# N/A 2.5 running 3" exhaust?



## Rabbidrabbitt (Mar 21, 2011)

Any thoughts? opcorn:


----------



## jaja123 (Jan 17, 2011)

look around the forums. You will find 3 inch is unnecessary. 2.5 inch is the way to go thats it.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

3" is too much, and the increased flow only hinders performance.

the 2.5L likes some backpressure, which is why 2.5" is awesome.


----------



## TrillyPop (Jan 27, 2010)

Agree. I have a C2 3" tb exhaust sitting here waiting to go on with the turbo, and it's huge! I couldn't imagine it working on a n/a 2.5 just by looking at it haha.


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

TrillyPop said:


> Agree. I have a C2 3" tb exhaust sitting here waiting to go on with the turbo, and it's huge! I couldn't imagine it working on a n/a 2.5 just by looking at it haha.


can you post a pic of it? I'm curious to see what it looks like.


----------



## timmiller05 (Mar 26, 2010)

pennsydubbin said:


> can you post a pic of it? I'm curious to see what it looks like.


What exhaust setup are you running with your turbo?


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

timmiller05 said:


> What exhaust setup are you running with your turbo?


I'm just running the 2.5" downpipe paired with the AWE exhaust. Come May, the car will get SRI, Stage 3 and C2's 3" TBE. I was on C2's website last night but they don't have a pic of the exhaust.


----------



## DerekH (Sep 4, 2010)

I ran a 2.5 straight pipe and lost power, it didn't have enough back pressure. 3inch will cause the same problem.


----------



## Rabbidrabbitt (Mar 21, 2011)

What mods do u have?


----------



## DerekH (Sep 4, 2010)

Carbonio intake, header with highflow cat and tune.


----------



## timmiller05 (Mar 26, 2010)

pennsydubbin said:


> I'm just running the 2.5" downpipe paired with the AWE exhaust. Come May, the car will get SRI, Stage 3 and C2's 3" TBE. I was on C2's website last night but they don't have a pic of the exhaust.


good to know :beer:


----------



## TrillyPop (Jan 27, 2010)

pennsydubbin said:


> can you post a pic of it? I'm curious to see what it looks like.


It's a VERY solidly built exhaust. Super clean welds all around, thick steel, nice construction. Big tentative :thumbup: to C2 for this product. Of course I must install it to see how it performs/sounds, then I will give my final blessing


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

pennsydubbin said:


> I'm just running the 2.5" downpipe paired with the AWE exhaust. Come May, the car will get SRI, Stage 3 and C2's 3" TBE. I was on C2's website last night but they don't have a pic of the exhaust.


Dibs on your exhaust


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

That exhaust looks really nice :thumbup:




itskohler said:


> Dibs on your exhaust


haha, ok you can have it.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

HAVE it?!


----------



## nothing-leaves-stock (Mar 1, 2005)

3'' is TOOOOOO big for NA
2.5" with cat and single muffler:thumbup:
2.5 with no cat and dual mufflers:thumbup:
3'' with turbo only.


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

let me fix that 



pennsydubbin said:


> haha, ok you can have first dips to buy it.


----------



## mldouthi (Jun 26, 2010)

nothing-leaves-stock said:


> 3'' is TOOOOOO big for NA
> 2.5" with cat and single muffler:thumbup:
> 2.5 with no cat and dual mufflers:thumbup:
> 3'' with turbo only.


3" for s/c??


----------



## nothing-leaves-stock (Mar 1, 2005)

ehh, i wouldn't


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

*FV-QR*

this thread is useless unless there are dynos of back to back 2.5"/3" exhausts. everyone bashed 3" exhausts on VRs for such a long time, but it turns out 3" does gain power. 

so, lets see some dynos.


----------



## Rabbidrabbitt (Mar 21, 2011)

Shtbox said:


> this thread is useless unless there are dynos of back to back 2.5"/3" exhausts. everyone bashed 3" exhausts on VRs for such a long time, but it turns out 3" does gain power.
> 
> so, lets see some dynos.


