"94-95 intake is restrictive, exhaust is good"

[JimTMich]

Was looking through some Kenne Bell literature and their notes say that the 94-95 GT's intakes are very restrictive. I guess that is why I find it best to shift at about 4200-4500 when my buddy's older 5.0 runs nice to 5500. Is this what you have found? are the heads the same between older 5.0's and the 94-95?

Kenne Bell literature also says the the 94-95 exhuast is good for quite a while and not worth changing. What does everyone think?

Jim

 

[94DreamGT]

Please copy and paste that exact literature here or give us a link...sounds like there is some misinformation in here.

The stock intake, exhaust, heads, etc...are all restrictive to a point, some more than others. It is by replacing these with higher-flowing aftermarket components that you create more horsepower. This is magnified as well by forced induction.

The biggest bottleneck is probably the intake, but it's all part of a combination and by freeing up the intake, you are just moving the bottleneck to a different area. This is why it is so crucial to get a properly matched H/C/I TB, MAF, Exhaust etc...comboniation. The most horsepower in stock form that is being trapped is located in the stock heads.

As for the shift points, stock componenets shoudl make power at least up to 4800 and your shifts should come at 5200 give or take.

1987 to 1995 5.0's all use the same Cylinder Heads (E7TE)

 

[Trick95]

I've always heard that the stock exhaust isn't that restrictive on a mostly stock motor.

 

[1105]

The biggest bottleneck is probably the intake

I always thought the heads were the most restrictive part on our cars anyways all of that stuff is probably going to get replaced with aftermarket parts anyways

 

[94DreamGT]

The stock heads restrict the greatest horsepower, therefore they are the largest source of untapped horsepower from the motor so-to-speak. But when talking about actual bottleneck's, the intake is larger because that isn't even allowing the full potential of the stock heads.

I've heard about many cases where guys replace the stock heads with nice aftermarket aluminum heads and don't pick up nearly the horsepower they should...reason being is the stock intake is the biggest bottleneck.

On the flipside, there are many guys running aftermarket intakes on stock heads and going well into the mid 13's at over 100mph (myself included). You don't usually see these numbers with stock intakes no matter what heads they have (or at least I haven't seen too many).

 

[WhiteDevil]

Yup you got it man

E7TE Heads = SUCK
Stock GT Intake = SUCKS MORE

 

[Eric94GTvert]

Please copy and paste that exact literature here or give us a link...sounds like there is some misinformation in here.

The stock intake, exhaust, heads, etc...are all restrictive to a point, some more than others. It is by replacing these with higher-flowing aftermarket components that you create more horsepower. This is magnified as well by forced induction.

The biggest bottleneck is probably the intake, but it's all part of a combination and by freeing up the intake, you are just moving the bottleneck to a different area. This is why it is so crucial to get a properly matched H/C/I TB, MAF, Exhaust etc...comboniation. The most horsepower in stock form that is being trapped is located in the stock heads.

As for the shift points, stock componenets shoudl make power at least up to 4800 and your shifts should come at 5200 give or take.

Everything in the KB article is on point.
Basically KB said the intake is the biggest restriction and you agree to that.
Also, the article states the exhaust side is not as restrictive as the intake side of the engine and NOONE can argue with that statement. The stock exhaust is good for quite a bit of horsepower above the stock output and most people know that. The exhaust is changed out more for SOUND than power in near stock applications.

So, you say there's mis-information in the KB statement but you also agree with it. I don't understand?

 

[HtownGT]

Yup you got it man

E7TE Heads = SUCK
Stock GT Intake = SUCKS MORE

i like that. it should be made a sticky so everyone knows it that is new to sn95 5.0 stangs.

 

[Eric94GTvert]

i like that. it should be made a sticky so everyone knows it that is new to sn95 5.0 stangs.

Should be in our owners manual.(lol)

 

[zenboy99]

I completely agree with that article. Headers and H-pipe didn't really wake my car up as much as I thought, my ET didn't change at all. Edelbrock intake made a big difference, the car pulled well past 5000rpm.

 

[94DreamGT]

Everything in the KB article is on point.
Basically KB said the intake is the biggest restriction and you agree to that.
Also, the article states the exhaust side is not as restrictive as the intake side of the engine and NOONE can argue with that statement. The stock exhaust is good for quite a bit of horsepower above the stock output and most people know that. The exhaust is changed out more for SOUND than power in near stock applications.

