10 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHVideo: 996 aftermarket exhaust group test
Leading reported evidence
Set ups
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Set ups' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Set ups' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Loved the concept of the test but missed the mark.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
A better test with in car and drive by, with consistent conditions would be useful.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
10 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
911uk: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T013556Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I saw that last week but got bored of wading through the white noise padding.
A simple index telling you which exhausts were involved and the timeline in the video, would vastly increase the appeal.
A very cool concept to do a video for and potentially super useful :thumb:
A nice table at the end comparing the max decibels etc. for each exhaust and price point would have been really useful too.
Great work!
Loved the concept of the test but missed the mark. A table at the end as
already said would have been good.
And some of those drive by's were pathetic. Good grief. I was disappointed with most of those. Expected the car's to come singing past flat chat. Total flop.
The RPM teknik set up got a good slagging off.
Milltek sounded nice.
A better test with in car and drive by, with consistent conditions would be useful. As would be, subjective comment from three different testers. Static revving of the engine a waste of time, except whether it would get through a trackday noise test.
Confine the test to no more than ten set ups. Forget the painful interviews.
So who's going to sort that out then :dont know:
I didn't know they were featured. May have to watch properly.
I love the sound of my Milteks. can be driven quietly around town, but a lovely howl when you open the throttle out of town. I have a K&N lifetime panel filter and PSR 9Line resonator delete too.
I'm surprised they're not more popular than they are.
I thought the Cargraphic + gundo system sounded best, but then I may be biased by familiarity as I have the same on mine. There are 3 versions of the Cargraphic, ET/Performance; ETR/Sound, and ETS/Super Sound.
Mine is the ETR/Sound. If anyone has one without the gundo hack I'd be interested to hear it.
I also agree that a table showing exhaust, peak noise values, cost, and which engine would be helpful.
Non of them would want me to buy an aftermarket exhaust tbh.
I have a full Hayward and Scott setup. There is a little tiny bit of drone at around 2k rpm but it does sound the part.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
