Visit Fabspeeds website. They posted 2 videos, 1 with the x pipe to remove the center muffler and 1 with the center muffler but the 2 side mufflers removed.

 

I was thinking that by removing the side mufflers you lose a lot of rear end weight and then use a center free flowing muffler with out the U bends could be used. Elminate the U bends and have for example the right side exhaust exit through the left tips and vica versa, all this within 1 muffler. This would be a more straight flowing design.

thoughts opinions? Plus 1 muffler would cost a lot less than 2 mufflers. I am looking for an inexpensive solution to the horrible sounding stock exhaust.

 

Here is the baseline dyno results on our stock 997.2 Carrera S. We used our in house DynoJet 424x424 AWD dynamometer.

Also check out our website for dyno results showing power gains for the Primary & Secondary Muffler Bypass. http://www.fabspeed.com/carrera_2009.html

 

Joey,

Tell me that you didn't just pimp your products in a development thread that we started about our 997.2 exhaust system.

I find that in poor taste.

 

A customer asked for other stock baseline runs performed on a different type of dyno to compare results. I was simply answering a customer's question.
Originally Posted by mdrums
I do agree though and hope they publish there dyno runs so we can see the stock runs on their dyno vs a different type of dyno some other company's use. It would be eye opening and very interesting to see the different interpretations of various brands of dyno's.

 

Guys, no harm no foul we all know about both of your products. I asked what the base line runs were from different dynos knowing Fab and AWE use different dyno's. I am just wonder, no hidden agenda.

I see that Fab's base line is 339hp/273tq and AWE is 345hp/289tq.

I guess the diffent baseline numbers is due to different dyno's since you both are basically in the same climate?

 

He was asking us to post our baseline, which we did.

You had already posted your baseline in your own thread. There was no need to repeat it here, along with links to your website and products.

Perhaps I am assuming too much, but that is basic forum etiquette.

 

Those headers are out of this world!

 

Todd, Why not use the old 997 exhaust system and bypass the center muffler with long cats like before.

 

The geometry of the new system, especially the angles of the fender muffler, do not allow us to carry over the old system completely. We are reusing some components, like muffler cans and cat bodies, but we have to bend up all new tubing to connect it all.

However, that does not mean we are not testing how the overall layout of the previous gen system will work on this car. We just can't simply bolt it on.

 

Thanks for all the technical answers.

 

Damn Mike! You guys do great work. I love your stuff!

 

I agree with Todd at AWE that another manufacturer, in this case, Fabspeed, should not jump on the thread. This is poor forum etiquette and unprofessional.

That issue aside, there is a fundamental question in both test results about the ratio between crankshaft and rear wheel horsepower. "Conventional wisdom" has found that drivetrain losses on a 2WD are around 16 to 17 percent on a Mustang dyno and less on a Dynojet, based on Porsche's data. These stock engines, probably not broken in yet, are making lots of power. More than would be expected from comparisons with the generation one 3.8S. A 12 percent drivetrain loss was claimed for the posted results. Where did this remarkable increase in efficiency come from?

Let us verify that these numbers are truly valid from testing some other cars.

 

MichaelL, maybe you or some else here can help me out.

What I am trying to learn/understand and also bring to the attention of others here is the difference in HP/TQ numbers by various brands of dyno's. I am not doubting the base line results from AWE or Fabspeed. However I noticed AWE's basline numbers are lower than Fab's. I know weather and such also plays a part too but both these manufactures are very close to the same climate. I hope Sharkwerks post's their baseline numbers soon too.

This is not a slam on any manufacture but just somthing I am interested in learning. Some guys on these forums will buy one product over another just because 1 dyno run is only a few HP better. These baseline runs from both manufactures show how there can be differences in dyno's I am thinking.

So if you are saying a Mustang shows drivetrain loses at 16%, that would make the crank shaft of the AWE car at 393hp stock baseline. If you are saying a Dynojet shows drivetrain loses at 12%, that would put the Fabspeed car at 386hp stock baseline. Are these the drive train loses these dyno company's claim? Where did you get these % numbers?

Knowing that Porsche claims 385 crankshaft HP the Fabspeed car is right on Porsche claims and the AWE car in stock form is 2% more powerful.

Am I thinking correctly?

 

I have yet to see any dyno result that I can truly trust. There are so many varying conditions that play a large role that it is impossible to compare different results. Why can't there be a more scientific method of measuring the output that is not affected by external conditions. Or, just do it in an extremely controlled environment.