Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Just had my Magnaflow catback system installed. I has an MF on previous vehicle and loved the deep sound and quality.  Havent had a lot of time on it as  of yet but so far a big improvement in sound.  I didn’t want obnoxious, but wasn't satisfied  with stock.  It is a bit noisier in cab, which  I enjoy as I like the audio confirmation I am running a V8.  I had option to keep HDMI tips but wanted that custom look that the MF provides. They currently only offer chrome tips at this time. 
 

Had installed at a local shop, as pricing for labour was reasonable vs. Aggravation, and broken skin I would be sure to encounter, and they went through hassle of boxing up stock and loading. I am up in Canada and was under $2K installed. 
 

I know with my previous truck with this set up there was a definitive break in sound change so will update in awhile if any noticeable change.   I had a lot of compliments on my other truck as Flowmaster is the popular choice around here and just has a different pitch. I like the deep,  throaty rumble of old school muscle cars and this did not disappoint. 
 

Stock start up and idle<< youtube video link

 

 MF start up and idle<<<youtube video link

not sure how to imbed actual videos

 

0D148280-2FAD-45E9-8875-79F1112ABB68.jpeg

Edited by Yfz43gmc
Update links
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, It's Tim said:

Problem with a loud exhaust is it's always loud, just another in a proverbial sea of loud pickup trucks... shoulda bought 2k Bitcoin instead.

My investment portfolio is just fine, but thanks for your sage advice and concern.  However  I will choose to invest in my local and US economy by supporting the people who work at both companies😉

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
22 hours ago, C5 Pete said:

Part numbers for the MF you installed?

Thanks. 

Magnaflow system catback 2019 Silverado/sierra part number is 19489. DFM sounds still applicable. I was able to clean it up a little bit by running it in sport mode. But the back pressure on the XL gives you a good amount of burble. They are working on the X mod but currently only gotten to the TRX and Ram models at the moment. I am awaiting them to start on the Sierras/Silverado. I never welded my system yet even though I have a slight tick at clamp.  I want to see what parts may be interchangeable. It is loud however. I like it and love the fact that I can hear my intakes screaming for air. Are awaiting the decision on what my options are for working with the system with a new X model or replacing it when it becomes available

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

So apparently MF is not able to address the DFM as GMC module controls the Cylinders- Or that is jist of info I got. Looks like a programmer is only way to get rid of drone and annoying shift feedback.  Will be looking into that as a problem solver as I can't hold a gear-depending on wind- at highway speed, and the shifting up and down drives me literally bonkers!  Well played fuel efficiency engineers. It works great until it doesn't.

 

I found the efficiency BS drove me bonkers on my previous truck also while using cruise control. I appreciate that GMC at least allows you option to bypass the adaptive cruise, but wish it was a feature you could set and forget, not engage every trip, much like auto off which you also have to push switch for.  but there are a lot of buttons I would love to not have to press in life, just to get on gas!. 🙄

Edited by Yfz43gmc
autocorrect-wrong

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
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
    • Just don't turn the steering wheel as much?
    • Rockauto bud. I pass local stores for parts.   Findya something online. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...