correct me if I am wrong)

So paying $500 + for a cat back is stupid IMO. I used to work for borla so I know how stupid it is.

Muffler cut into the existing pipe is your best bang. A restrictive muffler causes more back pressure Which changes your torque band profile. Less restriction changes your high end HP. So with a wrangler I would get a flow through (maybe one that s-turns inside the muffler) using the factory pipe diameter. Magnaflow or dynamax or banks.

An internal chamber muffler like FM causes the sound and exhaust gases to bounce around inside the chamber causing that Gawd aweful droning sound (usually around 1,800-2,200 RPM.

 

So if I add the River Raider Expedition Snorkel with a K&N Drop In filter will that give me the same effect as a standard CAI?

And then if I add the Cat Back Exhaust will that INCREASE the effect the CAI gives me?

And then if I add the Bully Dog Programer when they post the 2011 update to tune it all, will that INCREASE the effects?

Or do I just need ONE and not the others to get more HP and/or MPG from my ride?

sorry, for all the questions, but I"m new at building it up....



Black on Black, 2011 Unlimited 70th Anniversary Edition

 

^^I think this thread pretty well answers your questions except for the snorkel, which will drain power, not add it.

Otherwise, yes, a CAI will be enhanced by an exhaust. Though neither is going to knock your socks off.

A good programer--for an auto transmission--will help. For a manual, not as much.

But these are all pretty modest changes for pretty modest gains--a few hundred bucks for a few ponies. You can decide if it's worth it.

Your best bet for power is to regear (~$1500). Or if you want to get into real money territory ($5k), a supercharger. Or real real money territory, a Hemi ($10k+).

 

Is there any actual evidence that this is true for a stock motor? I know about RIPP's test with their supercharger, but I would expect the loss the super charger experienced with a snorkel to be much greater than the loss on a stock setup (if there is any loss at all). I just have a hard time believing the stock setup with it's tiny little air box opening allows that much more airflow than a snorkel.

 

Fair enough. I wasn't going off of ripp's reports though as much as the anecdotal stuff that I've "heard". It also, to me anyway, just makes sense. The addition of extra tubing makes bringing in air harder--try running a marathon with a snorkel in your mouth. Even if the snorkel is as wide as your mouth, it's still harder due the energy required to channel the air through the extra tubing. I could be wrong--hopefully someone with a snorkel will chime in.