• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Do dumps give you more horesepower?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pokageek
  • Start date Start date Mar 25, 2008
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Mar 25, 2008
#1
  • Mar 25, 2008
  • #1
Just curious.
 

earleys94gt

Active Member
Aug 31, 2003
1,223
16
49
Ashley, Ohio
Mar 26, 2008
#2
  • Mar 26, 2008
  • #2
HP, I don't know, but I would guess it would affect torque somewhat.

In the same way an "x" pipe 'favors' high rpm, where as an "h" 'favors' low rpm.
 

hollywoodstang

Active Member
May 23, 2006
1,095
2
36
Mar 27, 2008
#3
  • Mar 27, 2008
  • #3
THE ANSWER IS "NO"
 

1slow95

Founding Member
May 16, 2002
1,797
3
48
ohio
Mar 27, 2008
#4
  • Mar 27, 2008
  • #4
I read an exhaust tuning article a good while back where they tested various lengths of exhaust. They picked up 2-5hp with tailpipes, but made 14-15lb.ft more torque with dumps.

I don't remember what car this was, or if it was an engine or chassis dyno. I'll see if I can find that article again when I get time.
 

zenboy99

Founding Member
May 12, 2002
2,212
0
47
Madison, WI
Mar 29, 2008
#5
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #5
hollywoodstang said:
THE ANSWER IS "NO"
Click to expand...

Totally depends on the application. Pretty much all the NMRA racers are running something similar to dumps, except those classes that have to have the exhaust exit past the axle like Pure Street.
 

95Vert

New Member
Aug 19, 2004
1,785
0
0
North Mexico (deep south Texas)
Mar 29, 2008
#6
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #6
hollywoodstang said:
THE ANSWER IS "NO"
Click to expand...

And what proof might you have of this.

I once asked the same question and the answer I got was,

Jay Allen; said:
How many race cars run mufflers?

People run mufflers because of class rules, not because of power.
Click to expand...


Same applies for length of exhaust.
 

blksn955.o

Founding Member
Mar 15, 2002
3,263
0
66
st.louis mo 314
Mar 29, 2008
#7
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #7
I do not know about power but they give me headaches....too much drone and echo in the car for me. Unless they give you 40+rwhp not worth it IMHO...plus our cars and LX/Notch fox's look 100x's better with some nice chrome/SS tips out back.
 

95Vert

New Member
Aug 19, 2004
1,785
0
0
North Mexico (deep south Texas)
Mar 29, 2008
#8
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #8
blksn955.o said:
I do not know about power but they give me headaches....too much drone and echo in the car for me. Unless they give you 40+rwhp not worth it IMHO...plus our cars and LX/Notch fox's look 100x's better with some nice chrome/SS tips out back.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get what you mean. I love my dumps though. Maybe when I get older, I'll install my side exhaust Borlas and be done with it, but for now, I'll have a loud mofo.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Mar 29, 2008
#9
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #9
I would say in a basically stock, or modest bolt on Mustang, there will be little to no horsepower/torque gain from dumping the exhaust in front of the axle. At least nothing that'll make itself apparent in "real world" testing. The few horsepower you may, or may not gain up top, will probably show an equal amount of torque loss down lower in the bottom end regions of the power band.

If you're moving a lot of air through the engine via some sort of power adder or large displacement bump (which you are) and are reaching the flow limits of the average 2 1/2" diameter aftermarket exhaust system, then yes probably a fair amount of power at the mid to upper end of the power band could be picked up.

Not only are your reducing the exhaust length by cutting it short, but you’re also reducing the turbulence of the system by taking a 180* bend out the tubing and out of the pathway of the exhaust, thus further reducing backpressure.
 
R

RAD

New Member
Jun 16, 2006
167
0
0
Mar 29, 2008
#10
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #10
My car lost torque, I can definitely feel it driving uphill. Depends on the application.
 

DDSTANG94

New Member
Dec 9, 2006
465
2
0
FRASER, MICHIGAN
Mar 29, 2008
#11
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #11
95Vert said:
And what proof might you have of this.

I once asked the same question and the answer I got was,




Same applies for length of exhaust.
Click to expand...

ya but its not a a race car... how often do race cars drive on the street where tq counts...race cars see 4000 rpms and up, they dont need or USE low end torque
I had them on my car and it felt a little softer down low, but i couldn't tell a difference up top, maybe a little stronger

I think it really depends on the application like stated above
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Mar 29, 2008
#12
  • Mar 29, 2008
  • #12
My car is nasty loud at stop lights but it is quiet driving. I had to cut the tailpipes to get the panhard bar on. I intend to put them back on.
 

BaBysARM

Founding Member
May 9, 2002
161
0
0
Hickory, NC
Mar 30, 2008
#13
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #13
both my cars have dumps. If i wasnt such a tight wad then i would surely have tailpipes. In stock form you are probably going to lose power due to loss of backpressure. My opinion would be keep the tail pipes!!
 

