shorty/ equal length headers = waste of time and money
do it right, do it once....get long tubes or nothing at all
do it right, do it once....get long tubes or nothing at all
JBA Shorty headers vs. Long tube headers
- Thread starter BlackBeauty44
- Start date
What is your definition of “doing it right”? With headers it often means you "doing it more them once" with all the problems they create :cuss:
LT’s don’t exactly yield big results in there cars either if power gain is your ultimate goal and also come with a few penalties of their own. I admit shorties won’t buy you much horsepower gains but they do have advantages over both the stock cast iron manifold and long tubes as outline on my earlier post. The first is reduced pumping losses in the engine over the very restrictive stock manifold which is probably responsible for the hp gains but won’t scavenge the exhaust like LT’s will. I don’t see what the point is porting the exhaust runners when they are dumping into that cast iron manifold. They will also allow for more options with different systems design to work with the stock exhaust systems as I pointed out plus you will loose a couple pounds of weight in the process. Long tubes can be nothing more then a pain in the ass especially working around all those tubes trying to tighten the header bolt on a leaky exhaust.
The back pressure created by stock exhaust maintains higher boost pressure by restricting the charge ability from getting sucked out the exhaust system from the negative pressure created behind the high pressure wave during cam overlap which is largely responsible for a few pounds of lost boost. On an NA engine headers will help the engine scavenge the spent gasses out while on an FI engine the boost can do that..
For me when you add up all the advantages and disadvantages between cast iron, shorties and LT’s, the shorties are the best choice for a street car with some of it having nothing to do with horsepower. On a big 600+ hp engine the LT’s will start to make more sense but you will still have to deal with the service and clearance issues.
Agreed 100%.
A personal friend of mine (SSSSIKH) recently got some Mac Long Tubes installed on his 2.76 upper only full weight Vert. His previous best was 11.7 at 119 through the stock manifolds. He added headers, and matched his best E.T. of 11.7, but picked up a solid 4 MPH to trap 123MPH in weather at least 12-15 degrees warmer. This is with the only change being Long Tubes.
He also happened to add 30RWHP with those headers. While his gains are on the high side for an upper only Eaton, his track times support it. Hard to argue that.
Long Tubes headers are definitely beneficial, whether it be on the street and/or track. Sometimes it seems that only the guys who actually have headers will agree to this.
I again agree. Long Tubes definitely deserve more credit for their benefit from a performance stand point.
Yes, install can bring the price up to a conlict point that will make some rethink headers. But IMO, some people let the added performance of a pulley swap on our blowers overshadow other mods that may admittedly be more expensive and less convenient to install, but still beneficial none the less.
Not sure where that is coming from.
I've seen quite a few back-to-back dyno sheet between engines running headers vs. stock manifolds and the two almost overlapped one another from 2000 rpm to redline. Bigger gains come from a catback exhaust. MM&FF measure a measly 10 hp gain with headers on a 500hp engine with an open exhaust
Anyone who is a serious drag racer who wants to get an edge over the competition will run LT's but he's not going to win by a large margin because of it. On the street it would most likely come down to who's a better driver
On Hellions compound supercharged/Twin turbo they were making almost 1200 hp on the stock logs
I am not quite sure where you get your information on headers from, but I wouldn't exactly call it accurate.
Here is a graph of my car on my old 2.76 upper only Ported Eaton set up, with the only change being Long Tube headers. Just as 96Stanggt said, the area under the curve is where they are beneficial, and that will equal added performance.
Look at the graph from 4,000-6,000 RPM. The margin steadily grows larger, much larger than anywhere else on the graph. At about 6,200 RPM (about where most Eaton cars make peak power), you see that margin start to 'pinch' due to the effeciency limits of the Eaton.
Also take note to the readjusted torque curve after adding Long Tubes. This is something I noticed before Iron Terp's great thread on the effects of long tube headers, but at the time hadn't noticed it on other graphs of cars with Long Tubes. The upward shift in peak torque also plays a significant role in the added performance of Long Tubes.
