I said I wouldn't waste $300 for 5hp (at best)
2/21/06, 09:44 PM
#21
Cobra Member
Join Date: February 20, 2005
Posts: 1,292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Route 66 @ February 21, 2006, 8:34 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Sorry, but your smiley looks like something from Brokeback Mountain. Please, give the bottum one some hair. (or a black stripe around the top smiley).
[/b][/quote]
Thats pretty $%&#ing funny right dar.
BTW, last year was only 2 months ago. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img]
-Dan
Sorry, but your smiley looks like something from Brokeback Mountain. Please, give the bottum one some hair. (or a black stripe around the top smiley).
[/b][/quote]
Thats pretty $%&#ing funny right dar.
BTW, last year was only 2 months ago. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img]
-Dan
2/21/06, 10:20 PM
#22
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RRRoamer @ February 21, 2006, 7:04 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
And just because I am replying, I might as well add my take on the "only 5hp, but 20lb from 2200 rpm to 4000rpm" statement:
hp = torque * rpm / 5252. So,
20 lb-ft * 2200 rpm / 5252 = 8.3 hp and
20 lb-ft * 4000 rpm / 5252 = 15.3 hp.
Guys, this is simple math. Any time anyone gives you numbers like that, it is trivial to double check them and either verify them or flash the light of BS on them. In this case, there is no way in HADES that you can get 20 lb-ft of torque between 2200 and 4000 rpm and ONLY get 5hp max gain. NO way. No how.
[/b][/quote]
Actually, I respectfully disagree. It is quite possible that a given mod (and I'm not specifically referring to mufflers here) can make 20rwtq from 2200-4000rpm, but only 5hp. That's because the 5hp gain is typically measured (and reported) as the peak hp number, which would occur at a much higher rpm (say 6,000rpm for example). So, if the peak hp went from say 290 to 295 (at 6000rpm), it gained 5hp (peak). However, the hp gains at a lower rpm can be greater than 5hp, thus resulting from larger torque gains down low across a wider band. That is one reason I'm not a big proponent of reporting "peak" hp or torque numbers to begin with. They both only occur at a single point on the curve, and to me, the whole curve is more important.
And just because I am replying, I might as well add my take on the "only 5hp, but 20lb from 2200 rpm to 4000rpm" statement:
hp = torque * rpm / 5252. So,
20 lb-ft * 2200 rpm / 5252 = 8.3 hp and
20 lb-ft * 4000 rpm / 5252 = 15.3 hp.
Guys, this is simple math. Any time anyone gives you numbers like that, it is trivial to double check them and either verify them or flash the light of BS on them. In this case, there is no way in HADES that you can get 20 lb-ft of torque between 2200 and 4000 rpm and ONLY get 5hp max gain. NO way. No how.
[/b][/quote]
Actually, I respectfully disagree. It is quite possible that a given mod (and I'm not specifically referring to mufflers here) can make 20rwtq from 2200-4000rpm, but only 5hp. That's because the 5hp gain is typically measured (and reported) as the peak hp number, which would occur at a much higher rpm (say 6,000rpm for example). So, if the peak hp went from say 290 to 295 (at 6000rpm), it gained 5hp (peak). However, the hp gains at a lower rpm can be greater than 5hp, thus resulting from larger torque gains down low across a wider band. That is one reason I'm not a big proponent of reporting "peak" hp or torque numbers to begin with. They both only occur at a single point on the curve, and to me, the whole curve is more important.
2/21/06, 10:32 PM
#24
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Cleveland @ February 21, 2006, 9:27 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
"I have to agree with Don on this one" [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img][/b][/quote]
I'm doomed... [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/banghead.gif[/img]
"I have to agree with Don on this one" [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img][/b][/quote]
I'm doomed... [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/banghead.gif[/img]
2/22/06, 12:11 AM
#26
I used to be really got at that Dan... Not sure why but my posts have had an "unrepliable" power to them :-P
I need to get to a dyno...
I need to get to a dyno...
2/22/06, 08:42 AM
#27
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The mufflers came in Monday. They are bolted on and sounding VERY good.
Installation was fairly easy. The passenger side muffler centered perfectly right off the bad. The drivers side is tipped a bit towards the center of the car. I need to loosen the H-pipe to get everything squard away, but I was running out of daylight and heat Monday evening, so I left it as is until the weekend.
