Does anyone here have experience with Hooker Aerochamber or Maxflow mufflers?

Title says it all.

yes. Both. I had read that Hooker was discontinuing the aerochamber. It's a chambered muffler and has a very nice deep sound at idle. The maxflow is basically an aluminized copy of the dynomax ultraflo. I've had the 304SS dynomax ultraflo as well and the hooker maxflow sounds the same. If you know someone with the dynomax catback, that's basically the sound you'll get. Both the aerochamber and maxflow are quiet at idle but scream at WOT. If I had to choose one based on sound I would go with the aerochamber. IMO if going 2.5", both these mufflers need a resonator.

Main issue would be rust. I painted my maxflows with BBQ paint and they've held up to 2 Quebec winters and still look good. That being said, I've had them since 2004 on the Turbo Regal, then the RMS, and now they are on the Riviera. If rust is a concern, go with the 304SS dynomax ultraflo.

What problems will I encounter putting dual exhausts on my OCC? It is a 92 with 5.7 L.
Dick

COL wrote:

What problems will I encounter putting dual exhausts on my OCC? It is a 92 with 5.7 L.
Dick

This is the second time you,ve asked this question, and both times in a non related thread,. perhaps you might take the plunge and start your own thread, otherwise it,s called "thread hijacking" when the subject is changed,.

Here's a copy of my answer to this question in the other thread where you asked first time,.

Quote :

dick it can be done,. i,m not sure the benefits would be worth the cost and effort,.you can use a 94-96 crossmember with a little work,.then you need to run dual cats if your state has emissions testing,.
check out the cop car "Y" pipe for 93 cars, and then run a 3" exhaust with a decent muffler,
good gains for the right price ,.dump the huge restrictive factory cat for a nice 3"free'er flowing aftermarket cat,
.i,m just spouting off what i,ve read on here,.
I think Pat did it to one of his wagons and he was pleased with the sound and performance,.
JMHO

Nick

I have Aero's on my RMW...love them! If you can still snag a set, I would put them on!

Chris

Thanks for the information twice and the lecture. Goodbye

jasonlachapelle wrote:

yes. Both. I had read that Hooker was discontinuing the aerochamber. It's a chambered muffler and has a very nice deep sound at idle. The maxflow is basically an aluminized copy of the dynomax ultraflo...

Thank you Jason! The specs I've read on the net AND the tech I talked to at Hooker inferred that the Maxflow was the quieter of the two at low and mid throttle (the tech was surprised when he was telling me this). This is why I wanted someone who was familiar with both to chime in, because (at least in theory) the Aerochamber should be quieter. It's design notes show that it was engineered to filter out resonances. When I read 'resonances', I see 'drone' at various rpms. If you can remember well enough, do you recall whether either (or both) mufflers had drone at any points in the 'cruising' mode (not accelerating). As you have probably guessed, I have a strong aversion to drone; it's exasperating. I want the quieter, or least objectionable of the two. I have narrowed down my muffler choices to the Hooker offerings because the company stresses design & engineering; etc. over 'the cool sound' (like Flowmaster).

These specs are quoted on several forums. The two Hookers show amongst the lowest back pressure AND amongst the lowest noise (look at the decibel grouping):
http://www.oldspower.com/vb/showthread.php?t=53999

I'm pretty sure the maxflows drone more. I guarantee they will drone at cruise if you don't use resonators.

I haven't used the aerochambers w/o resonators on a B-body (I can't comment on cruise rpm drone on the B-body) but I have on other cars. They are NOT drone-proof, and I personally would use resonators, or at the absolute minimum an X-pipe on a b-body. I'm pretty sure I recall ISSF members with the hooker cat-back (aerochamber mufflers) saying they had drone, but that info is gone for now.