Dual Exhaust '99 Suburban K1500

Page 1 of 2  
I am curious to know if anyone knows who makes a complete dual exhaust for the Suburban? I am talking with headers ( with cats) all the way out the
back. Would it increase gas mileage / horsepower? Also, is it worth the money to put in a K&N filter to increase gas mileage?
Thank you, in advance, for any info.
Wayne
'99 Chevy Suburban
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You'd be farther ahead with a K&N filter and a Hypertech programmer.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

K&N's are greatly over rated and have been proven to filter air less too. If you are looking for a makes cure for MPG, K&N is not the answer. Custom tune would be money better spent. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have a stupid question. If a K&N filter doesn't do something then why do the displays at the auto parts store show that K&N's work much better than a paper filter. I don't think its magic......

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

When Snoman says it filters less he means that it filters less, not flows less. It flows more, and filtration rate is more than adequate. I used a Hypertech programmer on my '04 Avalanche Z71 along with a K&N. The difference over stock performance is a lot. Especially with the premium fuel program.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Your gain is from the combo of program and better fuel, not the filter. Even if you just ran 89 or better long term stock you would likely see a MPG gain and better fuel is a must with a programmer if you want best return because 87 octane can severly limit spark curve and resulting efficeny and power. The masses though tend to be hung up on 87 octane and this is why Detriot has spent billions over the years on advanced knock control systems to keep consumer "happy" (no knocks) while they burn cheapest fuel they can find ignorant to that it is likely increasing overall operating cost due to reduced efficency because of constant need to adjust spark curve at times increase fuel consumption. 87 octan came out in 70 and was designed for 8 to 1 compression engines and now engine are 9 to 1 and higher (and would be higher still were it not for 87 octane because there is limits to how much you can mask octane requirements). America s love for 87 is kinda its own undoing. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 01:21:24 GMT, "NinetyThreeRedCapri"

It is not s stupid question.(really no such thing as one either) If you play with the display (like I did once) you will find the it is a VERY fine adjustment to make it favor K&N (very fine). A modern engine controlls fuel air mixture regardless of air density so even if the pressure dropp through filter is say 1% less (any is is a very small difference indeed) it will have no effect on the MPG on a closed loop fuel injected motor because it will adjust mixutre. With a old carb, a bit less retriction on intake cause carb to lean out a bit which is good or bad depending on what A/F ratio for it currently is. People want to beleive is silver bullets though so myth lives on. (just like they wanted to beleive in 50 MPG carbs locked in a vault many many years ago) Ask yourself this, if there was any real merit to this and dual exhausts truck would come with them because detriot is under a LOT of pressure to get MPG and power up and if this worked that great, new trucks would have a form of them on them. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Dear Snowjob,
Do you still drive a Model T? That is the same type of ignorant thinking that hindered many advancements in all fields. What it really boils down to is $$$$$$$$$$$$. It costs MONEY to put in the best equipment, MONEY that the average buyer does NOT want to spend. Yes, they are under lots of pressure to get MPG up, but also under even MORE pressure to keep costs down. MONEY was the issue in EVERY election for decades. People vote by their greedy pocketbooks and not by issues. People buy vehicles more by their out-of-pocket expense than by long term savings in gas mileage. Those people most interested in fuel economy also want the least expensive cash outlay also!
Yes, there are many stupid gimicks out there (gas pills, vortex addons to the intake, gas magnets, etc.). That does not mean that everything out there not OEM is a gimick.
Mike D.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 14:54:30 -0600, "Mike Dobony"

The ignorance is yours not mine because you seem to know far more than the engineers that built them and me too on the subjest of engine design and theromdynamic preciples and efficencys of a IC engine even though you likely never studied it like I have and its designers have. People like you think WOT all the time and 5000 RPM but the reality is what might help a bit at 5000 RPM and WOT, hurts you the rest of the time. YOu can beleive what you want but it does no change the physics involed because they is a LOT more to engine design and efficency than just chopping it up and adding a new air filter (with less filtering capacity) and a different exhaust on a closed loop engine. After market makers love you guys and laugh all the way to the bank. Ill bet you thing 87 octane is the best possible fuel for it too even though detriot has long used 93 octane for their MPG tests (but they never tell you that on stick because the law does not require them to tell you) ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Snoman, again, tell me where you studied engineering at. What school and what years?? I've asked you several times and you've never answered. Is there a reason why??
Denny

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Let me help you out. He is aware that you and he are just about neighbors. Thus it would be real easy for you to disprove what he offers up. Sorta like telling me I have some interest in 87 octane. He makes these statements, then ignore's anybody who ask's for clarification or proof. It is the same thing he's always done.
Roy

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Under the Old Testament you would be stoned to death for such a false prophecy. No, a LONG string of false prophecies. Engineers do not sell cars, businesses do. My expertise is business, Bachelors of Science, Management Major, Daemen College class of '83, Snyder, NY. If engineers had their way there would be no auto industry because they would make products too expensive to buy. Your thinking would have a budget car priced at over $30,000. Engineers can do and have done MUCH more that is available on the dealer lots. They are called concept cars! They are WAY too expensive for the average buyer.
I think crusing RPM (targeting about 75% of the peak torque RPM), not WOT. I rarely put the pedal to the metal. I am not into drag racing. I am into driving to the store, to church, to school, to my favorite first grandson and my favorite second grandson's home, to the hospital, to the theater, to friend's homes, to the restaurant, etc.
I prefer 89 octane gasohol. That is where I get the best gas mileage on most of my vehicles since I started buing new vehicles around 1988. Higher octane has not proven to give better gas mileage.
You are a liar as to your education, unless it was from a mail-order catalog. If you had any real knowledge of fluid dynamics you would understand about exhaust and intake restrictions and design and why very small changes (details optomized by the aftermarket) can yeld exponential results (rule of squares sound familiar). Your grammar stinks. I thought MINE was bad, but I still get A's and B's graduate level marked down only a half a letter grade due to grammar. Yours would get lowered to near failing. Lack of reasoning skills drops you below F.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The condemnation on the K&N filter comes from those who never used it and don't want you to prove they are stupid. As far as whether or not it is worth the monty, it is your choice. Consider the simple cost of replacing the filter ever 15,000 versus paying once for the expected length of ownership. I have changed over to the K&N in just about every vehicle I have had since the late 80's and always had an immediate increase in mileage and power. The mileage increase has varied from just measurable to considerable (when I used to check out ever tank full, but that was long ago). Probably the most dramatic demonstration of the noticable power increase came from my Jeep Cherokee, an '88 I think. Pre K&N using the cruise control at 55 the Cherokee would downshift about half way up a particular hill. The day after I installed the K&N air filter and nothing else it would not downshift until almost all the way up the hill and sometimes not at all.
Mike D.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not really. Cummins would at one time void a warranty if a K$N was used.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ok, why did they stop? And was it a specific mention of the K&N or all aftermarket filters?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"It [K&N air filter] won't void your warranty. By federal law, the only time an aftermarket part can void a warranty is if that part can be proven to be the cause of the problem with the vehicle."
From a dealer (owner) on:
http://www.dodgeforum.com/m_119778/mpage_1/tm.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks for everyones help so far.... Still nobody answered the part about a full dual exhaust system. I've been sno-blinded by a bunch of comments against the sno-man.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Common with Snowman's snowjobs. After the cats you can do anything you like as long as you have a muffler. You can use bullet mufflers, dual, half-size, stacks, etc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As was the case with the turbo and related failures.

failure and resulting downstream damage was caused by the stuff that passed by the K$N.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But failed to prove it, hence the govt. put a stop to it, right?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.