A few observations:
1) Flowmaster needs to work on their welding. Don't get me wrong, I love Flowmaster mufflers (I have a pair of three chambers on my pickup for the last five years), but the weld quality is NOT there. A lot of splatter and some bits of slag in the muffler.
2) I had to rework the inlet to one muffler a bit. It had a bit of a flat spot in it and I'm not sure if it happened before or during shipping. A hammer and dolly fixed it right up.
3) The clamps that came with my set are very nice. They pull directly in tension, so you get a very nice, very even compression all the way around the clamp. No issues tightening everything up at all and no leaks that I can hear.
4) Ford REALLY doesn't want the mufflers going anywere! That is pretty significant hardware holding the muffler hangers to the chassis!
5) The sound at idle is perfect! All the audio and video online just doesn't do it justice. But then, it can't. Unless you have VERY good audio rigs, you won't record the low frequency sounds being produced. Of course, that probably applys to all the aftermarket mufflers as well...
6) They actually have a bit less drone right at 80 mph (in 5th) than stock. I had a pretty noticable rattle in my Tri-Ax shifter at 80 mph when I rolled into the throttle (going up hill for exampe). It is much better with the Flows.
7) While they are definitely louder when you are on the gas (like they should be!), crusiing down the highway is only a bit louder. Not enough to bother me, at least not yet.
8) The 4" tips REALLY fill the cut outs properly. Given how large the openings in the rear bumper cover were, the stock tips just looked small there. The Flows fit it perfectly. Now I just have to keep the tips clean and shiney over the long haul...
All in all, I'm happy with this upgrade. It was definitely worth the money.
Installation was fairly easy. The passenger side muffler centered perfectly right off the bad. The drivers side is tipped a bit towards the center of the car. I need to loosen the H-pipe to get everything squard away, but I was running out of daylight and heat Monday evening, so I left it as is until the weekend.
A few observations:
1) Flowmaster needs to work on their welding. Don't get me wrong, I love Flowmaster mufflers (I have a pair of three chambers on my pickup for the last five years), but the weld quality is NOT there. A lot of splatter and some bits of slag in the muffler.
2) I had to rework the inlet to one muffler a bit. It had a bit of a flat spot in it and I'm not sure if it happened before or during shipping. A hammer and dolly fixed it right up.
3) The clamps that came with my set are very nice. They pull directly in tension, so you get a very nice, very even compression all the way around the clamp. No issues tightening everything up at all and no leaks that I can hear.
4) Ford REALLY doesn't want the mufflers going anywere! That is pretty significant hardware holding the muffler hangers to the chassis!
5) The sound at idle is perfect! All the audio and video online just doesn't do it justice. But then, it can't. Unless you have VERY good audio rigs, you won't record the low frequency sounds being produced. Of course, that probably applys to all the aftermarket mufflers as well...
6) They actually have a bit less drone right at 80 mph (in 5th) than stock. I had a pretty noticable rattle in my Tri-Ax shifter at 80 mph when I rolled into the throttle (going up hill for exampe). It is much better with the Flows.
7) While they are definitely louder when you are on the gas (like they should be!), crusiing down the highway is only a bit louder. Not enough to bother me, at least not yet.
8) The 4" tips REALLY fill the cut outs properly. Given how large the openings in the rear bumper cover were, the stock tips just looked small there. The Flows fit it perfectly. Now I just have to keep the tips clean and shiney over the long haul...
All in all, I'm happy with this upgrade. It was definitely worth the money.
2/22/06, 09:14 AM
#28
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(don_w @ February 21, 2006, 11:23 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Actually, I respectfully disagree. It is quite possible that a given mod (and I'm not specifically referring to mufflers here) can make 20rwtq from 2200-4000rpm, but only 5hp. That's because the 5hp gain is typically measured (and reported) as the peak hp number, which would occur at a much higher rpm (say 6,000rpm for example). So, if the peak hp went from say 290 to 295 (at 6000rpm), it gained 5hp (peak). However, the hp gains at a lower rpm can be greater than 5hp, thus resulting from larger torque gains down low across a wider band. That is one reason I'm not a big proponent of reporting "peak" hp or torque numbers to begin with. They both only occur at a single point on the curve, and to me, the whole curve is more important.