I think there will be soon :thumbup:


----------



## nothing-leaves-stock (Mar 1, 2005)

We didn't do a dyno for 2.5 to 3". But we did from Header/ one res/ no cat/ no muffler to a header/ no cat/res/muffler setup and we gained power with back pressure after adding the muffler ...


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

nothing-leaves-stock said:


> We didn't do a dyno for 2.5 to 3". But we did from Header/ one res/ no cat/ no muffler to a header/ no cat/res/muffler setup and we gained power with back pressure after adding the muffler ...


So because you added a muffler, you're claiming that a 3" is useless? Give me a ****ing break


----------



## nothing-leaves-stock (Mar 1, 2005)

You pay for 3". I'll build it at a discount to prove it will kill power.


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

how much is this discounted price?


----------



## nothing-leaves-stock (Mar 1, 2005)

Cat back or high flow cat from header back? Also... Rabbit or Jetta?


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 2, 2009)

If you can get it over 250-275 whp all motor, the 3" will most likely start to work. Below that it's usually too much.


----------



## DerekH (Sep 4, 2010)

Shtbox said:


> this thread is useless unless there are dynos of back to back 2.5"/3" exhausts. everyone bashed 3" exhausts on VRs for such a long time, but it turns out 3" does gain power.
> 
> so, lets see some dynos.





Shtbox said:


> So because you added a muffler, you're claiming that a 3" is useless? Give me a ****ing break


I bet if you built a 3inch but put like 5 or 6 mufflers on it it would have enough back pressure for the engine to work properly. Other than that it is too big and will not have enough back pressure. That is a fact i am telling you also, Josh and Fred are telling you the same thing from first hand experience. If you want to waste your money on it than go ahead but i for one will laugh when you don't make as much power as a stock 2.5L with your 3inch exhaust.


----------



## Dronks (Jun 7, 2011)

These N/A dynos show no truth behind the "2.5" is better for N/A" myth. Enjoy.

K20 - http://www.k20a.org/forum/showthread.php?t=46317 

VR6 - http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?4969653-Vr6-exhaust-dyno-2.5-quot-vs-3-quot-back-to-back.

H22 - http://honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=2197695&highlight=3''+exhaust

K20 - http://honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=2341715

K20 - http://forums.clubrsx.com/showthread.php?t=583274

Before anyone says "those aren't 2.5L", engines work the same way. They aren't like women in that some like different things than other. All the dynos I linked are similar size engines so head flow will be similar.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Engines do all work the same way in theory, but I find all of this irrelevant. Sorry. If you want to make a compelling argument for the 3" than go have one made, give the specs, post the before and after dyno runs. But for now I am going with the people that work on these engines day in and day out. Not some dyno from a Honda forum :thumbdown:


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

DerekH said:


> I bet if you built a 3inch but put like 5 or 6 mufflers on it it would have enough back pressure for the engine to work properly. Other than that it is too big and will not have enough back pressure. That is a fact i am telling you also, Josh and Fred are telling you the same thing from first hand experience. If you want to waste your money on it than go ahead but i for one will laugh when you don't make as much power as a stock 2.5L with your 3inch exhaust.


How are they telling me first hand experience when THEY'VE NEVER DYNO'D IT (or even put one on a NA setup).


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Large exhaust systems kill low end torque, so I guess it depends where you wany your power band.


----------



## Dronks (Jun 7, 2011)

itskohler said:


> Engines do all work the same way in theory, but I find all of this irrelevant. Sorry. If you want to make a compelling argument for the 3" than go have one made, give the specs, post the before and after dyno runs. But for now I am going with the people that work on these engines day in and day out. Not some dyno from a Honda forum :thumbdown:


I did the next best thing, provided dyno evidence. The forum it comes from doesn't matter. 

One of those links is to a VR6 dyno, which gained power with 3" from a 2.5" pipe.

This is the kind of thinking that spews misinformation and zero progress, lets keep that in the general forum :thumbup: 



itskohler said:


> Large exhaust systems kill low end torque, so I guess it depends where you wany your power band.


