Why arent there any 3" exhausts for mod mustangs???

AirWolf87

New Member

Mar 14, 2004

382

0

0

L I, NY

Nov 17, 2004

#1

• Nov 17, 2004

• #1

Why arent there many 3" exhausts for mod mustangs???

hey guys, the thread "Weld-in flows vs. CatBacks" got me thinking.....
I grew up around f-bodies. all my cousins have em (im the rebel of the family.lol. and the joke, but anyway...) they all have 3.25"+ pipes on em. it looks straight up mean. i think i can fit one of my old cats in one of their tail pipes. the popular pipes used on mustangs are around 2.5....why???
the only thing i could think of is that f-bods dont have true duel exhausts (if you never seen it, after the mannifolds, it has a Y pipe and a single pipe all the way back to the muffler where it splits again). but wouldnt mustangs benifit from bigger pipes. would it not be enough backpressure? I dont realy get it. i thought backpressure was bad, at what point is it too little for the engine to make power? since when did "bigger is better" stop being true?

 

tomustang

Psychotic Member

Founding Member

Jun 8, 2000

3,434

2

78

McLean Hospital

Nov 17, 2004

#2

• Nov 17, 2004

• #2

i have a 3" catback. Mac makes them, and so does flowmaster.

it's a tight fit too.

 

mity2

I like Pro3 and all I got was this crappy CT.

Jul 24, 2003

2,872

3

48

StateCollege PA

Nov 17, 2004

#3

• Nov 17, 2004

• #3

i would think 3" may be too big for near stock motor. If you S/C it, then may be thats just fine...

 

T

tarch at school

New Member

Feb 24, 2004

272

0

0

Nov 17, 2004

#4

• Nov 17, 2004

• #4

i have a 2.5 exhaust from the headers on... the tips i think are either 3" or 3.5"

 

Juiced87Notch

Member

Sep 30, 2004

500

0

16

Gresham, Oregon

Nov 17, 2004

#5

• Nov 17, 2004

• #5

because its too much... unless you have a monster of a car 600rwhp (example) or more, you dont need more than 2.5 in.

 

SRT Handz

I tripped & fell down and cut myself & got blood

Oct 10, 2004

941

23

19

La Mirada, CA

Nov 17, 2004

#6

• Nov 17, 2004

• #6

Backpressure. its like running a car with out mufflers. SLOW!!!

 

streetstang03

unModerator

Dec 27, 2003

0

1

0

the dark side of the moon/home of the 1999, 2003,

Nov 17, 2004

#7

• Nov 17, 2004

• #7

3 inch pipes will hurt performance unless you have a s/c or pushing big hp. on an all motor car, you dont want to go over 2.5" pipes. The size of the tailpipe doesnt matter, if you want to put some 3.5" TIPS on the car, go ahead. it wont effect performance any.

 

sawman70

New Member

Nov 15, 2004

156

0

0

Cleveland Ohio Area

Nov 17, 2004

#8

• Nov 17, 2004

• #8

I had a 3" Bassanni X pipe with cats and 3" Bassanni cat back with 3.5" tips on my 99 GT. It had 401hp and 400ftlb at the wheels with a procharger. Sounded great.

 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash

20+ Year Stangneter

Aug 10, 2002

9,457

1,377

234

Ontario, Canada

Nov 17, 2004

#9

• Nov 17, 2004

• #9

sawman70 said:

I had a 3" Bassanni X pipe with cats and 3" Bassanni cat back with 3.5" tips on my 99 GT. It had 401hp and 400ftlb at the wheels with a procharger. Sounded great.

Click to expand...

Yes but again, yours falls into the supercharged category. Forced induction loves a big intake and big exhaust, but N/A doesn't. That being said, I'd be willing to be that your car would make nearly the same numbers (with possibly a better under the curve torque figure) with a smaller exhaust.

 

YardSpecial

New Member

Mar 20, 2003

2,664

0

0

MT

Nov 17, 2004

#10

• Nov 17, 2004

• #10

What Gear says..................

 

S

Sellout

New Member

Oct 31, 2004

43

0

0

Nov 18, 2004

#11

• Nov 18, 2004

• #11

yeah without the proper backpreasure the exhaust will swirl and not flow very well through the 3-3.5" pipe. That is why with stock to nearly stock SB really only need 2.5 and perform better. get up into the 440 454 and stuff like that don't be afraid to open up the exhaust but with our 281 2.5 is great.

 

U

UNVMATT

New Member

Jan 15, 2004

294

0

0

COLUMBUS

Nov 18, 2004

#12

• Nov 18, 2004

• #12

MM&FF installed the MAC 3" kit right after it came out 5 years ago. On a stock GT it gained a peak net of 4 rwhp but kept the same amount of torque..

My dad has a 00GT vert N/A. With no other mods we put the 3" kit on it because we were going supercharged in a year or so.. It actually was just a little faster and has a nice tone!

 

WhiteDevil69

New Member

Sep 15, 2003

518

0

0

Tucson, AZ

Nov 18, 2004

#13

• Nov 18, 2004

• #13

I remember when Tim was still building his BEAST, he said he made more power with his 2.5" pipes then with his 3's. Even at 600+rwhp at the time. No clue what size he's using now, with his crazy 1200+hp rediculous car though..

 

hognutz

New Member

Nov 12, 2002

1,940

0

0

albany, oregon

Nov 18, 2004

#14

• Nov 18, 2004

• #14

Stock gt internals are not really good over 500hp and that is about the marke you need to support dual 3inch.

Becdause of that you are not going to find every company putting one out.

now you step up to the new cobras that can be modified to those power levels easily you find lot of 3"

but like earlier stated I think mac and flowmaster make them.

 

R

Rocketman

New Member

Apr 20, 2004

730

0

0

SoCal

Nov 18, 2004

#15

• Nov 18, 2004

• #15

SRT Handz said:

Backpressure. its like running a car with out mufflers. SLOW!!!

Click to expand...

4.6 needs backpressure to maintain low end torque.

 

C

codyGT

New Member

Apr 11, 2004

365

0

0

Nebraska

Nov 18, 2004

#16

• Nov 18, 2004

• #16

F-Bodies use a single 2.75" or a single 3" into a cross flow muffler. Some aftermarket exhausts (SLP) are still single 3.50".

Some people have run dual on F-Bodies but it looks like crap and sounds even worse.

As for Mustangs the stock exhaust is even more than enough with decent mufflers welded in.

 

AirWolf87

New Member

Mar 14, 2004

382

0

0

L I, NY

Nov 19, 2004

#17

• Nov 19, 2004

• #17

makes sence...thanx guys.