[/b][/quote]
Theoritically, you are correct. But I have NEVER see any company advertise "we made 5hp gain at peak hp" if they could say "we made a peak increase of 15hp!". Then you get into a VERY fine line on the grammer. Are you talking about the increase of the peak hp or the peak increase in power? Vendors tend to use which ever one gives them the biggest number. Unless they just decide to make crap up. And I have NEVER seen one single company that could back up a claim of a 5hp gain and 20lb-ft at lower rpm. Not one.
I'll go digging in my magazine collection, but I don't remember seeing one single exhaust that produced anything like a 20 lb-ft increase down low. None of them have that much impact at lower rpm. As would be expected given the state the stock exhaust is in (aka: It's actually pretty good). Axle backs just can't give you those kind of increases on this car.
So Don, if you have some dyno results of your own to post that can show I'm smoking crack, feel free.
Oh, and I DO 100% agree with your last statement about the whole curve.
Actually, I respectfully disagree. It is quite possible that a given mod (and I'm not specifically referring to mufflers here) can make 20rwtq from 2200-4000rpm, but only 5hp. That's because the 5hp gain is typically measured (and reported) as the peak hp number, which would occur at a much higher rpm (say 6,000rpm for example). So, if the peak hp went from say 290 to 295 (at 6000rpm), it gained 5hp (peak). However, the hp gains at a lower rpm can be greater than 5hp, thus resulting from larger torque gains down low across a wider band. That is one reason I'm not a big proponent of reporting "peak" hp or torque numbers to begin with. They both only occur at a single point on the curve, and to me, the whole curve is more important.
[/b][/quote]
Theoritically, you are correct. But I have NEVER see any company advertise "we made 5hp gain at peak hp" if they could say "we made a peak increase of 15hp!". Then you get into a VERY fine line on the grammer. Are you talking about the increase of the peak hp or the peak increase in power? Vendors tend to use which ever one gives them the biggest number. Unless they just decide to make crap up. And I have NEVER seen one single company that could back up a claim of a 5hp gain and 20lb-ft at lower rpm. Not one.
I'll go digging in my magazine collection, but I don't remember seeing one single exhaust that produced anything like a 20 lb-ft increase down low. None of them have that much impact at lower rpm. As would be expected given the state the stock exhaust is in (aka: It's actually pretty good). Axle backs just can't give you those kind of increases on this car.
So Don, if you have some dyno results of your own to post that can show I'm smoking crack, feel free.
Oh, and I DO 100% agree with your last statement about the whole curve.
2/22/06, 10:28 AM
#29
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RRRoamer @ February 22, 2006, 8:17 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Theoritically, you are correct. But I have NEVER see any company advertise "we made 5hp gain at peak hp" if they could say "we made a peak increase of 15hp!". Then you get into a VERY fine line on the grammer. Are you talking about the increase of the peak hp or the peak increase in power? Vendors tend to use which ever one gives them the biggest number. Unless they just decide to make crap up. And I have NEVER seen one single company that could back up a claim of a 5hp gain and 20lb-ft at lower rpm. Not one.
I'll go digging in my magazine collection, but I don't remember seeing one single exhaust that produced anything like a 20 lb-ft increase down low. None of them have that much impact at lower rpm. As would be expected given the state the stock exhaust is in (aka: It's actually pretty good). Axle backs just can't give you those kind of increases on this car.
So Don, if you have some dyno results of your own to post that can show I'm smoking crack, feel free.
Oh, and I DO 100% agree with your last statement about the whole curve.
[/b][/quote]
I wasn't trying to flame you or anything; please recall I said that I "respectfully" disagree. And I'm also not saying that any axle backs can achieve those numbers, because personally I don't actually think they do. I was just trying to provide a plausible alternative scenario how the numbers could be reported. No offense intended.
Theoritically, you are correct. But I have NEVER see any company advertise "we made 5hp gain at peak hp" if they could say "we made a peak increase of 15hp!". Then you get into a VERY fine line on the grammer. Are you talking about the increase of the peak hp or the peak increase in power? Vendors tend to use which ever one gives them the biggest number. Unless they just decide to make crap up. And I have NEVER seen one single company that could back up a claim of a 5hp gain and 20lb-ft at lower rpm. Not one.
