• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech

flowmaster mufflers

  • Thread starter Thread starter afsoccaplayer04
  • Start date Start date Jun 30, 2004
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 2 of 4 Next Last

bierbelly

Dirty Old Men Need Love Too
Founding Member
Oct 17, 2001
1,598
4
58
Sterling, VA
Jul 1, 2004
#21
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #21
Enough with all the suppositions. I had 2 chambered Flows welded into my '98 headswapped GT and lost 7 hp over stock muffs. Dyno-tested. I could feel it SOTP as soon as I left the muffler shop too. So, no matter whether they flow better or worse than stock, I lost real HP. Had to buy a Vette just to get it back.
 

Ryan02Stang

Active Member
Jun 17, 2003
1,181
0
36
Arlington Heights, Illinois
Jul 1, 2004
#22
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #22
bierbelly said:
Enough with all the suppositions. I had 2 chambered Flows welded into my '98 headswapped GT and lost 7 hp over stock muffs. Dyno-tested. I could feel it SOTP as soon as I left the muffler shop too. So, no matter whether they flow better or worse than stock, I lost real HP. Had to buy a Vette just to get it back.
Click to expand...
There is no way you lost 7rwhp from flowmasters. There was probably a difference in conditions or something. The tornado is also DYNO PROVEN to increase horsepower.
 

new22003

New Member
Jun 22, 2003
657
0
0
Missouri
Jul 1, 2004
#23
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #23
The majority of all drag racers in muffler class are using flowmasters. They wouldnt it they lost power.
 
H

Halcyon_Dolour

My gash is bleeding but I don't let that stop me f
Founding Member
Nov 5, 2002
455
0
0
Bottom of a Bottle
Jul 1, 2004
#24
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #24
new22003 said:
The majority of all drag racers in muffler class are using flowmasters. They wouldnt it they lost power.
Click to expand...
So, they must be using 2 chambers right?
 
C

codyGT

New Member
Apr 11, 2004
365
0
0
Nebraska
Jul 1, 2004
#25
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #25
New22003, I am sorry I have enough money to buy Borlas and to have a second car to drive to work and else where. And you are just as dumb as anyone slse who says a Flowmaster is any better than a newer stock Mustang Muffler.

You think the fact that these mufflers suck would much more obvious to people.
 

Ryan02Stang

Active Member
Jun 17, 2003
1,181
0
36
Arlington Heights, Illinois
Jul 1, 2004
#26
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #26
codyGT said:
New22003, I am sorry I have enough money to buy Borlas and to have a second car to drive to work and else where. And you are just as dumb as anyone slse who says a Flowmaster is any better than a newer stock Mustang Muffler.

You think the fact that these mufflers suck would much more obvious to people.
Click to expand...
Maybe you just suck
 

CManT1914

New Member
Feb 5, 2004
3,172
2
0
Killeen, Texas
Jul 1, 2004
#27
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #27
I see the beginnings of another flame war.
 
C

codyGT

New Member
Apr 11, 2004
365
0
0
Nebraska
Jul 1, 2004
#28
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #28
Yep, Thats it I suck.

It's not my opinion only on the Flowmasters. Say what you want. I guess I don't bench race so I don't care. Flame away and make this site slower.
 

wms004

Founding Member
Jan 15, 2002
2,864
2
49
Los Angeles
Jul 1, 2004
#29
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #29
Ryan02Stang said:
There is no way you lost 7rwhp from flowmasters. There was probably a difference in conditions or something. The tornado is also DYNO PROVEN to increase horsepower.
Click to expand...
There are many conditions to consider. I've seen 10 horsepower variations from one pull to the next within a 5 min period, no mods changed.
 
C

codyGT

New Member
Apr 11, 2004
365
0
0
Nebraska
Jul 1, 2004
#30
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #30
It is very easy to see +/- HP within the same group of dyno pulls. Thats why most companies say there product adds -blank- HP. They simply record the best dyno pull and compare it to the lowest and call it a gain.
 

bierbelly

Dirty Old Men Need Love Too
Founding Member
Oct 17, 2001
1,598
4
58
Sterling, VA
Jul 1, 2004
#31
  • Jul 1, 2004
  • #31
Think what you want, but I noticed the reduction in low end torque immediately after the swap.
 

hotmustang331

Active Member
Apr 29, 2004
2,967
3
48
Bastrop,TX
Jul 2, 2004
#32
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #32
bierbelly said:
Think what you want, but I noticed the reduction in low end torque immediately after the swap.
Click to expand...

Well if you lost LOW end tork, then that usually means that you increased flow.A restricted exhaust gives good lowend, but sucks on top end...a good flowing exhaust is basically oppisite.I have 3 chaber flows on my 66 and it doesnt have hardly any low end power LOL(but man it comes in HARD past 3K or so), and the exhaust will hit you like 10 feet back when you rev it.If you look inside of a flowmaster, you will see that it is not that restrictive.Anyone have a spare stock muffler laying around after a exhaust swap?If so, saw it in half (length ways, and straight up and down if you can) and post pics of it...then we can see exactly how it is designed and how restrictive it really is compared to the flows.
 
