• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

S-trim Fox - Which exhaust to buy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FastSVO
  • Start date Start date Dec 2, 2010
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

clement

Founding Member
Feb 27, 2001
1,106
52
59
Oak Cliff
Dec 4, 2010
#21
  • Dec 4, 2010
  • #21
3" certainly wont hurt it. why buy parts twice?

i have a very good friend that bought a 93 cobra new. to this day it has 24K miles on it, but i digress. a month after he bought it we put an a trim on it. that became an s trim in '96. the car ended up making 434rwhp with the s trim pullied to 12lbs with a stock engine from tb to pan. it had bolt ons. 3.55s, tuning, injectors, suspension, powerpipe, 1 5/8" shorties, 2.5" off road H pipe and 2.5" flowmaster catback.

it was a consistent 11.40@122mph car running high 1.5 second 60' times.

we put a set of 1 3/4" to 3" collector accufab longtubes on it, a 3" H pipe and 3" flowmasters dumped at the rear axle. after the exhaust swap it only made 10lbs of boost and we only got 8rwhp out of it for a total of 442rwhp. this was after we added more fuel to the tune to get the a/f back to where it was pre exhaust swap.

even though it only made 8rwhp with the exhaust, the car consistently went 11.0s-11.1@124 after the exhaust swap. still running high 1.5 second 60' times. the engine just accelerated harder.

this was an untouched 302 with a vortech, not some 700hp combination. yet the larger exhaust was worth a consistent .3-.4 in the 1/4 mile and 2mph at a 3300lb race weight. there is absolutely nothing wrong with running a 3" exhaust on a supercharged 302.
 

93GTStang

Founding Member
Jun 8, 2000
149
0
0
Plattsburgh,NY
Dec 4, 2010
#22
  • Dec 4, 2010
  • #22
Quietest setup I have heard was : MAC 1 5/8 shorty, MAC ProChamber, Dynomax Super Turbo 2 1/2" catback.

The car ran 9.8@142 with this exhaust in 100% street trim, stock pony rims with 255/50 Hooiser Drag radials. I have pics of the car somwhere on my laptop maybe in my photobucket. The car was a TOTAL sleeper other than the SC whine. It looked all stock. Not one single gauge inside and nothing to make it look overly modded.

I have the Dynomax Ultraflow catback and it is pretty drone free BTW...
 

93GTStang

Founding Member
Jun 8, 2000
149
0
0
Plattsburgh,NY
Dec 4, 2010
#23
  • Dec 4, 2010
  • #23
FastSVO said:
How are the Ultra Flow's on these cars? I believe I read somewhere that they are prone to droning and there is a report out there showing the flow rates of many mufflers and I was surprised not to find the Ultra Flows on top of the list.
Click to expand...

I have it on my with shorty headers and offroad x-pipe. Before the car had 2 chamber flows and is substantially quieter. I will try and find a sound clip of it. It drones some but not as bad as Flows or MACs. It is pretty loud at WOT though for sure. I really like the fit and finish along with the stock looking 2 1/2 tailpipes that are brushed stainless.
 

93GTStang

Founding Member
Jun 8, 2000
149
0
0
Plattsburgh,NY
Dec 4, 2010
#24
  • Dec 4, 2010
  • #24
I can get some better pics, I know I have more of it when we 1st installed it.
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Dec 5, 2010
#25
  • Dec 5, 2010
  • #25
clement said:
3" certainly wont hurt it. why buy parts twice?
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.

clement said:
i have a very good friend that bought a 93 cobra new. to this day it has 24K miles on it, but i digress. a month after he bought it we put an a trim on it. that became an s trim in '96. the car ended up making 434rwhp with the s trim pullied to 12lbs with a stock engine from tb to pan. it had bolt ons. 3.55s, tuning, injectors, suspension, powerpipe, 1 5/8" shorties, 2.5" off road H pipe and 2.5" flowmaster catback.

it was a consistent 11.40@122mph car running high 1.5 second 60' times.

we put a set of 1 3/4" to 3" collector accufab longtubes on it, a 3" H pipe and 3" flowmasters dumped at the rear axle. after the exhaust swap it only made 10lbs of boost and we only got 8rwhp out of it for a total of 442rwhp. this was after we added more fuel to the tune to get the a/f back to where it was pre exhaust swap.

even though it only made 8rwhp with the exhaust, the car consistently went 11.0s-11.1@124 after the exhaust swap. still running high 1.5 second 60' times. the engine just accelerated harder.

this was an untouched 302 with a vortech, not some 700hp combination. yet the larger exhaust was worth a consistent .3-.4 in the 1/4 mile and 2mph at a 3300lb race weight. there is absolutely nothing wrong with running a 3" exhaust on a supercharged 302.
Click to expand...

Good post. It's exactly for that reason that I'll probably never buy a 2.5" system again. The gains from the 3" may not be immediately apparrent on the dyno, but the dyno only measures engine work and the speed it occurs at... Not engine acceleration.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
My numbers sound right?
  • MiltP
  • Feb 25, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
28
Views
788
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Apr 2, 2026
MiltP
M
9
Forced Induction Prepping for supercharger on non-stock build
  • 91fox427
  • Nov 25, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
425
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jan 5, 2026
Qtrhrse23
Q
G
Quiet my 2015 GT on the cheap
  • gsrblack
  • Feb 12, 2025
  • 2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk
Replies
6
Views
784
2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk Apr 16, 2025
gkomo
S
Engine Stalls when downshifting/coasting
  • Scott_S
  • Nov 5, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
11
Views
734
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Nov 6, 2025
Mustang5L5
C
Dyno day! # guesses?
  • clayton seiders
  • Aug 15, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
439
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 16, 2025
Scrapla347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 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?