Does anyone know if it is possible to install this system on a car with the stock Y pipe? Does the system come with adapters to fit the smaller collector?

I can't find much help on the Mufflex web page and I haven't had a chance to call them yet. TIA.

--JF

 

Guess the real question I have is.. why?

3" is plenty.. 3.5 is overkill.

 

many guys have problems fitting 3" y-pipe without banging issues on the floor, what do you think it will be like with a 3.5" pipe?

overkill? i personally believe it is. unless you are going with a big nitrous shot, even a big H&C combo will only net you 420 or so (give or take) RWHP max and a 3" pipe will certainly flow that, esp with a good flowmaster 2-1 pipe.

 

I had a knockoff of the Mufflex, I bought the pipe from their supplier, so I can't answer your question... But it sounds like no other catback... I sold mine but I might buy it back... I ran the Flowmaster muffler on mine, but they have subsequently gone to a Spintech muffler which sounds great.

(I can't get the piping again so please don't ask <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> )

 

Hmmm,

Thanks for the replies guys... Maybe I'll go w/ the Magnaflow catback instead? I just wanted performance as close to a cut-out as possible so I didn't have the catback as a bottleneck.

Would a 3" system be able to handle 500RWHP? If I ended up doing a stroker motor later on down the road, I don't want to have to get yet another catback.

PSJ, did you LIKE the Mufflex style set up then?
I wasn't sure what you thought of it exactly by your reply. Thanks guys!

--JF

 

I had fun with my Mufflex, I never should have sold it. In it's last iteration I had ripped the Flowmaster muffler off. I felt that it was restrictive. I welded on a 4" Ultraflow round muffler. It for sure would have supported 500rwhp. I think it depends on which muffler you run.

 

Well,

I was contemplating the Spintech set up. I've never heard really anything good about the Flowmasters even with the race muffler.

I'm not really sure if I should go w/ the Mufflex if a cheaper catback will give me the same performance. John, yours was the 3.5" pipe?

--JF

 

Contrary to what so many might believe, a 3.5" or 4" cat-back is NOT overkill(even for a mildly modified car). Dyno #'s have proved this over and over. I'm not saying a good 3" system won't do the trick(because it will) but the Mufflex exhausts won't hurt either. Personally, I'd go Mufflex simply because of the unreal sound. Until somebody shows me otherwise, I'll continue to believe it is not too much for the average LS1 or LT1.

BTW, if you do decide to get either of the Mufflex cat-backs(I'd recommend the Spintech), let me know(by e-mail) because I'd love to come hear it. I'm over in Hoffman Estates right by you.

Later,

Mike

 

2000LS1,

You betcha. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> I'm not sure yet though which I'm going to go with. The 4" costs the same as the 3.5", so I was thinking why not.... although I'd be pretty annoyed if it kept banging all the time.

I'll let ya know!

--JF

 

On a stock motor, I would not recommend going that far as you will not have enough backpressure. I have LT's, no cats, 3 inch Y, 3 inch I pipe, Spintech muff, and 3 inch tips. I also have the QTEC cutout in the I pipe. With the Spintech, you get a nice quiet sleeper exhaust at idle, but it is very loud when spun up. Spintech sounds good, and works as well as any flowmaster. I barely have enough back pressure with the cutout closed. With the cutout open, it is wayyyy loud and rough. But it scares the crap outta Grandma! If you have heads-cam that are advanced, and you want more exhaust, then use the mufflex style set-up.

I run about .3 sec slower in the quarter and 4mph faster trap with the cutout open on this 3 inch system.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by 2000WhiteZ28:
<strong> On a stock motor, I would not recommend going that far as you will not have enough backpressure. I have LT's, no cats, 3 inch Y, 3 inch I pipe, Spintech muff, and 3 inch tips. I also have the QTEC cutout in the I pipe. With the Spintech, you get a nice quiet sleeper exhaust at idle, but it is very loud when spun up. Spintech sounds good, and works as well as any flowmaster. I barely have enough back pressure with the cutout closed. With the cutout open, it is wayyyy loud and rough. But it scares the crap outta Grandma! If you have heads-cam that are advanced, and you want more exhaust, then use the mufflex style set-up.

I run about .3 sec slower in the quarter and 4mph faster trap with the cutout open on this 3 inch system. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Just to clear one thing - there is no such thing as backpressure being good. The real issue has to do with exhaust scavenging and the net mass of air per pipe diameter. An exhaust which is too large (diameter) per given volume of air expelled through the engine will lose velocity. This loss in velocity decreases the ability of the exhaust to scavenge additional air from the cylinder when the exhaust port is open. In other words, you will lose low-end torque since there will be less cylinder pressure generated during combustion, which in turn is a result of less combusted gases removed from the cylinder during the exhaust stroke. You also lose intake charge since the cam overlap period is less efficient.