So, you say there's mis-information in the KB statement but you also agree with it. I don't understand?

I thought he was saying something about KB saying he could only rev to 4500...I was mistaken. I'm not disagreeing with anything KB was saying...I would still like to see what they said verbatim.

However...there is no way the stock catalytic H-pipe is good exhaust for anythign for awhile..that is a big restriction. Headers and catback...not so much.

 

[final5-0]

Kenne Bell literature also says the the 94-95 exhuast is good for quite a while and not worth changing. What does everyone think?

Jim

Jim

I want to share some findings on our stock 94-95 catback with you and others.

My dyno #'s were with stock catback, tb, & maf as sig shows.

After I got my baseline dyno pulls I knew it was time to upgrade the last few remaining stock parts.

I was not sure which place would be best to start for more airflow, the front(tb & maf) or the back(catback).

My Tweecer will show airflow thru the maf at any rpm.

I made a 2nd gear pull on a flat road from about 2500 to 6k rpms and datalogged the airflow for a baseline.

Within the same hour I did the same kind of pull with my k&n discoed and airflow went up a good amount.

About an hour later with the k&n back on but the catback discoed I did the same pull again and showed no more airflow than the baseline.

I found this hard to believe but I double checked everything and the test was valid.

Needless to say I still have the stock catback and am in the process of getting my new tb & maf dialed in.

The catback will be the last stock part to be upgraded.

Later
Grady

 

[WhiteDevil]

Well in real world track numbers i dropped .3 and got 3mph with my Edelbrock intake, and dropped .3 and got 3 mph out of my full exhaust so im thinkin they are both pretty bad. Also i did my intake manifold , then i did a 65mm throttle body, pro-m 75mm MAF, and a CAI and i got around 0 mph and dropped nothing from my E.T.

 

[WhiteDevil]

Woah my first doublt post

 

[final5-0]

Well in real world track numbers i dropped .3 and got 3mph with my Edelbrock intake, and dropped .3 and got 3 mph out of my full exhaust so im thinkin they are both pretty bad. Also i did my intake manifold , then i did a 65mm throttle body, pro-m 75mm MAF, and a CAI and i got around 0 mph and dropped nothing from my E.T.

Great info, thanks for sharing!

I did not mean to imply that the stock exhaust manifolds or stock cat-pipe would not be restrictive.

It's just the catback that I question.

Later
Grady

 

[Rootus]

Great info, thanks for sharing!

I did not mean to imply that the stock exhaust manifolds or stock cat-pipe would not be restrictive.

It's just the catback that I question.

Later
Grady

I am tempted to get a stock catback for my car to quiet the damn thing down. With the X-pipe and MAC cat-back, it's quite audible. Just got a "Exhibition of Speed" ticket a few days ago that had everything to do with how loud the car is, nothing to do with acceleration (no tire spin, below 45 mph, etc).

Dave

 

[final5-0]

I am tempted to get a stock catback for my car to quiet the damn thing down. With the X-pipe and MAC cat-back, it's quite audible. Just got a "Exhibition of Speed" ticket a few days ago that had everything to do with how loud the car is, nothing to do with acceleration (no tire spin, below 45 mph, etc).

Dave

Dave

After the last batch of parts I put on which were heads, cam, lt's, & h-pipe, my exhaust got a lot louder!!!

It is nowhere as loud as say flows and such but still not like before.

I guess it's cause I'm makin more power.

I am thinking about a Dynomax superturbo catback. You have any thoughts???

Later
Grady

 

[beemrmem3]

I picked up quite a bit of speed at the track when i changed from stock exhaust to a O/R X-pipe and Flowmaster cat-back. I went from 92.8mph to 96.5mph. The only other mod i did was advance the timing from 10 to 14 degrees.

 

[Rootus]

I am thinking about a Dynomax superturbo catback. You have any thoughts???

I'll either do stock mufflers welded in with 2.5" pipes, or Dynomax Superturbos. I'm almost 100% positive that Dynomax is the manufacturer of the OEM mufflers, so I wouldn't be surprised if the stock ones are some flavor of Superturbo.

You and I have very similar engine combos. I can tell you that with an O/R X-pipe and MAC cat-back, it's audible for quite a ways. Great for the track (I get people coming up to me all the time asking what kind of exhaust I have, they really like the sound), but not so great for the street.

Dave

 

[WhiteDevil]

OH yeah gotta love the O/R X and MAC. So great sounding but your right its loud as hell.