Although the power lines break up some in the upper RPM, as evident by my graph, at peak power the difference is 20RWHP. Under the curve, a bit more. I will also say that after adding the Long Tubes, this is definitely the RPM range the car felt the strongest. Even before getting tuned for the Long Tubes and having this data, the car felt noticably stronger and had a much snappier throttle between 4,000-6,000RPM.
The Red line (top) was on my 2.76 Upper Only Ported Eaton, with stock exhaust manifolds.
The Blue line (bottom) is the exact same pulley and blower combo, with Mac Long Tubes.
Last edited:
Agreed 100%.
A personal friend of mine (SSSSIKH) recently got some Mac Long Tubes installed on his 2.76 upper only full weight Vert. His previous best was 11.7 at 119 through the stock manifolds. He added headers, and matched his best E.T. of 11.7, but picked up a solid 4 MPH to trap 123MPH in weather at least 12-15 degrees warmer. This is with the only change being Long Tubes.
He also happened to add 30RWHP with those headers. While his gains are on the high side for an upper only Eaton, his track times support it. Hard to argue that.
Long Tubes headers are definitely beneficial, whether it be on the street and/or track. Sometimes it seems that only the guys who actually have headers will agree to this.
I again agree. Long Tubes definitely deserve more credit for their benefit from a performance stand point.
Yes, install can bring the price up to a conlict point that will make some rethink headers. But IMO, some people let the added performance of a pulley swap on our blowers overshadow other mods that may admittedly be more expensive and less convenient to install, but still beneficial none the less.
I am not quite sure where you get your information on headers from, but I wouldn't exactly call it accurate.
Here is a graph of my car on my old 2.76 upper only Ported Eaton set up, with the only change being Long Tube headers. Just as 96Stanggt said, the area under the curve is where they are beneficial, and that will equal added performance.
Look at the graph from 4,000-6,000 RPM. The margin steadily grows larger, much larger than anywhere else on the graph. At about 6,200 RPM (about where most Eaton cars make peak power), you see that margin start to 'pinch' due to the effeciency limits of the Eaton.
Also take note to the readjusted torque curve after adding Long Tubes. This is something I noticed before Iron Terp's great thread on the effects of long tube headers, but at the time hadn't noticed it on other graphs of cars with Long Tubes. The upward shift in peak torque also plays a significant role in the added performance of Long Tubes.
Although the power lines break up some in the upper RPM, as evident by my graph, at peak power the difference is 20RWHP. Under the curve, a bit more. I will also say that after adding the Long Tubes, this is definitely the RPM range the car felt the strongest. Even before getting tuned for the Long Tubes and having this data, the car felt noticably stronger and had a much snappier throttle between 4,000-6,000RPM.
The Red line (top) was on my 2.76 Upper Only Ported Eaton, with stock exhaust manifolds.
The Blue line (bottom) is the exact same pulley and blower combo, with Mac Long Tubes.
Your installation netted you a 5% hp gain which is on the high side. Go to MM&FF November 06 issue where they recorded a 13 hp on back-to-back dyno run for a 3% gain. I have seen quite a few post where the owners were pissed as hell after doing back-to-back dyno runs with one guy ranting he gained on 5 hp after spending almost two thousand dollars installing LT's which is a 1% gain (do you see where this is going?).
A $200 intake system which takes 20 minutes to install will net you the same or more power increase then a set of LT's.
With all the hassles associated as noted this would be the very last mod I would do on a Terminator which is what the post originator was asking in the first place.
the best thing i ever did on my car was add the ARH 1 3/4 LT's with the matching O/R X. Sounds INCREDIBLE, runs cooler and pulls better and smoother up top. Anyone saying dont get LT's on these cars is just saying that because they heard or because they dont want to spend the money.
My buddys car when he had the same set-up as me the only thing different was his LT's ran 4mph! faster then me in the quarter.
