Axleback vs. Cat-Back
04-12-2006, 02:23 AM
#11
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Queens, New York
Posts: 390
RE: Axleback vs. Cat-Back
ORIGINAL: andyman
I JUST FCKING POSTED THIS
I JUST FCKING POSTED THIS
-------------
Ahem..... I made this video with my buddy. His car is hte Borla axel backs and mine is the cat back. Notice the differnce in sound? Note the differences anyman noted. Also note that the stock pipes are a lot heavier than the alumimun ones that the cat backs come with.
http://media.putfile.com/Borla-catback--vs--axle-back
thread: https://mustangforums.com/m_1236795/tm.htm
10-06-2007, 02:26 PM
#12
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4
RE: Axleback vs. Cat-Back
I wanna dispute this last one. Here is my video of stock compared to the Axle Back, not cat back. Axlebacks sound the like cat backs in the last video. Check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju1hKBiAJD4
Erik
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju1hKBiAJD4
Erik
10-08-2007, 06:51 PM
#13
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: ?
Posts: 115
RE: Axleback vs. Cat-Back
According to Magnaflow's website and dyno sheet they gained 11 rwph and 14 rwtq on a stock mustang using their 2.5" Magnapak cat-back system. Point is yes, there is a big difference between the axle and cat-back when it comes to performance.
10-08-2007, 09:42 PM
#14
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location:
Posts: 6,414
RE: Axleback vs. Cat-Back
Callahan and Derf00 are correct. Yes for now it will have very minimal gains over the stock pipes from Ford but as mods continue (especially forced induction), a little more airflow can go a long way. Since he is planning on adding a high-performing supercharger on, he should in fact spend a little more dough for the cat-back
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
