Jump to content

Stock Exhaust Back Pressure???

BuyAmericanIron

By BuyAmericanIron
in Engines & Drivetrain

 Share

Recommended Posts

BuyAmericanIron Enthusiast

BuyAmericanIron

Posted
Posted

Tried something today out of curiosity. Pulled a rear O2 sensor and installed an exhaust back pressure gauge for testing. Truck is a 2016 Sierra Denali 6.2L. Here are the findings:

Stock exhaust

  • 30 mph cruising, .50 ~ .80 psi back pressure
  • 55 mph cruising, .50 ~ .80 psi back pressure
  • WOT in 3rd gear right before shifting at 5500 rpm, 5.5 ~ 5.8 psi back pressure

Stock exhaust with flapper bolted open

  • 30 mph cruising, 0 psi
  • 55 mph cruising, 0 psi
  • WOT in 3rd gear right before shifting at 5500 rpm, 4.8 ~ 5.1 psi back pressure

 

Magnaflow 15318 cat back exhaust

  • 30 mph cruising, 0 psi
  • 55 mph cruising, 0 psi
  • WOT in 3rd gear right before shifting at 5500 rpm, 0 ~ .1 psi back pressure. (the needle was fluctuating a bit but barely moving off of zero)

I thought this was very interesting and wanted to pass on what was learned. Now the questions. How much HP do you lose with 5.5 psi back pressure? How much fuel economy does .5 to 1.0 psi cost? When accelerating with the stock exhaust at WOT, the pressure would pretty much follow the tach. I.E. 3000 rpm, 3 psi, 4000 rpm, 4 psi, 5000 rpm 5 psi. It may have been in my head, but the engine seemed to run more freely with the Magnaflow and zero back pressure at any RPM.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

BuyAmericanIron
BuyAmericanIron

Tried something today out of curiosity. Pulled a rear O2 sensor and installed an exhaust back pressure gauge for testing. Truck is a 2016 Sierra Denali 6.2L. Here are the findings: Stock exhaust 30

Jon A
Jon A

Excellent data collection! It seems to be in vogue these days for people to say various mods "don't do anything" or "are for looks/sound only" etc. Instrumented data collection always trumps interne

Victory14red
Victory14red

The following is copied from http://www.dsmtuners.com/threads/exhaust-the-straight-scoop-on-backpressure.168578/ Granted this is a completely generalized answer not in any way specific to our trucks

Posted Images

GMC207 Enthusiast

GMC207

Posted
Posted

I don't know much about this stuff but would be curious to find out.

muddkatt Senior Enthusiast

muddkatt

Posted
Posted

The GM Borla exhaust claims a 10HP gain(GM makes the claim, not Borla), and no mention of increased fuel mileage. Only way to compare that I can think of is test the back pressure of the GM Borla system or put your truck on a dyno.

Jon A Senior Enthusiast

Jon A

Posted
Posted

Tried something today out of curiosity. Pulled a rear O2 sensor and installed an exhaust back pressure gauge for testing. Truck is a 2016 Sierra Denali 6.2L. Here are the findings:

Stock exhaust.....

 

Excellent data collection! It seems to be in vogue these days for people to say various mods "don't do anything" or "are for looks/sound only" etc. Instrumented data collection always trumps internet speculation....

 

If you search through enough SAE papers you can likely find equations/example data that will correlate backpressure to power for a given set of circumstances. I can't tell you exactly off the top of my head what it would calculate out to be, but with 5 psi going to zero it's certainly not nothing.

  • Like 2
07Softail Senior Enthusiast

07Softail

Posted
Posted

Didn't Black Bear do a test between Performance and stock mufflers and found no gains on the dyno? Someone did at one time not sure who.

 

RT

Jon A Senior Enthusiast

Jon A

Posted
Posted

Didn't Black Bear do a test between Performance and stock mufflers and found no gains on the dyno? Someone did at one time not sure who.

 

Old tests on different engines (exhaust and intakes) are not really applicable to the new engines. Items that pose little restriction on a 300 HP engine can become big restrictions on a 420 HP engine.

TJay74 Senior Enthusiast

TJay74

Posted
Posted

Pretty sure it was on the 14's when they first came out.

 

RT

 

It was on the previous generation trucks.

glcbn Enthusiast

glcbn

Posted
Posted

Those numbers make me feel good that I've had my flapper clamped open since the thread about it's usefulness good or bad first appeared on these forums. Granted, it doesn't help with WOT, but I rarely ever do that anyway.

Jon A Senior Enthusiast

Jon A

Posted
Posted

Pretty sure it was on the 14's when they first came out.

 

 

Do you have a link, I don't think I saw it. I do know the CAI test everybody quotes here all the time was done on an older, much less powerful engine.

glcbn Enthusiast

glcbn

Posted
Posted

 

 

Do you have a link, I don't think I saw it. I do know the CAI test everybody quotes here all the time was done on an older, much less powerful engine.

 

Is this the one you are referring to?

http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topic/145676-bbp-independent-intake-test-results/page-1

 

I searched for exhaust tests by BBP, but couldn't come up with any on the Ecotec.

Jon A Senior Enthusiast

Jon A

Posted
Posted

Yup. There's nothing wrong with the test (although many misinterpret the results), I give Kudos to BB for doing it, it's just that on an engine that makes 100 more HP and all the parts being tested are somewhat different, different results can be expected.

07Softail Senior Enthusiast

07Softail

Posted
Posted

I would venture to guess that the damn valve after the muffler would be the only obstruction causing the minimal BP evident in the testing. Even bolted open there is still that weight on the blade itself that still blocks a bit of flow imo. Can these gauges be rented at an auto store if so I will perform this test being that I will be bolting up some headers soon with the stock exhaust and will be removing the valve completely and I will do a before headers, after headers, with valve, without valve for comparison.

 

RT

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 3,083 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • dna9656
      No low range 4 x 4

      By dna9656 · Posted

      My 2015 1500 LTZ Silverado suddenly won't go into 4 x 4 low. It will go into 4 x 4 high.
    • asilverblazer
      Transmission Woes :-(

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      Yep, just a quick reference point.    My main point being I’d do a thousand other things before I’d pay 10k for a transmission.    Speaking in ignorance cause I don’t look at these trucks, what is it worth? 20k?
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I think users are going to want to pick their monitored parameters, which parameters they want to see first.    It should probably start with baseline at a minimum and adjust to learned, but be able to overlay baseline for comparison.   A simple severity level would be able to determine what type of alerting is appropriate or user selectable.    Why not use the OBD port though?   I think a phone connection would be a good idea, push notifications type deal.   Number 1 issue is having data is useless if you don’t know what the data should be under normal conditions. 
    • Chuck FB
      summer road trips in the 2026 2500HD

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 
    • Aimatdeer
      Ac not keeping up

      By Aimatdeer · Posted

      Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...