Do you have _any_ proof of this?


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Next best thing still doesn't cut it for me, and no matter would it came from...IT STILL NOT THE SAME ENGINE. Nor is it the same piping layout, or headers, or materials (from one of your posts). Need I continue? I am no trying to get in a heated debate about this...But you sir, are borderline providing misinformation. One Honda used ceramic coated 3 inch pipes. Think that wont make a difference? Think again...Heat dispersion is something that you DONT want to happen to soon. The cooled gasses will condense, slow down due to the added friction, and clog the system. To put is simply.

I'm sorry if I thought common sense would rule over evidence in this. Google it and you will see more than enough evidence; its practically everywhere. Mustang forums are big on this and they, quite literally, have an engine that is twice the size of ours and they still run a 2.5 inch until over 500hp in dragsters. 

It has everything to do with velocity and achieving a streamlined pulse. And just for the record here...I am not saying we need back pressure at all. its put perfectly here:


> _The faster an exhaust pulse moves, the better it can scavenge out all of the spent gasses during valve overlap. The guiding principles of exhaust pulse scavenging are a bit beyond the scope of this doc but the general idea is a fast moving pulse creates a low pressure area behind it. This low pressure area acts as a vacuum and draws along the air behind it. A similar example would be a vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed on a dusty road. There is a low pressure area immediately behind the moving vehicle - dust particles get sucked into this low pressure area causing it to collect on the back of the vehicle. This effect is most noticeable on vans and hatchbacks which tend to create large trailing low pressure areas - giving rise to the numerous "wash me please" messages written in the thickly collected dust on the rear door(s)._


A 3 inch pipe is widely known to no be useful in a DAILY DRIVEN car until around 250-300hp. This all goes back to what I said earlier. Depending on where you want your power band, will guide you in the right direction for piping systems.

Read up on it for yourself. And since you have no problem using other forums, youll enjoy these even more.
http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Miscellaneous/exhausttheory.htm
http://www.8thcivic.com/forums/bolt...t-backpressure-explained-possible-sticky.html

Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio


----------



## nightshift1963 (Jun 20, 2011)

listen up shtbox.
unless your pushing mad hp out your 2.5l engine yo. *YOU DONT NEED A 3 INCH PIPE* maybe if you were turbo or NA build with sri and cams, _maybe_ ITB

but you on the other hand deserve a ****ing straightpipe. why dont you ask my friend heffery and he will gladly help you out there. 

now GTFO


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

nightshift1963 said:


> listen up shtbox.
> unless your pushing mad hp out your 2.5l engine yo. *YOU DONT NEED A 3 INCH PIPE* maybe if you were turbo or NA build with sri and cams, _maybe_ ITB
> 
> but you on the other hand deserve a ****ing straightpipe. why dont you ask my friend heffery and he will gladly help you out there.
> ...


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: you are so dumb


----------



## DerekH (Sep 4, 2010)

Shtbox said:


> How are they telling me first hand experience when THEY'VE NEVER DYNO'D IT (or even put one on a NA setup).


No i did not dyno my straight pipe, but i did drive it for 2 months and once i put a res and a muffler on it i got a tonne more power.


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

DerekH said:


> No i did not dyno my straight pipe, but i did drive it for 2 months and once i put a res and a muffler on it i got a tonne more power.


No proof, no care. This doesn't even pertain to this particular subject as you didn't even have a 3".


----------



## Dronks (Jun 7, 2011)

itskohler said:


> Next best thing still doesn't cut it for me, and no matter would it came from...IT STILL NOT THE SAME ENGINE. Nor is it the same piping layout, or headers, or materials (from one of your posts). Need I continue? I am no trying to get in a heated debate about this...But you sir, are borderline providing misinformation. One Honda used ceramic coated 3 inch pipes. Think that wont make a difference? Think again...Heat dispersion is something that you DONT want to happen to soon. The cooled gasses will condense, slow down due to the added friction, and clog the system. To put is simply.
> 
> I'm sorry if I thought common sense would rule over evidence in this. Google it and you will see more than enough evidence; its practically everywhere. Mustang forums are big on this and they, quite literally, have an engine that is twice the size of ours and they still run a 2.5 inch until over 500hp in dragsters.
> 
> ...