I'll go digging in my magazine collection, but I don't remember seeing one single exhaust that produced anything like a 20 lb-ft increase down low. None of them have that much impact at lower rpm. As would be expected given the state the stock exhaust is in (aka: It's actually pretty good). Axle backs just can't give you those kind of increases on this car.
So Don, if you have some dyno results of your own to post that can show I'm smoking crack, feel free.
Oh, and I DO 100% agree with your last statement about the whole curve.
[/b][/quote]
I wasn't trying to flame you or anything; please recall I said that I "respectfully" disagree. And I'm also not saying that any axle backs can achieve those numbers, because personally I don't actually think they do. I was just trying to provide a plausible alternative scenario how the numbers could be reported. No offense intended.
2/22/06, 01:11 PM
#30
Member
Join Date: December 5, 2005
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RRRoamer @ February 22, 2006, 7:45 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
The mufflers came in Monday. They are bolted on and sounding VERY good.
5) The sound at idle is perfect! All the audio and video online just doesn't do it justice. But then, it can't. Unless you have VERY good audio rigs, you won't record the low frequency sounds being produced. Of course, that probably applys to all the aftermarket mufflers as well...
6) They actually have a bit less drone right at 80 mph (in 5th) than stock. I had a pretty noticable rattle in my Tri-Ax shifter at 80 mph when I rolled into the throttle (going up hill for exampe). It is much better with the Flows.
7) While they are definitely louder when you are on the gas (like they should be!), crusiing down the highway is only a bit louder. Not enough to bother me, at least not yet.
.
[/b][/quote]
Quite question... I want a set of mufflers that are really deep but not TOO loud but loud when u get on the throttle. Would you recommend the Flows or go with Borla/FRPP?
The mufflers came in Monday. They are bolted on and sounding VERY good.
5) The sound at idle is perfect! All the audio and video online just doesn't do it justice. But then, it can't. Unless you have VERY good audio rigs, you won't record the low frequency sounds being produced. Of course, that probably applys to all the aftermarket mufflers as well...
6) They actually have a bit less drone right at 80 mph (in 5th) than stock. I had a pretty noticable rattle in my Tri-Ax shifter at 80 mph when I rolled into the throttle (going up hill for exampe). It is much better with the Flows.
7) While they are definitely louder when you are on the gas (like they should be!), crusiing down the highway is only a bit louder. Not enough to bother me, at least not yet.
.
[/b][/quote]
Quite question... I want a set of mufflers that are really deep but not TOO loud but loud when u get on the throttle. Would you recommend the Flows or go with Borla/FRPP?
2/22/06, 03:25 PM
#31
Super Boss Lawman Member
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DjSaL @ February 22, 2006, 12:14 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Quite question... I want a set of mufflers that are really deep but not TOO loud but loud when u get on the throttle. Would you recommend the Flows or go with Borla/FRPP?
[/b][/quote]
You should go with borla.If you want loud and deep , flow's are not for you. My first set of mufflers were the flow's, I took them off after a week because they sound almost exactly like stock, the borla's won't be too loud at all.
Quite question... I want a set of mufflers that are really deep but not TOO loud but loud when u get on the throttle. Would you recommend the Flows or go with Borla/FRPP?
[/b][/quote]
You should go with borla.If you want loud and deep , flow's are not for you. My first set of mufflers were the flow's, I took them off after a week because they sound almost exactly like stock, the borla's won't be too loud at all.
2/22/06, 06:34 PM
#34
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(don_w @ February 22, 2006, 11:31 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I wasn't trying to flame you or anything; please recall I said that I "respectfully" disagree. And I'm also not saying that any axle backs can achieve those numbers, because personally I don't actually think they do. I was just trying to provide a plausible alternative scenario how the numbers could be reported. No offense intended.
[/b][/quote]
No problems at all brother! I didn't take it as a flame, I was just arguing my point of view on this. That last change was just that: If you had ever seen a dyno graph that showed that type of power gain (20 ft-lbs down low but only 5 hp peak or something like that), then I want to see them. That would be VERY strange and abnormal. But real fun on the street if true!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DjSaL @ February 22, 2006, 2:14 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Quite question... I want a set of mufflers that are really deep but not TOO loud but loud when u get on the throttle. Would you recommend the Flows or go with Borla/FRPP?
