Hey,
I finally decided to go with the Flowmaster 80 series muffler for my 92 STS. I was debating between this muffler and the Edelbrock RPM muffler, but I decided to go with this one because I love that aggressive flowmaster tone! I will probably not get as much performance out of this muffler but I am not racing it, haha! I can't wait until I get it installed. Although that won't be until my 16th B-day next month when I get my license. I will definately post a link to a sound clip once it is installed.:)

What kinda of tubing setup you doin? Let see some pics when it is in.

I am probably going to use the stock tubes and just use adapters to make the muffler fit. Next summer I will probably replace the tubes with larger ones and get a high flow cat and new tips.

I'm not so sure going with larger tubes is such a great idea. You will only help top-end breathing marginally; and that's if you change valves, springs, & cams. The most pronounced effect you'll get is that your torque curve will be shifted to higher rpm but you won't get more torque. You'll lose that nice 4.9 jump out of the hole & strong pull up through the lower rpm's into the mid-range. IMHO.

Thanks for the tip! I guess I won't have to change the tubes! It will save me money! I definately don't want to loose that jump off the line!
Thanks!

you won't lose anything... you'll only gain. I have 2.5" throughout (from the headers all the way back to the dual tips), plus hi flow cat and only helped er out. no bottom end lost, but i thought it would too. man it sure it a deep rumble.

LacSeville,
What kind of cat do you have?

18" long glasspack. i didn't have a cat and it was too loud inside the cab and out the exhaust. a resonator in place helped soooo much.

you won't lose anything... you'll only gain. I have 2.5" throughout (from the headers all the way back to the dual tips), plus hi flow cat and only helped er out. no bottom end lost, but i thought it would too. man it sure it a deep rumble.
I am not disputing you, LacSeville, but I have never seen an improvement objectively documented in low end torque by increasing the exhaust diameter unless there was a previous restiction impeding flow e.g. plugged muffler or converter, bent pipe, etc. I have seen dozens, if not hundreds of cases where low & mid range suffered dramatically from a small diameter increase with a small displacement low rpm engine such as ours.

Hey lacseville, how did you run your pipes underneath your car? I want to do the same thing but the muffler guy told me there was no room underneath my car to do it. He said he was going to have to "y" out from the cat to 3" pipes. I know not to expect huge gains but what other than sound improved (low end torque, gas mileage etc..). Hope you come back check this old thread out.

i do not think it's possible to run true duals. i am not. I have the stock 2.5" pipe back to where the stock muffler used to be. the muffler is a single in, dual out camaro style muffler. you can pick any one you choose. obviously there is some dispute wether or not you get any gains....i don't care, i like the sound and I know with the intake and fuel and ignition upgrades it's better than stock (much better) if I had easy access to a dyno and money, I'd like to experiment and see if there was any more gains with a smaller pipe. i don't doubt there wouldn't be any "loss" of horsepower with smaller pipe, but i think it's not enough for me to change anything...

It's much easier to create backpressure than the other way around. If more backpressure is desired to create more power, just install a smaller exhaust tip.

I'm really happy with my flowmaster setup. I went with the Model 50 Deltaflow because it was the most quiet one that they sold. It is still very quiet but has the flowmaster sound at WOT. The first thing I noticed was better throttle response. I don't think I lost any low end torque because I can do better burn outs.

I don't think I lost any low end torque because I can do better burn outs.
:D

my tips are hidden behind the rear bumper shooting down at the pavement. i could easily slip some smaller jokers on there....

I am not disputing you, LacSeville, but I have never seen an improvement objectively documented in low end torque by increasing the exhaust diameter unless there was a previous restiction impeding flow e.g. plugged muffler or converter, bent pipe, etc. I have seen dozens, if not hundreds of cases where low & mid range suffered dramatically from a small diameter increase with a small displacement low rpm engine such as ours.


or you can do what i did, just punch the cat. out. you'll get some power that way.