3 1/2" or 4" w/ spintech proshoot out
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: Killeen, TX
Car: 90 Camaro RS
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
3 1/2" or 4" w/ spintech proshoot out
Currently im running a 305 TPI with 58mm TB, SLP runners, simmiesed plenum runners intake, world products 305 heads, comp cam w dur@.050 218/226 and lift 492/512 with 1.6 roller rockers, SLP 1 3/4 headers, underdrive pulley, no smog or egr, all free mods... but stock 2 1/4 exaust with gutted cat and 80 series flow.
Now the thing is that i want to do my exaust once and do it right... but i want it to be capable of handling a 400 w/ 210 race port AFR's, healthy cam and a pro charger
Thanks for you sugestions
JJ
Now the thing is that i want to do my exaust once and do it right... but i want it to be capable of handling a 400 w/ 210 race port AFR's, healthy cam and a pro charger
Thanks for you sugestions
JJ
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: Killeen, TX
Car: 90 Camaro RS
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
But I would lose a lot of low end TQ by going with the 4".... thats what it says on mufflex's site thats why i cant decide if i want a 3 1/2" or a 4"
unless you are making the power now do not do it. save exhaust for one of the last things if you can't afford to adjust as you go. i lost alot of low end tq with my 4" setup on my old 383 motor. it was only around 400 at the crank though. get your motor together with some true hard rwhp numbers before you go wasting your money.....you'll be sorry otherwise.
if you can actually use that size then by all means go for it. i love the sound of my spintech and with the new motor i can't wait to hear it. 4" is too much though unless your down in the 11's.
if you can actually use that size then by all means go for it. i love the sound of my spintech and with the new motor i can't wait to hear it. 4" is too much though unless your down in the 11's.
Originally posted by 90CamaroTPI
But I would lose a lot of low end TQ by going with the 4".... thats what it says on mufflex's site thats why i cant decide if i want a 3 1/2" or a 4"
But I would lose a lot of low end TQ by going with the 4".... thats what it says on mufflex's site thats why i cant decide if i want a 3 1/2" or a 4"
You didn't visit Mufflex's site. You will NOT lose low end torque by going to a larger after cat pipe. It's a myth, regardless of what others say. Visit this link to Mufflex's site: http://www.mufflex-performance.com/faq.html#q4 That's on an LS1 car, but the results would be similar for your car. I have a very mild SBC pushing 270rwhp and I gained low end torque by upgrading from a 3" to a 4" pipe. Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: Killeen, TX
Car: 90 Camaro RS
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
wow i dont know that thanks... but i still dont know if i should go 3 1/2" or 4"
... Right now im leaning torward the 4" because if you gained TQ and thats pretty much what i have.. we'll see... nothing sounds better than a 4" :hail: in my opinion
... Right now im leaning torward the 4" because if you gained TQ and thats pretty much what i have.. we'll see... nothing sounds better than a 4" :hail: in my opinion
Trending Topics
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
From: Brooklyn, New York
Car: '86 Camaro
Engine: 406 Small Block
Transmission: 4 Speed
Axle/Gears: 3.45
Originally posted by Marc 85Z28
You will NOT lose low end torque by going to a larger after cat pipe. It's a myth, regardless of what others say.
You will NOT lose low end torque by going to a larger after cat pipe. It's a myth, regardless of what others say.
I say go with the 4" set-up, especially if you're planning on adding some boost.





