| Subtopic | Msgs | Last Updated |
| | Wednesday, August 01, 2001 - 07:09 pm Anyone done this. I think the Monte Carlo is routed to the back. I'd like to do all stainless exiting the back instead of behind the tires. Would there be any benefit/harm in doing this. A couple other question I have are: What size 2.5" or 3". What is the best exhaust setup for these cars (I've only owned mine for a year)?. Will I lose to much back pressure with 3"? My car is basically stock besides an eastern performance chip. I'm a little confused if changing the whole exhaust will add or hurt performance with the turbo. To replace the whole exhaust from top to bottom would also have to include changing the downpipe to the same size as the exhaust pipes right ? I've looked at ATR's site,but didn't see anything that would exit out back. If anyone knows of some sites or has any answers I appreciate the input. Thanks.
|
| | Wednesday, August 01, 2001 - 07:24 pm I don't know a whole lot about the rear-exits, but as far as the exhaust system itself goes, REPLACE IT!! I put a dual cat-back with flowmasters(3" muffs, 2 3/4" pipes) and couldn't believe the difference. From what I observed, most TRs love the highest amount of exhaust flow possible. Mine sure did ;)
|
| | Thursday, August 02, 2001 - 05:37 am I believe ATR sells a MC system that should work on a TR. Other's have used this setup. One that comes to mind is Jim Testa. I forget his URL, but there are pictures of it on his site. I thought Torque Tech may have offered a MC-style system as well. Most people don't like the MC-style systems because they make a TR look like a MC! As far as backpressure...The turbo itself is all the backpressure you need. Go with the best flowing exhaust system you can stand in terms of noise. Bigger usually translates to 'louder'. You don't have to change the DP just because of an exhaust upgrade, and the stock DP works fine into the deep 12s. In fact, I've run 12.9s through the stock DP and stock exhaust with the original catalytic, too! See the 'recipes' in the tech area of this site for more information regarding the priority of what needs to be upgraded.
|
| | Friday, August 03, 2001 - 06:00 am If you're interested, I'll take a few pics this weekend with a GN having this style exhaust and post on my website (I'll post them by Sunday) http://www.geocities.com/turbo84gn
|
| | Friday, August 03, 2001 - 05:29 pm Just letting you know, I'm taking notes. Thanks for the responses. If anyone else has more comments or suggestions I'm listening. Arthur I'd love to see the pictures. Now you got me thinking about looking to much like a MC. It's just my stock exhaust minus mufflers looks like crap exiting behind the wheel. Maybe stainless tips would make me like it exiting where its suppose to. By the way making my first trip to the track tomorrow. I'll let you all know how I do with my stock exhaust minus mufflers if your interested.
|
| | Thursday, August 09, 2001 - 01:26 pm Several years ago I tried the dual exhaust (2 pipes from the "y" back - over the axle with pipe tips showing just below the bumper a'la Monte Carlo v8 dual exhaust style. I had 2 very low resistance "tube" like mufflers (i think they were Dyno max units). Any ways ... long story shortened .. did not like the sound one bit, can not say anything about performance gains/losses ...sounded very UN nice. Still got all the pipes, mufflers, hangers bolts etc ... only used it for about 1 month before removing it all (from y pipe back)
|
| | Friday, August 10, 2001 - 10:37 am Dave, If I were a bit closer to you as I would offer to buy your disused system... I guess the sound is a personal preference thing... I had the same type of system on my 85 T-Type with no mufflers and loved it... And, no I didn't have a seat-of-the-pants felt increase in power like installing headers, but I still prefer that look... Mike Elia SoCal [formerly Upstate NY] 87 T
|
| | Friday, August 10, 2001 - 01:28 pm Can anyone advise if they have installed a dynomax dual exhaust on their GN?? What were the gains or loses?? Thanks, Todd
|
| | Wednesday, August 15, 2001 - 11:37 am Dynomax crossflow super turbo was better than stock, but still not as good as the Flowmaster system. The Hooker and ATR systems are even better yet...
|
| | Thursday, August 16, 2001 - 04:48 pm Do you all agree ATR probably is the top of the line S.S. exhaust for these cars ? Through my research and readings along with the pricing of these systems this is the conclusion I have come to. If you can afford it it sounds like this is the premier exhaust. Hooker is second and offers similar performance but isn't S.S. My next question is, If I want the 3" dual system from ATR ($695) will it bolt to the stock cat or do you have to upgrade this at the same time. I would like to piece meal this as it is expensive. Same question about the 2.5" system ($595), will it bolt to the stock cat? Are all exhaust pipe measurements outside diameter's ?
|
| | Friday, August 17, 2001 - 05:15 am I am also considering a new exhaust. Mine is starting to rust through (the sound is not bad though, eh, eh, eh). I agree with your research, I'll save my money 'til I can afford the 3" SS system from ATR. I'm going to bolt it to the CAT as you plan to do, according to ATR's catalog, it bolts right up. Anyone out there have a comment on ATR's Pit Bull Mufflers?
|
| | Friday, August 17, 2001 - 07:53 am I believe all the ATR systems you mention are designed to bolt to the stock 86-87 cat flange. I believe the advertised pipe diameters are all O.D. The ATR mufflers are very well made and flow well. A little loud at low speeds, but they actually seem pretty quiet when you get up to highway speed. Of course a lot depends on how your car is set up, whether you use a cat or not, etc.
|
| | Friday, August 17, 2001 - 08:28 am Actually, they work for both hot airs and IC cars alike. Both systems' catalytic converters have the same flange and bolt up to the same place. Everything in front of the cat is different, so year doesn't matter with the ATR kits.
|
| | Friday, August 17, 2001 - 09:05 am Really? My friend's hot air car (and '84 T) had the cat kind "backwards"... the flange was different and on the front of the cat as I recall (been awhile). I remember really fighting to get things modified to fit... Of course, it was many years ago ... and you know that memory is the second thing to go!
|
| | Friday, August 17, 2001 - 02:08 pm I compared my '85 to an '86 T-type and the exhaust hangar on the trans was identical, he explained that they all bolt up the same. Also, I called ATR and asked when I bought my downpipe the part numbers for the 2.5" were the same for hotair and IC. Are they? I have reason to doubt now...
|
| | Sunday, August 19, 2001 - 10:39 pm Well, I used to have a rear exit 2.5" ATR system, but now have their stock exit 3" dual system. I have pics of both. My website is http://members.aol.com/jtesta1966/buick.htm The logo pic is with the old exhaust (I never changed it) and the pics on the site are current. I have old pix locally if you need em. IMHO the pitbulls are loud, least the 3" versions. Again, DL the mp3 or my car and be your own judge :-)
|
| | Wednesday, August 22, 2001 - 05:29 am No the hot-airs and IC's exhaust are not the same. My 84 GN has the flat four-bolt flange in front of the cat and a 2-bolt beaded seat (right descritpion?) flange at the rear of the cat. I also compared the 4-bolt flange to my Dad's 87 and they aren't even the same size.
|