[/b][/quote]
Sal,
I can say that the Flows WILL give you the deepness but not too loud. But that is my opionion only. I haven't heard the Borla/FRPP system in person, so I really can't say if the flows would work better or worse for you in that regard. When I voted with my wallet, I went with the flows, so I would HAVE to say I would go with the Flows. Because I did...
And just to expand a slight bit, I was leaning towards the flows for a couple of reasons: 1) I liked the way they sounded in the various clips I have listened to (but note, you WON'T hear all the deep bass from any of the exhausts in the clips!) and 2) I loved the way my Flows sounded on my pickup (1981 F100 with a 351W I built up several years ago. Well, up a little bit!). When I heard that car in person with Flows, I was sold. In person, they have that very deep rumble that is simply missing from the audio clips. But again, that rumble would also be missing from any other audio system as well just due to the limitations of the compressed audio format.
I wasn't trying to flame you or anything; please recall I said that I "respectfully" disagree. And I'm also not saying that any axle backs can achieve those numbers, because personally I don't actually think they do. I was just trying to provide a plausible alternative scenario how the numbers could be reported. No offense intended.
[/b][/quote]
No problems at all brother! I didn't take it as a flame, I was just arguing my point of view on this. That last change was just that: If you had ever seen a dyno graph that showed that type of power gain (20 ft-lbs down low but only 5 hp peak or something like that), then I want to see them. That would be VERY strange and abnormal. But real fun on the street if true!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DjSaL @ February 22, 2006, 2:14 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Quite question... I want a set of mufflers that are really deep but not TOO loud but loud when u get on the throttle. Would you recommend the Flows or go with Borla/FRPP?
[/b][/quote]
Sal,
I can say that the Flows WILL give you the deepness but not too loud. But that is my opionion only. I haven't heard the Borla/FRPP system in person, so I really can't say if the flows would work better or worse for you in that regard. When I voted with my wallet, I went with the flows, so I would HAVE to say I would go with the Flows. Because I did...
And just to expand a slight bit, I was leaning towards the flows for a couple of reasons: 1) I liked the way they sounded in the various clips I have listened to (but note, you WON'T hear all the deep bass from any of the exhausts in the clips!) and 2) I loved the way my Flows sounded on my pickup (1981 F100 with a 351W I built up several years ago. Well, up a little bit!). When I heard that car in person with Flows, I was sold. In person, they have that very deep rumble that is simply missing from the audio clips. But again, that rumble would also be missing from any other audio system as well just due to the limitations of the compressed audio format.
2/22/06, 06:58 PM
#35
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RRRoamer @ February 22, 2006, 5:37 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
No problems at all brother! I didn't take it as a flame, I was just arguing my point of view on this. That last change was just that: If you had ever seen a dyno graph that showed that type of power gain (20 ft-lbs down low but only 5 hp peak or something like that), then I want to see them. That would be VERY strange and abnormal. But real fun on the street if true![/b][/quote]
FWIW, last summer someone here developed the attached spreadsheet based on the data from the "exhaust shootout" in MM&FF magazine. The MM&FF data show large low-end torque gains, yet minimal top end gains.
No problems at all brother! I didn't take it as a flame, I was just arguing my point of view on this. That last change was just that: If you had ever seen a dyno graph that showed that type of power gain (20 ft-lbs down low but only 5 hp peak or something like that), then I want to see them. That would be VERY strange and abnormal. But real fun on the street if true![/b][/quote]
FWIW, last summer someone here developed the attached spreadsheet based on the data from the "exhaust shootout" in MM&FF magazine. The MM&FF data show large low-end torque gains, yet minimal top end gains.
2/22/06, 07:16 PM
#36
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: December 27, 2005
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I the only one whos flowmasters didn't tighten worth crap on the stock exhaust? I tightened down the included clamps as far as physically possible and they still leaked really bad. I had to get a friend to bring over a wirefed welder from his shop to seal them up. Didnt do a pretty job, as we didnt wanna pull the whole exhaust, but it sealed. I plan to go with complete after market exhuast eventually anyway.
