In article <bunb8q$63d$1@bent.twistedbits.net>, jldenning@earthlink.net
("Jeffery B. Denning") writes:
>
>
> In response to my cat-back recommendation query Gary suggested buying a high
> flow cat and high flow muffler, "unless I need a 3" system," could be much
> wiser than spending $$ on a full cat back. Brett concurred. Thanks. That
> seems to make good sense as all I want is a little bit of rumble - not loud,
> and a bit easier breathing exhaust to match upcoming TB tweak (plus being
> totally stock is, well, stock). So, a few more questions. Why would one
> "need" a 3" system, particularly if it follows a "2.5. pipe? Looks only?
> Plus, the two high flow cats Brett mentioned have way different prices, is
> the Carsound worth twice the price of a Catco?
>
> Jef
> 99 5.2 4x4
>
> ____________________
>
>
>
> <brett4hand@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bud51v$8du$1@bent.twistedbits.net...
> >
> > In article <BC2F5C15.143A%ghedlin@theramp.net>, ghedlin@theramp.net (Gary
> > Hedlin) writes:
> > >
> > >
> > > Word to the Wise,
> > >
> > > If you're happy with where the exhaust exits, you'll gain more by going
> with
> > > just a high flow cat and a high flow muffler. Unless you need a 3"
> system,
> > > why pay for pipes you already have??
> > >
> > > I don't think you can go wrong with a Magnaflow muffler, great sound and
> a
> > > good price.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gary Hedlin
> > > 98 3.9 RC Sport
> > > http://garysdakota.1colony.com
> > >
> >
> >
> > Gary, you bring up a very good point. Roughly 80 bucks for the
> performance
> > muffler of his choice, another 55 bucks for a Catco cat (or roughly 125
> for a
> > Carsound), add 100 bucks(or so) for welding it all up, and he's got a good
> > sounding/performing exhaust system.
> >
> > I've got all the whoopty-doo stuff on my Dak (headers, 3" cat-back, hipo
> pcm,
> > FIPK, blah, blah blah), and was relaying my experience. For a stock 318
> guy
> > just wanting to get better sound and a little hp/tq, your suggestion is
> more
> > cost effective, and should offer an equal (or better) performance gain
> than a
> > cat-back system.
> >
> > Brett Forehand
> > '94 Dakota Sport CC 5.2 Auto
>
>
Jeff, sorry for the delay in answering this one... was hoping some of the more
"techie" guys might have responded.
As far as the price difference in Catco and Carsound, I believe that someone
did respond to that. Quality and higher flow are supposed to be the main
differences. I added a Catco because that's what the muffler shop
stocked...probably would have passed out if they told me 125 bucks just for a
cat! My Catco has been in for a year with no problems. (Knock on wood)
The main thing on the 3" exhaust is that it's designed as a package. You're
*supposed* to buy headers, a 3" Y pipe, and the 3" cat back to get the full
gain in performance with a free flowing exhaust. (Combined with the obligatory
free flowing air filter of your choice, of course). Because the cat-back
systems are already fabbed up and an easy DIY installation, lots of guys run
them without the headers and Y pipe. As I mentioned before, you'd get
arguments as to whether you gained or lost torque with a 3" system on a stock
motor without the headers/y pipe.
It's one of those things with performance, you have to think in total package
terms and most of all "what do you want to do"? If you were wanting to race
your Dak, then I would say just putting in a cat and muffler would be a waste
of money and time. Go buy Scott Q's headers and X-pipe setup for that. (I've
seen it, it's QUALITY stuff, and flows like crazy). That way, no matter what
you throw at it, (blower, 408 stroker, nitrous, etc.) the exhaust will handle
it. However, you stated what your goal was to take a stock truck and give it a
better sound and a little more performance. Getting a free flowing cat and
muffler will do that for you.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 01 2004 - 16:29:51 EST