Just an update from a RWD 3.4 ;)

[DetroitsFinest]

Riding on 1999 C5 rims now with 275-40-18 tires in the rear and 245-40-17s up front.

For exhaust flow I have a 3" cat back SLP Loud Mouth with a Dynomax Race Bullet in place of the stock SLP resonator and let me tell you it sounds MEAN!

[DEI37]

Let's hear a .WAV of it! Looks nice enough.

[RidgeRunner]

Just 'cause you took a pic of it at a Porsche dealership doesn't mean it is one!







Nice looking Fbod tho.

[SappySE107]

Why are you running 3" exhaust on a 3.4?

[3.4tothefloor]

sorry but the only real 3.4 was the DOHC "X". But thats just my opinion, and it might be a biased one at that. Nice looking camaro otherwise

[jmgtp]

sorry but the only real 3.4 was the DOHC "X". But thats just my opinion, and it might be a biased one at that. Nice looking camaro otherwise

sure you don't drive an l67? you picked up the attitude of some of the owners.

I like the Camaro
3" exhaust does seem kinda big for anything 60v6 naturally aspirated, must sound pretty good though!

[DetroitsFinest]

On the 1993-1995 F-Bodies 3" actually yields a really good increase in power and puts more power up top. My car used to fall flat on its face at about 4000rpms but now it pulls all the way to redline. Dyno numbers for a 3" flowmaster catback on the same year car yielded 12hp/15tq at the rear wheels. Sure, thats not much, but thats definately helping. And seeing as I'll be supercharged soon i'll see even MORE increases from it

Soon to come will be a 3" high-flow cat and ceramic coated headers. The intake now is a Lingenfelter SuperSucker CAI off of a 1993 LT1 Z28..

[SappySE107]

Where is this dyno sheet? I would really like to see it since those numbers are very impressive for a 3.4 V6 and just an exhaust without headers or other mods (or a previously clogged up cat). 3" exhaust should be hurting the low end more than it helps the top end.

[TheProfessor]

sappy is right theres no reason to ever need more than 2.5 inch pipe on any n/a 60 degree pushrod

[DetroitsFinest]

My low end isn't hurt at all. In fact, its just as good as it used to be. Stock exhaust on the 1993-1995s is 2.5 at the Y-Pipe, to the cat converter then out a 2 1/4" I pipe to a really restrictive stock muffler. I think he also had a homemade CAI and 3" cat with those dyno numbers but if you wait I'll try and find you that sheet.
On 4th gens iwth the 60* motors headers free up about 5rwhp when combined with other exhaust work.

"my car dyno'd - with just a 3" exhaust pipe and K&N FIPK - 140.2 hp @ 4500 and 182 tq @ 3500 rpm. (thats 164/215 at the flywheel, 4hp/15tq more than stock)"

[DetroitsFinest]

oh, yeah, and that was a quote from a guy when there was a debate between V6 f-body owners of 2.5" vs 3" -- 3" won. 2.5 was only for people who never raced and just wanted a deeper tone to their exhaust note.

[Rhedalert]

sorry but the only real 3.4 was the DOHC "X". But thats just my opinion, and it might be a biased one at that. Nice looking camaro otherwise

[SappySE107]

Are you quoting GM stock numbers vs actual dynoed numbers? That just doesn't work. Also, if headers only give 5 hp and you are saying 3" exhaust does the same, those headers blow.

Using the same mufflers and cat and mandrel bent, I am still pretty sure 2.5" will have the better powerband. 3" is for boost and larger displacement that needs the larger pipe. Going too large is gonna slow down exhaust velocity a hell of a lot, especially after using the stock exhaust manifolds that aren't to great for flow as it is. Was this debate solved through numbers or voting? You really need to have before and after numbers for at the wheels, not calculating the generic drivetrain loss to come up with crank HP to compare to GM numbers.

[TheProfessor]

im still with sapppy on this one

[Lyle's GTP]

160HP @ the flywheel?! Can you even break the tires loose with that? Shit the J-bodies came with 150HP. That race would be embarrasing.

Lyle