Been a while since I've had a refresher, thanks for that. Now back to the topic, why do those 3" systems in the dynos I linked make more power throughout the pictured powerband than the 2.5" systems? 

So what if one of the links used a coating, wrap, thicker tube walls or a fart can, all of the larger diameter pipes made more power. One of the runs was also a month apart with ambient temperatures being ~20 degrees warmer during the larger diameter dynos and it still made more power, how'd that happen? 

I posted proof, you're posting myths and theory. Lets get on the same level.


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

Dronks said:


> I posted proof, you're posting myths and theory. Lets get on the same level.


this is what it comes down to folks :thumbup:


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Will you take dyno sheets from someone who makes exhausts?
For the 2.0T cars, which would benefit the most from having a larger diameter...And don't even try to say its not the same engine as others have posted from Honda forums and everyone wants to believe those dyno charts...

http://www.awe-tuning.com/products/vw-1/mk5-g-j-2006/2-0t/awe-mk5exhaust.html

Look at the bottom of the page.
Boom.

Maybe they don't know what they are talking about, they only spend lots of time and money developing exhaust systems for our cars.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

bro, be cool.. do it. dyno it.

prove us right.

i once had a 2.75" exhaust, and it too was too much. i do have hard data that i have shared on the past, but i'm not willing to look it up, just so i can prove it to you.

have a nice day!


----------



## nothing-leaves-stock (Mar 1, 2005)

thygreyt said:


> do it. dyno it.
> 
> prove us right.


freds right...
and my offer stands so there IS proof....

i'll built 3'' exhaust to your specs for a discount IF you dyno before AND after....no other changes.


----------



## Dronks (Jun 7, 2011)

itskohler said:


> Will you take dyno sheets from someone who makes exhausts?
> For the 2.0T cars, which would benefit the most from having a larger diameter...And don't even try to say its not the same engine as others have posted from Honda forums and everyone wants to believe those dyno charts...
> 
> http://www.awe-tuning.com/products/vw-1/mk5-g-j-2006/2-0t/awe-mk5exhaust.html
> ...


That's strange, so I'll quote a different performance shop - [email protected] says - "On a turbocharged vehicle a general rule of thumb is a larger exhaust will be better for performance. 

Smaller diameter exhaust systems are not only quieter, but cheaper to produce. This means the manufacturer makes more money selling a smaller diameter exhaust compared to a larger diameter exhaust if the charge the same for both systems. 

Anyone who tells you a smaller exhaust is more powerful, or that a larger exhaust will cause a loss of torque, is yanking your chain!" That's from the second post in this thread - http://forums.triplezoom.com/showthread.php?5325222-3-quot-vs.-2.5-quot-debate&p=73607761

And some dyno charts from turbo cars that weren't posted by a company - http://honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=1530154

Another thread with [email protected] chiming into a thread regarding AWE (4th post) - http://forums.subdriven.com/showthread.php?5022112-2.5-quot-Downpipe-vs.-3-quot-Downpipe




nothing-leaves-stock said:


> freds right...
> and my offer stands so there IS proof....
> 
> i'll built 3'' exhaust to your specs for a discount IF you dyno before AND after....no other changes.


The discount would have to be *massive* for anyone that isn't willing to throw money away to prove some people wrong on the internet. If you could provide the dyno time I would consider paying for the materials and use of a shop to install the exhaust. It would also of course depend on location.


