to clear up a few things, originaly i wanted to remove all of the exhaust except for a few feet of pipe off the exhaust mainfold (enough to get it clear of the engine compartement), because i was looking for a cheap/easy way to gain mileage, and i was under the impression that removing backpressure would increase overall torque/hp, i didnt realize that it would decrease the lower end torque as much. I also had heard that emissions laws didnt apply to offroad vehicles or at least that they werent as strict, although apparently i misread something somewhere. Thanks for the clarification.
Obviously i wouldnt submerge my engine in water without the exhaust manifolds on it. I did'nt even realize my indecisiveness in the first post of this thread, what i was trying to say was, when you drive through deep water consistently i.e. bogging, would it be worth it for your engines sake to route the exhaust above the level of the water?
When i said running your engine wihout the exhaust manifolds, i thought that, that was ideal because there was no backpressure, and by running the exhaust out of the water, youd reduce backpressure. From what i've read countless times is that, the less backpressure the better. From what everyone here has told me is that, that isnt true ?
So what i've now established from everyones responses, is that removing all backpressure in the exhaust system will shift the power curve to higher rpms?
Is is true that the less backpressure the better mileage?
what is it that makes the mileage so awful on the explorers ? I was originaly under the impression that it was the weight, however i found out that, that isnt true because mercury i.e. ford, released a armored car that weighs around 7500 with a v8, that gets 19/21 . Is it the 4x4 / Intake/exhaust that accounts for the terrible mileage?
anyone ?
