<![CDATA[Turbo car. Cat or no cat.]]>What is the difference (HP wise) between a turbo car with a high flow cat or no cat at all. The reason I ask is my buddy got a new 3 inch exhaust for his turbo daytona, but had the put on a high flow cat. Is there a big difference in hp?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/topic/7497/turbo-car.-cat-or-no-cat.RSS for NodeThu, 28 May 2026 15:19:34 GMTThu, 31 Aug 2006 00:51:52 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 04:01:51 GMT]]>el oh el

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114886https://fargostreet.com/post/114886Sun, 03 Sep 2006 04:01:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:57:20 GMT]]>

MisterCMK wrote:
The flow characteristics may be like 2.5" pipe when 3" is pressbent, but it is still 3" pipe so its not technically 2.5"

Is your ice cream too cold? You know what I mean dick.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114884https://fargostreet.com/post/114884Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:57:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:53:41 GMT]]>

PSiedTSi wrote:
No where did I say it wasn't 3''. I simply stated it was "technically 2.5''" since the 3'' pressbent flows like 2.5'' Mandrel.

The flow characteristics may be like 2.5" pipe when 3" is pressbent, but it is still 3" pipe so its not technically 2.5"

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114882https://fargostreet.com/post/114882Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:53:41 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:43:56 GMT]]>

MisterCMK wrote:
Yes, I know that, but its still just a 3" pipe

No where did I say it wasn't 3''. I simply stated it was "technically 2.5''" since the 3'' pressbent flows like 2.5'' Mandrel. This is irrelevant because we already came to the conclusion it was mandrel bent, therefore it is full 3''.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114880https://fargostreet.com/post/114880Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:43:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:40:26 GMT]]>Yes, I know that, but its still just a 3" pipe

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114878https://fargostreet.com/post/114878Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:40:26 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:19:22 GMT]]>

MisterCMK wrote:
How would that be technically? Its 3" pipe. While the bends may slightly smaller the pipe is still 3"

Measure the inside diameter of a pressbent 3'' pipe. The flow is only as good as the smallest portion....

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114874https://fargostreet.com/post/114874Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:19:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:00:52 GMT]]>

PSiedTSi wrote:
So then it's technically 2.5'' since 3'' pressbent corners flow like 2.5''.

How would that be technically? Its 3" pipe. While the bends may slightly smaller the pipe is still 3"

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114870https://fargostreet.com/post/114870Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:00:52 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 02:00:29 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
Well with an in house mandrel bender, you can move stuff quicker. But i guarentee that Nicks welds are better than the poop they do at exhaust pros. Spanish-Rice shoul dpost up a pic of his sweet downpipe they made him...
I wouldn't doubt it. He got what he paid for, but it was what he wanted.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114857https://fargostreet.com/post/114857Sun, 03 Sep 2006 02:00:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:57:08 GMT]]>Well with an in house mandrel bender, you can move stuff quicker. But i guarentee that Nicks welds are better than the poop they do at exhaust pros. Spanish-Rice shoul dpost up a pic of his sweet downpipe they made him...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114854https://fargostreet.com/post/114854Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:57:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:47:58 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
press bent looks like a cambels soup can when its bent, all ripply and shit, mandrel looks like u would think a pipe bend should look, clean and somewhat uniform.
Yeah, it was very nicely done. It was NOT pressbent then. He said it was ~$200 less than he got quoted at SLS, but he got a discount.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114847https://fargostreet.com/post/114847Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:47:58 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:46:36 GMT]]>press bent looks like a cambels soup can when its bent, all ripply and shit, mandrel looks like u would think a pipe bend should look, clean and somewhat uniform.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114845https://fargostreet.com/post/114845Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:46:36 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:36:00 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
Exhaust pro's has a mandrel bender now...
Yeah, it looked like it was mandrel bent, but I always thought SLS was the only mandrel bent shop in town, so I didn't even look that close at it.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114838https://fargostreet.com/post/114838Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:36:00 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:18:58 GMT]]>Exhaust pro's has a mandrel bender now...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114832https://fargostreet.com/post/114832Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:18:58 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:18:06 GMT]]>

94NDTA wrote:
What ever exhaust pro's is. I don't think it was mandrel, but it wasn't wrinkled.

So then it's technically 2.5'' since 3'' pressbent corners flow like 2.5''.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114830https://fargostreet.com/post/114830Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:18:06 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:01:19 GMT]]>

PSiedTSi wrote:
Pressbent?
What ever exhaust pro's is. I don't think it was mandrel, but it wasn't wrinkled.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114828https://fargostreet.com/post/114828Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:01:19 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 00:26:03 GMT]]>Pressbent?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114807https://fargostreet.com/post/114807Sun, 03 Sep 2006 00:26:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Sun, 03 Sep 2006 00:24:50 GMT]]>He is shooting for the 425-450 whp mark. IT is allready really quiet for a 3 inch exhaust, I don't think it would be much louder without a cat.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114805https://fargostreet.com/post/114805Sun, 03 Sep 2006 00:24:50 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Fri, 01 Sep 2006 02:54:47 GMT]]>Cats are for Californians.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114468https://fargostreet.com/post/114468Fri, 01 Sep 2006 02:54:47 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:49:41 GMT]]>Lose the cat., put in a test pipe. Chances are you'll melt the catalyst and end up with a plugged exhaust, if you're looking at a bigger turbo and most likely fueling adjustments.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114428https://fargostreet.com/post/114428Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:49:41 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:47:09 GMT]]>BAH! you might notice a slight difference without a cat. There aren't any tests, so you don;t have to worry about emissions. while you're at it, put a spark plug in the tail pipe.

600 whp on a dynojet doesn't get my pants tight. 😉

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114416https://fargostreet.com/post/114416Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:47:09 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:26:45 GMT]]>

Sweet-WRX-Lovin wrote:
I love it. I said I love it.

This moment brought to you by Mr. Bartz (only Harvey people will have any idea what I'm talking about):icon_rr:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114395https://fargostreet.com/post/114395Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:26:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:26:32 GMT]]>

dynotune wrote:
depending on application you WILL NOT lose much power at all if you have a GOOD converter. I have made 600 plus to the wheels w/ them and alot of cars sound better with them in place. People that pick up horsepower w/ no converter is generally due to the cats being plugged. Good converters on a supercharged car will INCREASE the HP. I would advise him to leave the converter alone.

There's the answer you were looking for. A really good high flow cat only becomes a significant restriction at ridiculous amounts of power and up. I grew up around the smell of unburnt gas so it's no cats for me. I love it. I said I love it.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114352https://fargostreet.com/post/114352Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:26:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:32:45 GMT]]>I love my car with no cat and it isnt even that loud.....:p I am guessing once I put on the 3inch turbo back I gained 20-30 hp.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114338https://fargostreet.com/post/114338Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:32:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Turbo car. Cat or no cat. on Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:56:48 GMT]]>depending on application you WILL NOT lose much power at all if you have a GOOD converter. I have made 600 plus to the wheels w/ them and alot of cars sound better with them in place. People that pick up horsepower w/ no converter is generally due to the cats being plugged. Good converters on a supercharged car will INCREASE the HP. I would advise him to leave the converter alone.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/114332https://fargostreet.com/post/114332Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:56:48 GMT