Axle back exhaust with more power?
Cobra Member
Joined: September 16, 2012
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
From: North Carolina
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Joined: July 7, 2012
Posts: 4,421
Likes: 21
From: Indianapolis
Flowmaster posts the dyno sheets. I don't support either claim. I just like the sound and am purchasing this set.
Then again this is for the 6 cylinder
Then again this is for the 6 cylinder
Last edited by Getportfolio; Dec 9, 2012 at 03:16 PM.
Cobra R Member
Joined: September 22, 2012
Posts: 1,690
Likes: 17
From: Ontario, California
One of my buddies in high school used to call it mhp. Mental horse power. It sounds fast therefore it is fast. The mhp of stickers is 5 per sticker. Powerful stuff. That said, I love my axel backs. I don't feel a bit of difference. But the mhp is amazing.
V6 Member
Joined: July 18, 2012
Posts: 61
Likes: 1
From: Oklahoma
Flowmasters add 50MHP
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 17, 2012
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
2013 Mustang GT Dyno (Stock, Axleback, and SVE Powerpack) - YouTube. Though it could have been one of those 87-93 runs
9:41 am it made 363
11:04 am it made 372
12:02 pm it made 393
The first 2 dyno pulls were done with a stock tune (2nd pull is with the GT500 axle backs). After the 2nd pull, the JLT and tune was loaded to make the 393 number.
Also, Humidity was lower each run, and run conditions were warmer each time.
Humidity was 35% first pull, 28% on the 2nd, and 22% on the third.
84 degrees on first pull, 91 degrees on 2nd, and 92 on the third.
I am sure there could be something else that played into the numbers. I will never know for sure. The only thing I can go off of is the dyno graph.
There was no 87-93 octane change. All runs were done with 93 octane that was already in the car.
Last edited by Jarrod@latemodelresto; Dec 11, 2012 at 08:00 AM.
Cobra Member
Joined: February 18, 2011
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
From: South Carolina
Originally Posted by Jarrod@latemodelresto
This is my personal car. I still have the graph of that day sitting in my office. I will admit, it caught me off guard to see a gain like that with just an axle back. I'm still 50/50 on the gains myself.
9:41 am it made 363
11:04 am it made 372
12:02 pm it made 393
The first 2 dyno pulls were done with a stock tune (2nd pull is with the GT500 axle backs). After the 2nd pull, the JLT and tune was loaded to make the 393 number.
Also, Humidity was lower each run, and run conditions were warmer each time.
Humidity was 35% first pull, 28% on the 2nd, and 22% on the third.
84 degrees on first pull, 91 degrees on 2nd, and 92 on the third.
I am sure there could be something else that played into the numbers. I will never know for sure. The only thing I can go off of is the dyno graph.
There was no 87-93 octane change. All runs were done with 93 octane that was already in the car.
Shelby GT350 Member
Joined: May 18, 2010
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 15
From: CT
^interesting...
One thing is for sure; there is some weight to be saved by going to aftermarket mufflers. Saving 20lbs is probably realistic...and while you won't feel that, it does improve your power:weight ratio and every performance aspect of your car, even if only slightly.
One thing is for sure; there is some weight to be saved by going to aftermarket mufflers. Saving 20lbs is probably realistic...and while you won't feel that, it does improve your power:weight ratio and every performance aspect of your car, even if only slightly.
Cobra Member
Joined: February 18, 2011
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
From: South Carolina
Originally Posted by Jarrod@latemodelresto
This is my personal car. I still have the graph of that day sitting in my office. I will admit, it caught me off guard to see a gain like that with just an axle back. I'm still 50/50 on the gains myself.
9:41 am it made 363
11:04 am it made 372
12:02 pm it made 393
The first 2 dyno pulls were done with a stock tune (2nd pull is with the GT500 axle backs). After the 2nd pull, the JLT and tune was loaded to make the 393 number.
Also, Humidity was lower each run, and run conditions were warmer each time.
Humidity was 35% first pull, 28% on the 2nd, and 22% on the third.
84 degrees on first pull, 91 degrees on 2nd, and 92 on the third.
I am sure there could be something else that played into the numbers. I will never know for sure. The only thing I can go off of is the dyno graph.
There was no 87-93 octane change. All runs were done with 93 octane that was already in the car.
Cobra R Member
Joined: September 22, 2012
Posts: 1,690
Likes: 17
From: Ontario, California
This is my personal car. I still have the graph of that day sitting in my office. I will admit, it caught me off guard to see a gain like that with just an axle back. I'm still 50/50 on the gains myself.
9:41 am it made 363
11:04 am it made 372
12:02 pm it made 393
The first 2 dyno pulls were done with a stock tune (2nd pull is with the GT500 axle backs). After the 2nd pull, the JLT and tune was loaded to make the 393 number.
Also, Humidity was lower each run, and run conditions were warmer each time.
Humidity was 35% first pull, 28% on the 2nd, and 22% on the third.
84 degrees on first pull, 91 degrees on 2nd, and 92 on the third.
I am sure there could be something else that played into the numbers. I will never know for sure. The only thing I can go off of is the dyno graph.
There was no 87-93 octane change. All runs were done with 93 octane that was already in the car.
Shelby GT350 Member
Joined: May 18, 2010
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 15
From: CT
Same here...I know we all want to believe this but his improvements would have to be repeatable before I modded the axle-backs for more power.
Fortunately, the auditory sensations justify the purchase price so a power improvement from axle-backs would be a bonus.
Fortunately, the auditory sensations justify the purchase price so a power improvement from axle-backs would be a bonus.