On the flip side, if you have an exhaust system that is too small, then it cannot flow the air mass effectively, which causes a big slowdown in the velocity and buildup of pressure due to turbulence. This pressure generated within the exhaust is BAD - the exhaust gas expelled out of the cylinder during the exhaust stroke has to work against this excess pressure in the pipe.

The upshot - pipe too big = lost velocity = less scavenging = lost torque, especially at the low end. On the other hand - pipe too small = big pressure buildup, lost velocity, and engine has to do more work to expel exhaust gasses, particularly at higher RPM.

I of course left out a discussion of resonant scavenging brought about by generated acoustic waves, but that is a function of header length and design, and not really applicable here.

 

Guys,

Here's the thing. I would be putting this system on a mildly modded motor for just a short time, but I have LS6 Stg. II heads and a huge cam waiting go in in the very near future, I just don't have quite all the parts I need yet. I was going to install the mufflex system before I install the rest of my parts is all.

So what would be better in everyone's opinion? Do you think I oughta go w/ the 3.5" then?

Maybe the 4" school bus exhaust is a little excessive. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

Thanks for all the feedback....

--JF

 

Wilwaxu,

I guess the question could go towards the 3.5" as well.

I'm doing a big heads/cam set up on my car eventually - but I wanted to put on this catback first before I tackle the other stuff plus headers ect.

The 4" costs the same as the 3.5", so I figured "what the hell" might as well go 4".

Anybody know if this can be done?

 

I don't think it's overkill for a heads/cam car with a huge cam? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />

 

JF...Cool, I'd appreciate it. I've always wanted to hear it on a mildly modified and built up car.

Just go with the 4" set-up. Its not going to hurt and it will be more beneficial than the 3.5" with what you've got planned.

Either cat-back will sound awesome though.

 

I run the Jet Hot headers, hooker Y, and 4" mufflex with flowmaster. My car definetley breathes well, and has an AWESOME sound. It sounds like a big block car except raps up a lot higher and quicker. At idle it has a quiet rumble (shakes windows a little), and at WOT it is just wicked. I like it a lot better than the loud mouth I was running. I say go for it! Screw back pressure! Who launches from an idle anyway?

 

Nolatrans,

How does the 4" pipe connect to your Hooker Y? Does it taper down?

Thanks.

--JF

 

Yes, it goes down to 3". The only issue I had when installing, was where it goes over the rearend, it bumped the side of the car when it shook with the cam hits. I took a small piece of steel and welded it to the pipe to take up the space so it couldn't vibrate. No issues now. It's a whole lot quieter than the loudmouth,and gmmg. But as my friends who work at gmmg say, it has a very "wicked" sound. People who park 3 to 4 cars down walk over to hear the car as it idles. Of course, an aftermarket cam helps in this matter. I highly recommend it!

 

NOLATRANS,

You say you've heard the GMMG(and know people who work there). How does the GMMG sound compared to your 4" Mufflex at idle, cruise, WOT(deeper/louder)? I've got the GMMG but am interested in the Mufflex.

Thanks,

Mike

 

Let me chip in my $.02 and say that I, too, believe that the 4" exhaust is not too much. Why do I say that??

Well, if you look at the cross-sectional area of two 3" pipes (which more and more people are using with true dual setups), it's damn near equal to the cross-sectional area of a single 4.25" pipe. As the Mufflex setup is not even equal in volume to the dual 3" pipes, I can't understand where it would be considered overkill when 3" duals aren't. If you look up an exhaust sizing chart, and note the kind of power that these cars are making, you'll see that dual 3" pipes is about right. However, for those of us that don't want to run true duals, the 4" Mufflex is as close as we can get.

That being said, it is far from unusual for cars at the strip to run best with uncapped headers. So, then, why not try to run an exhaust that flows as close to "uncapped" as possible, yet still provides (relatively) quiet operation?? Honestly, that's really what I'm after. I am also of the belief that what occurs more that a foot or so after the collector isn't going to change much of anything (unless, of course, a ridiculous obstruction is placed there, and the exhaust "backs up" in the header primaries).

However, I do take scavaging into account... that's why I don't believe in 1 7/8" headers for all but the most radical setups. I'm also a big believer in merge collectors, and the scavenging (read: mid-rang torque) that they can provide.