V

VictorII

New Member
Jun 19, 2004
148
1
0
Cotati, CA
Jul 2, 2004
#33
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #33
Here's my experience with Flows. Granted this is on a built '65 with a 302 and not a 4.6. But going from stock to Blue Flame glasspacks helped. But seat of the pants change going from the glasspacks to 50 series Deltaflows was really noticable; power, torque and gas mileage. Adding a balance "cross" tube is even more noticeable. I am skeptical that someone might have lost torque and increased backpressure with flows. But it is possible they got some bad ones or used small diameter pipes or had a less than stellar shop install them. Haven't tried them on the '01 yet. Maybe some day. They sound great.
 
R

Rio96

New Member
Sep 11, 2003
99
0
0
Jul 2, 2004
#34
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #34
Could some care to offer an explanation:
Why is backpressure EVER helpful to torque?
(at low RPM, or whatever)
 

Ryan02Stang

Active Member
Jun 17, 2003
1,181
0
36
Arlington Heights, Illinois
Jul 2, 2004
#35
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #35
wms004 said:
There are many conditions to consider. I've seen 10 horsepower variations from one pull to the next within a 5 min period, no mods changed.
Click to expand...
Thats exactly what I meant. He did not lose 7hp from flowmasters.
 

Betrayer00GT

Member
Apr 21, 2003
364
0
16
Sacramento, CA
Jul 2, 2004
#36
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #36
Rio96 said:
Could some care to offer an explanation:
Why is backpressure EVER helpful to torque?
(at low RPM, or whatever)
Click to expand...


There are two important aspects of exhaust:

1. Exhaust gas VELOCITY
2. Resistance to flow (backpressure, if you will.)

Sometimes if you increase the resistance to flow a little (narrower pipe for example) the velocity of the gases will increase.

You want high gas velocity because it will suck the exhaust gas from the compression chamber (called scavenging (SP?)).

You want low backpressure so that the resistance to flow of exhaust gasses is low. If the backpressure is too low, you have lost too much of the valuable velocity.

You trade velocity for backpressure, usually, so you need a proper balance. This is why there are no 3" diameter or larger exhaust parts for non poweradder mustangs. It would slow the velocity and kill the scavenging (SP?) effect in the combustion chamber. You don't see 2" or smaller, because it would be too restrictive to the flow of exhaust gasses.

Just to complicate things, the proper balance is different for different RPMs the enging is turning. You can have an exhaust that is TUNED to give a perfect combination at the High end, but this combo will not have the sufficient velocity at partial throttle to give good scavenging at low RPM (low volume of exhaust gasses). This causes a loss of low end power.

The exhaust system of a stock mustang is so restrictive that there are mods you can do that give accross the board gains, up to a cirtain point. Then, as you get the last little bit out of the exhaust system, you need to start making compromises as to where the system is going to be tuned for.

Hope this helps.
 

jrc_03_gt

New Member
Jan 1, 2004
786
3
0
Jul 2, 2004
#37
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #37
bierbelly said:
Think what you want, but I noticed the reduction in low end torque immediately after the swap.
Click to expand...

I agree! I fixed the sotp feeling with 4.10's though.
 
H

huesmann

Founding Member
Jun 21, 2002
332
0
16
Jul 2, 2004
#38
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #38
I think you're full of it. Exhaust gases are positive pressure, not vaccum (sucking). There's no sucking involved in the exhaust--nothing sucks the exhaust out of your motor. It's pushed out by expansion.
 

bierbelly

Dirty Old Men Need Love Too
Founding Member
Oct 17, 2001
1,598
4
58
Sterling, VA
Jul 2, 2004
#39
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #39
Ryan02Stang said:
Thats exactly what I meant. He did not lose 7hp from flowmasters.
Click to expand...

Yes, he did.
 

FallenPhoenix

New Member
Nov 22, 2003
911
0
0
Odessa Tx
Jul 2, 2004
#40
  • Jul 2, 2004
  • #40
huesmann said:
I think you're full of it. Exhaust gases are positive pressure, not vaccum (sucking). There's no sucking involved in the exhaust--nothing sucks the exhaust out of your motor. It's pushed out by expansion.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what it's called, but the effect of a larger opening into a smaller opening creates suction. Like in the venturii of a carb or your the way your toilet flushes.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 2 of 4 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Need MIL Eliminators?
  • crazyone64
  • May 18, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
80
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech May 21, 2026
GOvert
G
P
Tailpipes for '88 GT
  • pindude80
  • Apr 30, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
31
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 13, 2025
pindude80
P
C
98 gt fuel pressure issues
  • chasecollier1984
  • Jun 2, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
0
Views
27
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jun 2, 2026
chasecollier1984
C
Fox Help
  • 93fox85
  • Mar 22, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
5
Views
181
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Mar 23, 2026
Noobz347
P
2000 GT Random Power Loss
  • Pinellas50
  • Mar 9, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
4
Views
237
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Mar 23, 2026
Pinellas50
P
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang 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?