2/23/06, 04:15 PM
#37
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(FireFighterHill @ February 22, 2006, 8:19 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Am I the only one whos flowmasters didn't tighten worth crap on the stock exhaust? I tightened down the included clamps as far as physically possible and they still leaked really bad. I had to get a friend to bring over a wirefed welder from his shop to seal them up. Didnt do a pretty job, as we didnt wanna pull the whole exhaust, but it sealed. I plan to go with complete after market exhuast eventually anyway.
[/b][/quote]
Maybe. I didn't have any trouble at all with mine and I just tightened them with a socket (1/2" drive and I am a big guy!). The passenger side was real loose, so I figured I was in for a fight, but it tightened up very nice and I don't have any leaks that I can hear (in the car or out).
Am I the only one whos flowmasters didn't tighten worth crap on the stock exhaust? I tightened down the included clamps as far as physically possible and they still leaked really bad. I had to get a friend to bring over a wirefed welder from his shop to seal them up. Didnt do a pretty job, as we didnt wanna pull the whole exhaust, but it sealed. I plan to go with complete after market exhuast eventually anyway.
[/b][/quote]
Maybe. I didn't have any trouble at all with mine and I just tightened them with a socket (1/2" drive and I am a big guy!). The passenger side was real loose, so I figured I was in for a fight, but it tightened up very nice and I don't have any leaks that I can hear (in the car or out).
2/23/06, 04:29 PM
#38
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(don_w @ February 22, 2006, 8:01 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
FWIW, last summer someone here developed the attached spreadsheet based on the data from the "exhaust shootout" in MM&FF magazine. The MM&FF data show large low-end torque gains, yet minimal top end gains.
[/b][/quote]
Don,
Thanks for posting that link. I was following it originally, but I had let it drop off before the spread sheet was added.
And it is also clear something is WAY hosed with the stock run data. There is NO WAY the Flows (or any other muffler they tested) are actually making 24% more power and torque at 2400 rpm than stock. No way in hades. Something was hosed. While I will admit my butt dyno hasn't been calibrated lately, I KNOW I could feel a 24% increase in low rpm power after the install and it is NOT there. Not sure who or how, but someone screwed up the stock run.
This really reminds me of an article in 5.0 about 4 months ago or so on the JBA long tube headers. They were showing some NICE gains for the JBA headers, but the before run numbers just didn't look right. So I tossed both tables into Excel and found a nice little 15 to 20 hp negative offset for EVERY SINGLE hp number for the stock run based on the posted torque and rpm. Strangely enough, the JBA run did NOT have any offset and the posted HP numbers exactly matched what was calculated with the torque and rpm.
When you took that into consideration, that nice 28 hp gain suddenly dropped to an 8 hp gain. And dropped right in line with what everyone else was posting for assorted different long tube headers on these cars (both here and other forums).
FWIW, last summer someone here developed the attached spreadsheet based on the data from the "exhaust shootout" in MM&FF magazine. The MM&FF data show large low-end torque gains, yet minimal top end gains.
[/b][/quote]
Don,
Thanks for posting that link. I was following it originally, but I had let it drop off before the spread sheet was added.
And it is also clear something is WAY hosed with the stock run data. There is NO WAY the Flows (or any other muffler they tested) are actually making 24% more power and torque at 2400 rpm than stock. No way in hades. Something was hosed. While I will admit my butt dyno hasn't been calibrated lately, I KNOW I could feel a 24% increase in low rpm power after the install and it is NOT there. Not sure who or how, but someone screwed up the stock run.
This really reminds me of an article in 5.0 about 4 months ago or so on the JBA long tube headers. They were showing some NICE gains for the JBA headers, but the before run numbers just didn't look right. So I tossed both tables into Excel and found a nice little 15 to 20 hp negative offset for EVERY SINGLE hp number for the stock run based on the posted torque and rpm. Strangely enough, the JBA run did NOT have any offset and the posted HP numbers exactly matched what was calculated with the torque and rpm.
When you took that into consideration, that nice 28 hp gain suddenly dropped to an 8 hp gain. And dropped right in line with what everyone else was posting for assorted different long tube headers on these cars (both here and other forums).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post