----------



## Quinny45 (Mar 26, 2009)

i found this on another car club forum 

'' For avoiding significant restriction from back pressure, the pipe should flow at least 2.2CFM per horsepower produced. A straight pipe will flow ~115CFM per square inch of area (using inside diameter of the pipe). I used the formula: (115*pi(diameter/2)^2)/2.2 The pipe size will become more restrictive the further you go above the zero loss horsepower. ''

Exhaust Diameter (inches): 2 
Zero loss Horsepower 164.22 

Exhaust Diameter (inches): 2.25 
Zero loss Horsepower 207.84 

Exhaust Diameter (inches): 2.5 
Zero loss Horsepower 256.59 

Exhaust Diameter (inches): 3 
Zero loss Horsepower 369.49 

Exhaust Diameter (inches): 3.5 
Zero loss Horsepower 502.92 

Exhaust Diameter (inches): 4 
Zero loss Horsepower 656.88 

for the 5cyl this mesurment maybe not exact but show a good idea of HP Vs Exhaust dia


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Good find, just hate they use the term "back pressure." That irks me to no end.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

itskohler said:


> Good find, just hate they use the term "back pressure." That irks me to no end.


lol... a bad experience?


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Haha!

Its just the wrong term entirely. Its a lack for a sufficient vacuum that creates the effect that people call back pressure. There still is a vacuum, just not enough of one.


----------



## jaja123 (Jan 17, 2011)

umm there is definitely a loss of low end torque the larger you go. It just may move the power band a bit further up.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Mhm.


----------



## Skaffles (May 27, 2011)

Maybe this could help? These catless DPs are for 3 series' but yeah.

Downpipe Features:
- 76.2mm overall diameter, eliminating restrictive factory pre-cats and crush bends
- 100% T304 Stainless Steel construction, using mandrel bends
- Precision TIG welded joints
- Heavy-Duty Stainless V-Band/Exhaust flanges
- Heavy-Duty locking fasteners and exhaust gaskets included
- Factory O2 locations retained with Stainless Steel bungs
- Pre-installed Stainless EGT bungs for easy thermocouple mounting
- Reduced underhood temperatures

*Dyno of Macht Schnell 3" catless downpipes vs popular 2.5" catless downpipes
*


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Still a boosted car. I posted info for the 20.T which is as close as we can get without someone throwing it on.


----------



## Skaffles (May 27, 2011)

itskohler said:


> Still a boosted car. I posted info for the 20.T which is as close as we can get without someone throwing it on.


Ah yeah true.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Good info though. It's weird how an engine of similar size can give put out different results depending on who made it.


----------



## Skaffles (May 27, 2011)

itskohler said:


> Good info though. It's weird how an engine of similar size can give put out different results depending on who made it.


Oh yeah definitely. I love how most of the time BMW severely underrates their engines.


----------



## jaja123 (Jan 17, 2011)

Skaffles said:


> Oh yeah definitely. I love how most of the time BMW severely underrates their engines.


well some bmw engines. You did say mostly. Mostly the turbo ones are underrated. I go in my friends on occasion e46 323 and it is slow as balls compared to mine. Its got the same 170hp our 5 cylinder has. Then again he was stock and an auto. But it feels less than 170 when I ride in it.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

jaja123 said:


> well some bmw engines. You did say mostly. Mostly the turbo ones are underrated. I go in my friends on occasion e46 323 and it is slow as balls compared to mine. Its got the same 170hp our 5 cylinder has. Then again he was stock and an auto. But it feels less than 170 when I ride in it.


keep in mind that you are only comparing PEAK hp at the crank. the curve is where it matters.

which is why i was so interested on the C2 dyno sheet.


----------



## timmiller05 (Mar 26, 2010)

thygreyt said:


> keep in mind that you are only comparing PEAK hp at the crank. the curve is where it matters.
> 
> which is why i was so interested on the C2 dyno sheet.


doubtful it will happen but im going to crack up if it out does the UM :laugh:


----------



## Skaffles (May 27, 2011)

jaja123 said:


> well some bmw engines. You did say mostly. Mostly the turbo ones are underrated. I go in my friends on occasion e46 323 and it is slow as balls compared to mine. Its got the same 170hp our 5 cylinder has. Then again he was stock and an auto. But it feels less than 170 when I ride in it.


