Coming from Mike at RRE. Now I may have over exaggerated by saying "all" but I would definitely spend the extra $ for the AMS product.

 

I just replied to a thread about downpipes earlier in this same section.

Here is a link to the thread.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...circulate.html

I could post again, but it would be a little redundant I'm trying to find the graph, but I do have dyno results of our downpipe making more power then an open o2 housing. I know the dyno was done at AWD Motorsports, but I can't find the graph yet.

Micheal

 

Go with any o2 dump. If I had the money Id go ETS!

 

if you have money for an ams go that route

 

why doesnt anyone comment on this? this would make perfect sense, i just wasnt able to get the ams dimensions. the rexpeed one looks a bit small but if it is the same size i think id go eith rexpeed

 

some people have it and if i remember right, they seem to like it.

 

i really wonder about the dimensions of this dp from rexpeed and what the advantages are.

 

The Rexpeed design is good, not great, but the price is very appealing. Personally though I'd spend a little extra and get MAP's since it retails for $369 and is a great design IMO.

 

ams, def the best route. that is what i am going with on my red. I bought an ets downpipe and changed my mind and went with the ams!

 

^Of the two I'd personally opt for ETS' over AMS' due to the divorced wastegate design and lower weight.

 

But by analyzing the "mouth" that mounts to the turbo, obviously the ams would have the least amount of resistance. Every think why mitsu designed the o2 housing as a mouth and not a divorced design? Obviously it would be cheaper to make the divorced design.

 

Go with the Ams definitely very solid well made piece. I've had zero problems with mine.

 

Absolutely Best: Map 02 eliminator down pipe with dump & tial external wastegate. Cannot even begin to testify; this has opened my car to the max. Only external wastegate/dump setup out there I think. Also comes with two bungs for w/b.

 

Look at it from a turbulence standpoint, a huge opening that doesn't match the actual outlets on the turbo will not be smooth at all. Plus, from a manufacturing standpoint, the large bellmouth is far cheaper to cast than a divorced design like the DSM's and EVO 8/9 had.

 

Do you think it would be cheaper to cast the bell mouth shape or to weld a standard size pipe to an easily machined part? Casting is SOOO much more expensive than welding a standard size tube. You have a good point with the turbulence but two major factors come into play (in our case) when we talk about turbulence. The velocity of liquid (in our case gas) and the shape of the o2 housing. I wouldn't think that our turbos (esp stock) would push enough gases to actually create enough "turbulence" to have a major impact on the back pressure. Plus the density of the exhaust would not restrict the gases enough to be pushed down the downpipe causing min back pressure. Its not like we are pushing molasses through the downpipe. The smooth shape of the ams downpipe would make the entrance length (length where the fluid stays turbulent before transitioning to laminar flow) very minimal. The mouth of the ams downpipe is large that it would be impossible (unless you have a huge turbo or pushing crazy amount of boost) to have more back pressure out of the ams downpipe compared to any divorced style downpipe. AMS has hired engineers that designs parts for the best possible outcome. Thats why they have the reputation that they do.