Of course,
Dynoed 250 is right on.
The XG XR6 ute engine, exhast and all the bits would be perfect for an XF falcon, but in NZ, XR6 utes are super rare. And an 93 to 96 XG with the stock 148 kw 4.0 would be trashed within and inch of its life by now. There are lots of little parts that make the XG 4.0 ute a great car, but everything has to be there to ensure you've got the factory 148 kW. Unless our newbie can find the bits, he can at least add some hot-up gear to his stock engine and get some extra ponies.
DYNOED250 is also bang on about the stock EB never having got tubing headers. Apparently, they are only worth 3 killer watts and cause under bonnet heat on OHC engine bays.
xecute®™© he he":10wpc7nm said:
Copy the EB XR6 exhast layout. It had a great extractor set, four mufflers, twin exhasts to the diff, and then one pipe past the axle.
Scratch four mufflers, it only had three.
My bad.
The exhast is indeed single from the cast iron header, then it runs to only one resonator, then a twin pipe set-up with big mufflers, then back to one 63.5 mm pipe, Watts linkage, fuel tank and a single catalytic converter prevent a proper dual exhast all the way through.
The EF got the a better spec six with an extra 3.5 kw. I can't remember if it had tube headers or not.
What has been established is that considerable time was spent making certain the exhast had low back pressure, could be fitted okay, and didn't resonate. This is just what the aftermarket is doing wrong today with Falcon i6 and Commodore V6 exhasts. The big gun single set-ups sound awfull, resonate, and have quite a lot of backpressure.
When the EL GT came out, they dropped the back pressure to about 4.7 kPa, or well under 1 psi at full revs. It sounded great, and from what we see from BMW M3's and the American Falcon and Mustang owners, a dual exhast of the right size makes a six sound sweet.