Jump to content

Flowmaster FlowFX Cat Back - My Experience

Diamond817
 Share

Recommended Posts

Diamond817 Enthusiast

Diamond817

Posted
Posted (edited)

My Truck:

 

2021 Silverado 1500 RST 5.3ltr 8spd. Single exhaust side exit option.

 

Parts used:

 

Cat Back – Flowmaster FLowFX cat back part # 717893

Muffler – Flowmaster Series 70 part # 530702

Resonator – Vibrant Performance Ultra Quiet part # 1142

Flex Pipe - RP Remarkable Power 3x8x12 part # RK7551 (on Amazon)

 

This all started because I wanted dual exhaust. I know there is a factory dual exhaust option. In my opinion the dual exhaust through the bumper looks clean, neat, modern, and finished, but at the same time looks too car-ish for me, so I went with the single side exit exhaust option. I wanted a dual side exit exhaust, with tips, hanging down under the truck look, which is not a factory option as we all know. My original intentions were to bring it to an exhaust shop and have them fab up the look I wanted. At this point, knowing what I know now, I should have just went that route.

 

Enter the FLowmaster FlowFX cat back part # 717893.

 

So, looking around at some already made cat back systems I came across the FLowmaster FlowFx cat back system for the 2019-2021 Silverado. It checked all the boxes. Inexpensive (paid around $520), stainless steel, 3”, performance muffler, dual side exit, and big black tips! I couldn’t ask for more.

 

Ordered. Shows up a promptly. Bring it down to my buddies garage and we throw the truck on the lift and get to work.

 

Growing up in the 80’s around mechanics and hot rods, FLowmaster was always synonymous with quality and performance. Not so much 40 yrs later.

 

Stock exhaust comes out easily in one piece. Start mocking up the flowmaster and right off the bat, the front hanger on the straight pipe misses the factory hanger location by 3 inches. Oh boy. So, we proceed to mock up the tailpipes and muffler. The tailpipes line up ok with the factory hangers, not perfect, but good enough where no fabrication will be needed. The passenger side tailpipe is really pulling the factory isolators inward. The muffler outlets could have been a little further apart. But it’s in. So we go back and fab up a hanger for the front pipe to use the factory isolator. Everything looks pretty good at this point, so we tighten up all the connections and proceed to the tips. Passenger side tip slides right on. The driver side, not so easy. The driver side tailpipe end has been expanded from 2.5 inch OD to 2.5 inch ID. WTF flowmaster? It took us a good hour of fighting with the tip and pipe to resolve the issue, but we got it done.

 

Remote start it on the lift, no leaks, sounds great! Or so I thought.

 

After a day of driving around, I realize this thing is loud. Really loud. Straight pipe loud. The drone and interior sound level is off the charts. On the highway and cruising around town. The DFM is only making it worse. And the cold start is explosive. Your neighbors will hate you. All I can think is what a mistake this was.

 

I need to a solution to quiet this thing down a bit. And I’m not going back to the stock exhaust because I am very pleased with the look of the dual tips hanging out the back.

 

I start looking at muffler options to replace the FlowFX muffler in the system. I decide to go back to FLowmaster to see if anything will directly fit in place. The 70 series is the “quietest” muffler in their lineup, uses the delta flow chambering, and is a close match to the inlet and outlet measurements. So, I go ahead and order the FLowmaster Series 70 part # 530702. Which winds up working out very well dimensionally. The outlets are .75 inches further apart than the FLoFX muffler which relieves the pulling on the passenger side isolators.

 

Now I have to remove the front 3 inch straight pipe to cut it down because the series 70 muffler is much longer than the FLowFX muffler. No big deal really. But before I install the new muffler I start to wonder why the factory exhaust has a flex pipe in it and the Flowmaster system doesn’t. So I do a little research by checking out different cat back systems for this truck, including the systems GM offers. I find there is really no consensus on this as half of the cat back systems incorporate a flex pipe and the other half do not. Even with GM’s cat back offerings, one system has a flex pipe and the other does not. So I decide to go ahead and air on the side of caution and add in a flex pipe (RP Remarkable Power 3x8x12 part # RK7551 (on Amazon)).

 

The new series 70 muffler and flex pipe are installed. This thing sounds great now. The delta flow chambering changed the sound from a race boat sound to a tuned V8 truck sound. But, it was still a little loud for me* on cold start up and idle. I decide to try adding a resonator into the system to knock the edge off the sound. I come across the Vibrant Performance Ultra Quiet part # 1142 resonator. Looks like the perfect option. I add it in before the muffler. All I can say is perfect! The sound and noise levels at start up, idle, around town, and highway cruising are perfect. Cold start and idle are tame. Around town is a nice deep tone that’s not obnoxious. And with the cruise set at 72 on the highway it sounds like a stock exhaust.

 

That DFM is still an ear sore around town at this point. I need a solution to remedy this. I decide to try the Range Technologies DFM disabler. I have to say, it worked, and flawlessly. Now the truck looks and sounds perfect.

 

 

IMG_20210313_163405833_HDR.jpg

Edited by Diamond817
Sublym808_RST Enthusiast

Sublym808_RST

Posted
Posted

I was thinking about ordering this kit through 4WheelParts. From the videos I've seen on YouTube, it sounds really good. Now, your review of it has me on the fence. 🤔 I may consider going to a local exhaust shop and price a custom setup. Is there anyone else that has installed the FlowFX Cat-Back on their 5.3 T1? If so, what was your experience like with this setup? 

Diamond817 Enthusiast

Diamond817

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Sublym808_RST said:

I was thinking about ordering this kit through 4WheelParts. From the videos I've seen on YouTube, it sounds really good. Now, your review of it has me on the fence. 🤔 I may consider going to a local exhaust shop and price a custom setup. Is there anyone else that has installed the FlowFX Cat-Back on their 5.3 T1? If so, what was your experience like with this setup? 

The FlowFX did what it was supposed to do, make a lot of noise and look good. The quality control at Flowmaster is questionable though. So, if you're intention is to make a lot of noise and look good doing it,  it fits the bill. 

 

I'll try to attach sound clips of the FlowFX and the Series 70.

Edited by Diamond817
Sublym808_RST Enthusiast

Sublym808_RST

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Diamond817 said:

FlowFx muffler.

 

There's no audio in this clip. 🔇 I'd rather not spend the $700 it would cost for this exhaust. I'm sure that it would be cover under warranty but, the hassle of returning it and additional shipping time to HI doesn't seem worth it to me. 

Edited by Sublym808_RST
Sent too soon
Diamond817 Enthusiast

Diamond817

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Sublym808_RST said:

There's no audio in this clip. 🔇

Click on the 3 dots in the right corner and download for sound. I don't know why uploading video is so difficult.

Edited by Diamond817
Diamond817 Enthusiast

Diamond817

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 hours ago, Smittys21elevation said:

Get the front driver and passenger windows tinted to match the back and that thing will look bad ass.  

Illegal in NJ. Although a lot of people do it, I don't like to draw attention.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 443 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...