Well the e46s are known for their power in the m3 world, but its still my favorite xD. I'm mostly talking about the new bmws. The new 328 they rated at like 210hp or something, but it actually got 222whp/240wtq or something like that, which is impressive, plus they changed it to a 4banger 2.0t... Not to be offtopic but that means 328>GTI until mk7s.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

I heard something about why they under rate their engines. It has something to do with insurance, the same thing domestic cars did in the early 70s. 

I think if you wanted to speed, and you bought a GTI, you missed your target. It is a decently QUICK car, but by no means a game changer. BMWs all look the same when they get done up, nice wheels, lowered, call it good. I think the VW community is more about making it "yours". 

Luckily for us the 2.5 engine is on the up and coming. :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## jettaglx91 (Jul 27, 2004)

itskohler said:


> I heard something about why they under rate their engines. It has something to do with insurance, the same thing domestic cars did in the early 70s.


Its not really for insurance purposes nowadays its usually done to not hurt sales of high line models. they need to make the entry level cars still enjoyable to drive without having similar "advertised" power to the more expensive models with what should be more power engines.

Vw/audi did the same thing in the late '90s early '00s. 

For example the vw 1.8T was was pretty much as powerful as the VR6 but rated for less. (same for Audi with the 1.8T and V6)


----------



## Rabbidrabbitt (Mar 21, 2011)

I just had my 3" 42 dd exhaust installed last week. It's sounds mean and my butt dyno approves. I am running c2 Sri and Sri tune, obx header, and custom test pipe.opcorn:


----------



## DerekH (Sep 4, 2010)

Rabbidrabbitt said:


> I just had my 3" 42 dd exhaust installed last week. It's sounds mean and my butt dyno approves. I am running c2 Sri and Sri tune, obx header, and custom test pipe.opcorn:


Did you change the header so it has a 3 inch collector?


----------



## tay272 (Aug 22, 2007)

Very interested to see what kinda power yours in making.


----------



## dhenry (Feb 10, 2009)

yea x2

when are you going to dyno that set up?


----------



## Rabbidrabbitt (Mar 21, 2011)

Soon


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

Rabbidrabbitt said:


> Soon


waiting!


----------



## Shtbox (Nov 27, 2010)

*FV-QR*

really hope it makes power.

only so that a claimed 'professional' on the 2.5 potential that has never been seen or done will be shut up.


----------



## nothing-leaves-stock (Mar 1, 2005)




----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Shtbox said:


> really hope it makes power.
> 
> only so that a claimed 'professional' on the 2.5 potential that has never been seen or done will be shut up.


You mad bro?


----------



## DerekH (Sep 4, 2010)

itskohler said:


> You mad bro?


Hes mad bro.

Also, i asked this before. gonna ask again seeing as it wasn't answered. Did you modify the header so it has a 3inch collector? Otherwise you are going from a 2.5inch collector to a 3inch exhaust which doesn't exactly illustrate that a 3 inch exhaust is superior.


----------



## Rabbidrabbitt (Mar 21, 2011)

The test pipe is tapered 2.5 to 2.75 to 3


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

i dynoed mine with a 2.5 exhaust and with a 2.75".

i lost tons of power and tq all over the power band. hopefully it doesnt happen to him


----------



## Mr2.0 (Nov 10, 2009)

Had a eurojet exhaust and test pipe. Switched to the stock exhaust with just the suitcase delete and its probably the best feeling ever. Throttle response is right there, the torque is really nice.

I think the stock exhaust flows pretty well, i may just delete the cat if anything. 

You move the powerband as you decrease and increase the diameter piping IMO till you go too big and start to lose power.


----------



## Rabbidrabbitt (Mar 21, 2011)

I was running stock exhaust w middle suit case removed, it was pretty torquey. But I feel it is faster now. If I did lose power I can't tell, this car is not staying n/a for too much longer any way. I am very pleased with the tone and sound. I guess only the dyno will reveille its true numbers. After C2 gets the dyno up and running I will know.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

BUTT DYNO IS ALL THAT MATTERS. SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS, CAPS KEY WONT COME UP.


----------

