Anyone have Magnaflow 3" system on a '65-66?

Cannoball888

New Member

Dec 25, 2005

320

0

0

Gainesville, FL

Sep 19, 2006

#1

• Sep 19, 2006

• #1

Just wondering is everything fits right or will I have problems after the mufflers?

 

fasttback

New Member

Apr 16, 2005

471

0

0

Northern CA

Sep 20, 2006

#2

• Sep 20, 2006

• #2

My 2.25" mandrel bent exhaust is tight after the rear axle. You might run into problems with the rearend vent hose and brake line on the driver's side (you probably already know this).

I see you have your exhaust exiting the valance, I don't think a 3" exhaust is going to fit between the gas tank and frame rail on the drivers side. I think there was a post on this before and there might be some pics along with it.

 

Cannoball888

New Member

Dec 25, 2005

320

0

0

Gainesville, FL

Sep 20, 2006

#3

• Sep 20, 2006

• #3

I'll probably have to go with smaller pipe near the end. From what I've read and heard from experts the reduction at the end will still give me more horsepower than having a reduced diameter through the whole system.

 

6

66HertzClone

New Member

Aug 24, 2004

428

0

0

Central New Jersey

Sep 20, 2006

#4

• Sep 20, 2006

• #4

I don't know about the Magnaflow kit, but this knucklehead put one on his car. Talk about being proud of yourself....

http://jmichael.info/SHELBY.htm

 

Cannoball888

New Member

Dec 25, 2005

320

0

0

Gainesville, FL

Sep 20, 2006

#5

• Sep 20, 2006

• #5

^I just got off the phone with him. He said his 3" fit without any major mods, but he didn't think it would work with an exit through the valence. He suggested I go with 2.5"

 

6

66HertzClone

New Member

Aug 24, 2004

428

0

0

Central New Jersey

Sep 20, 2006

#6

• Sep 20, 2006

• #6

Be prepared, you are going to start getting tons of email or phone calls from him. The emails will be long stories about what he is doing and then get to the point, invest some of your money with me. I should have warned you ahead of time, sorry.....

 

Cannoball888

New Member

Dec 25, 2005

320

0

0

Gainesville, FL

Sep 20, 2006

#7

• Sep 20, 2006

• #7

I phoned him, but I didn't email him so he hasn't my address

 

SoCalCruising

Founding Member

Jul 25, 2000

2,437

0

47

SoCal

Sep 20, 2006

#8

• Sep 20, 2006

• #8

I have 2.5" through the valence. 3" won't work unless, maybe, you use oval sections to fit along the gas tank/frame rail. The real question is why 3"? You'll want at least 1.75" primaries on your headers, I should think, to not have them become your restriction point.

 

fasttback

New Member

Apr 16, 2005

471

0

0

Northern CA

Sep 20, 2006

#9

• Sep 20, 2006

• #9

fasttback said:

My 2.25" mandrel bent exhaust is tight after the rear axle. You might run into problems with the rearend vent hose and brake line on the driver's side (you probably already know this).

I see you have your exhaust exiting the valance, I don't think a 3" exhaust is going to fit between the gas tank and frame rail on the drivers side. I think there was a post on this before and there might be some pics along with it.

Click to expand...

My mistake...it looks like some people did get 3" by the gas tank and out the valance (see other post). I would like to see a pic of the exhaust between the frame rail and gas tank.

 

Cannoball888

New Member

Dec 25, 2005

320

0

0

Gainesville, FL

Sep 20, 2006

#10

• Sep 20, 2006

• #10

I'd like to see that too.

 

LUCAFU1

Founding Member

Apr 19, 2001

496

0

16

Tucson

Sep 20, 2006

#11

• Sep 20, 2006

• #11

your car doesnt make enough power for 3" exhaust so why use it? my cobra is making over 500/500 at the wheels and im still at 2.5".
unless your making some serious power your gonna loose some tq with 3". not only that but youll save money too.

 

Cannoball888

New Member

Dec 25, 2005

320

0

0

Gainesville, FL

Sep 20, 2006

#12

• Sep 20, 2006

• #12

The general consensus is that cars making over 400 should upgrade to 3"

 

allcarfan

The Answer Man

Founding Member

Apr 8, 2001

2,458

1

56

North Atlanta

Sep 20, 2006

#13

• Sep 20, 2006

• #13

we had a customer install one of our 3" maggy kits, and he didnt care for it. he said it made the car have a great tone, but when he stepped on it, it felt like it wasnt going anywhere. He had a mild 302. he swapped back to a 2.25" kit and likes it a lot better. Just some FYI and my $.02

 

LUCAFU1

Founding Member

Apr 19, 2001

496

0

16

Tucson

Sep 20, 2006

#14

• Sep 20, 2006

• #14

Cannoball888 said:

The general consensus is that cars making over 400 should upgrade to 3"

Click to expand...

i would say that is incorrect IMO.

 

Cannoball888

New Member

Dec 25, 2005

320

0

0

Gainesville, FL

Sep 21, 2006

#15

• Sep 21, 2006

• #15

Well, I finally decided to go with 2.5" but only because I need the exit to be through the valence and I want to avoid any fitment issues also with a TCP SFC center brace.

 

Rusty67

20+ Year Stangneter

Dec 3, 2002

3,749

37

109

LA, CA

Sep 22, 2006

#16

• Sep 22, 2006

• #16

How much HP are you making/trying to make ?

If the exhaust system is properly done you should not be losing much if any with a 2.5" system. Turbo cars benifit a lot more from a larger exhaust in the 400hp range then a N/A motor could ever hope for. Size isn't the only factor when you deal with exhaust pipe. A mandril bent setup makes a difference for sure, crush bent is just.... nasty.