95Vert

New Member
Aug 19, 2004
1,785
0
0
North Mexico (deep south Texas)
Mar 30, 2008
#14
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #14
BaBysARM said:
In stock form you are probably going to lose power due to loss of backpressure.
Click to expand...

So you're saying we NEED backpressure? Can you explain why?
 

DDSTANG94

New Member
Dec 9, 2006
465
2
0
FRASER, MICHIGAN
Mar 30, 2008
#15
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #15
95Vert said:
So you're saying we NEED backpressure? Can you explain why?
Click to expand...

the back pressure makes the cylinders fill up with air faster
 

95Vert

New Member
Aug 19, 2004
1,785
0
0
North Mexico (deep south Texas)
Mar 30, 2008
#16
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #16
DDSTANG94 said:
the back pressure makes the cylinders fill up with air faster
Click to expand...


More back pressure will cause more heat and create more detonation. Like someone told me, try sticking a potato in your exhaust to see what backpressure does.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Mar 30, 2008
#17
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #17
95Vert said:
So you're saying we NEED backpressure? Can you explain why?
Click to expand...
DDSTANG94 said:
the back pressure makes the cylinders fill up with air faster
Click to expand...
95Vert said:


More back pressure will cause more heat and create more detonation. Like someone told me, try sticking a potato in your exhaust to see what backpressure does.
Click to expand...
Reduced backpressure is fine, but there are drawbacks to reducing it as well....especially if you go overboard.

It's true, backpressure will contribute to raised cylinder and exhaust temps, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. A hotter exhaust will aid with scavenging thus improving torque production at lower RPM levels. This will also help to maintain in town fuel economy, that would be reduced otherwise. Not to mention that added heat will provide you with over all cleaner emissions.

There's a reason most factory Mustangs only came with a 2 1/4" exhaust. Although there is a performance benefit to increasing exhaust diameter on a deeper breathing configuration that warrants its use (more cubes, power adder, freer breathing heads/intake), there are trade off's to having a larger, or freer breathing exhaust system when it's not warranted , as I mentioned above.
 

Rick 91GT

Mustang Master
Nov 29, 1999
9,692
95
99
PA
Mar 30, 2008
#18
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #18
Gearbanger 101 said:
Reduced backpressure is fine, but there are drawbacks to reducing it as well....especially if you go overboard.

It's true, backpressure will contribute to raised cylinder and exhaust temps, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. A hotter exhaust will aid with scavenging thus improving torque production at lower RPM levels. This will also help to maintain in town fuel economy, that would be reduced otherwise. Not to mention that added heat will provide you with over all cleaner emissions.

There's a reason most factory Mustangs only came with a 2 1/4" exhaust. Although there is a performance benefit to increasing exhaust diameter on a deeper breathing configuration that warrants its use (more cubes, power adder, freer breathing heads/intake), there are trade off's to having a larger, or freer breathing exhaust system when it's not warranted , as I mentioned above.
Click to expand...

Very true, scavaging will be greatly reduced.... You would be surprised how much HP can be made with 2.25" exhaust.
 

DDSTANG94

New Member
Dec 9, 2006
465
2
0
FRASER, MICHIGAN
Mar 30, 2008
#19
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #19
95Vert said:


More back pressure will cause more heat and create more detonation. Like someone told me, try sticking a potato in your exhaust to see what backpressure does.
Click to expand...

..that's ONE of the two reasons headers are offered in ceramic

1 reason- looks and durability

1 reason- traps in the heat and and speeds the exhaust gasses up
 

Fett

New Member
Nov 2, 2004
766
6
0
Mar 30, 2008
#20
  • Mar 30, 2008
  • #20
I don't know if this helps...

I had Flowmasters with pipes, then switched to Dynomax Super Turbos with dumps. I ran the exact same times, 13.2 @ 102. So I would vote that no, there is no significant increase in power with dumps vs tails. Same difference.
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
1994 Cobra - Fuel Pressure Drops Revving at Idle
  • IconicSilverGT500
  • Apr 11, 2026
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
16
Views
417
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Apr 24, 2026
Mcmahst
D
Engine HO cam in non HO roller block ‘93 f150
  • DanC1993f150
  • Mar 21, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
289
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Mar 29, 2026
General karthief
3
393W Stroker with Boost - Need Spark Plug Recommendations
  • 387lx
  • Apr 29, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
267
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 30, 2026
HotFox
P
rear Impact absorbers.
  • Praetorious
  • May 4, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
139
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 5, 2026
Praetorious
P
R
Front suspension upgrade going on one of our 64/5-68 Mustangs
  • Restomotive
  • Apr 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
119
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Apr 24, 2026
Restomotive
R
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?