Just a more elegant version of flipping over the air cleaner cover that we did in the 70s.
Been there, done that on my 76 GMC Jimmy, 400 small block 4x4, and with it flipped, it sounded nice!Just a more elegant version of flipping over the air cleaner cover that we did in the 70s.
The stock 2/Ecobooost engine noise is terrible- I have fixed thatI’ve been curious about all these claimed numbers myself and thank gawd this thread exists to have really broke most of it down.
This is the most concise comment for all the claims by manufacturers of “air intake systems” and car back exhausts.
The clincher is when you add it all up. I asked search assist about the claimed numbers for afe rebel exhaust and what was telling were the words “as tested on their in house dyno.”Which, admittedly without bothering now to look up exactly, is where I’m guessing the numbers for the only dyno sheet for the afe cold air intake for the Maverick came from, and those numbers are different from what is claimed by them on the webpage where the CAI is listed. The dyno sheet numbers show only 13hp and 8ftlbs of torque while the page shows 12hp and 14ft lbs of torque.
More evidence points to cat back exhaust systems not producing any gains: SW exhaust cat back claims no power gains, neither does the exhaust Ford performance just released.
From the Ford Racing Parts own page, it reads: “Ford Performance Sport exhaust systems are uniquely designed and tuned to provide an aggressive and throaty high-performance sound that is sure to enhance your driving experience”
ENHANCE DRIVING EXPERIENCE!
Engine noises!
To wrap it up, I would agree with what you said about making the turbo spool faster, as my truck seems to accelerate slightly better, just enough to notice, same with shifts, which could be explained by the quicker spooling of the turbo.
The more solid throughput of the exhaust structure does also make the turbosmart BOV active all throughout the RPM range whereas before it seemed to only happen around 3000 RPM or more, AND it is more audible, which I do love!
I will also say I noticed the truck feel nimbler likely because it shed at least 12-15 lbs from the stock system vs the MRT street race system so there is less weight flopping around the underside. The exhaust I bought isn’t very loud, but the note is really pleasant!
I didn't realize that you Canadians were so rebelliousBeen there, done that on my 76 GMC Jimmy, 400 small block 4x4, and with it flipped, it sounded nice!
Ha! Before that I had a 75 Chevy Blazer 4x4 , but it was a 350, still sounded good with the lid over! Rolled that puppy!I didn't realize that you Canadians were so rebellious
I’m going to install the 25/26 S&B Intake as soon as it is available for purchase ($379). Should be available any day now? I check the website weekly - still shows “launch Summer 2026”.
Some have already been installed & are being test driven pre-launch. I would have volunteered for that…
Hello, that is the 2.0 Ecoboost with exhaust and better air filter and you are getting that mileage? Guess I need to get those installed because my 2.0 gets about 24 average. Best I ever got driving to and from the Lake was 31.I have one on my 23 Lariat. Combined with a flowmaster FX exhaust which is not loud gives me the ability to get over 45mpg on a ecoboost truck. On a couple of trips on I35 this is what the mpg monitor showed. Trio is 42 miles each way. One was going the other returning.
BTW the 2025 intakes are now showing as in production. Should be soon!I’m going to install the 25/26 S&B Intake as soon as it is available for purchase ($379). Should be available any day now? I check the website weekly - still shows “launch Summer 2026”.
Some have already been installed & are being test driven pre-launch. I would have volunteered for that…
Must be coincidence but when I was a powertrain engineer we used dynamometers to check this kind of thing too. Then we used statistics to figure out if small changes were real. We'd usually do a test of reasonableness first to screen out testing stuff like Pixie Dust.
You were using the wrong measurement tool. Should have used sound level meter, also commonly referred to as a decibel meter, sound pressure level (SPL) meter, or noise meter.