In my opinion, say you dont even get that much HP from the LT's. Its worth it just in the fact that your engine will run more efficient. Period.
Just my $.02.
My buddys car when he had the same set-up as me the only thing different was his LT's ran 4mph! faster then me in the quarter.
In my opinion, say you dont even get that much HP from the LT's. Its worth it just in the fact that your engine will run more efficient. Period.
Just my $.02.
I don't know if he told you but those #'s were uncorrected!
oke: He actually gained 14 rwhp. Oh and i don't think i have ever seen a 30 rwhp gain with just the addition of lt's. You picked up a nice amount when you did yours! I think your gains from the lt's were on the higher side of the majority of people who add lt's!:beer:
I'll agree that my gains were on the higher side, and there may have been a couple of variables to affect this (which is why I've never posted this until now). They're only 5RWHP higher from what most would agree of the power increase you'd see with headers.
However, with my post I was simply trying to point out the increases in the area under the curve, just as 96Stanggt was talking about. In my graph, it shows a 20+ RWHP difference under the curve in the before/after power lines before they slightly 'pinch' back together (at peak HP). Had my power lines not broken up a little in the upper RPM's, it may have been more noticable.
I have also seen others post (on more than one occasioin) and say they only gained a few HP (less than 10) from headers and were disappointed. The only thing I can say about that is my experience has been different, as well as many others who have headers.
And no doubt even my Mac Long Tubes were damn expensive with install for the results gained on a dyno sheet - there's no arguing that. However, I'd be surprised to see an intake net someone 4MPH at the track. For some, the cost is worth it. For others, it is not.
To each his own.
:beer:
:thumbsup:
I wish American Racing had headers for our cars when I bought mine.
I don't know if he told you but those #'s were uncorrected!
I asked, and was told the numbers were SAE.
Regardless, that still doesn't discredit the fact that he matched a personal best in warmer weather and did it going 4MPH faster. :rockon: :rockon:
What I was getting at are the problems associated with headers. For a drag racer headers will certainly give you an edge if you want to win races. For a street car I just don't think they are worth the trouble. I had headers on my last gofast and they were nothing but a pain in the ass :cuss: I was constantly trying to keep them from leaking plus they kept bottoming out. I was looking at a lowered Saleen on a lift and the bottom of the collector flange was almost completely ground away. They do sound good but for me shorties are the only way to go plus the cats will still work with them.
To be honest I am amazed that the engine can make the power it does on the stock exhaust manifold. I would have a hard time putting those things back on the engine looking how restrictive they must be. The last runner actually is blasting in the oppisite direction of the forward 3 cylinders. The shorties seem to be the best compromise when comparing all the options.
If someone has had no issues with running headers and is happy with them then it's money well spent. That was just not my experience.
He knows that was a fluke! How do you bog, than let off, and still trap 122.8? I know you don't have much track experience so it's cool bro. So it's really a 125+ car all out right LMAO! Jason himself says it's a 120 car because his other 2 runs were 119 mph. I would say the lt's on his car are worth 2 mph!:beer:
takes a lot of power... it can be done...
my old set up... I would get out of the hole and 2nd gear wouldn't go one night at HRP and I still trapped 128... on a KB though
Yea the key word is "KB". The person im talking about has a full weight vert with a upper pulley only! Kinda impossible to do if you ask me.
Its is a fish story, but no reason to bust his balls about it...
anyone who has a 03-04 cobra with those type of mods knows thats not going to happen... 118-120 very possible with good driving and a shitty hole shot.. 1.8+
anyone who has a 03-04 cobra with those type of mods knows thats not going to happen... 118-120 very possible with good driving and a shitty hole shot.. 1.8+
LOL... well pretty much KB only cars will do that... whipples too
Me and the owner both agree that he can trap 120 but 123+ is def a far stretch.
Agreed:beer:
I would rep ya if I could my friend
:lol: Track experience has nothing to do with anything. :fart:
I still don't know why you try to argue against his track times to this day. Can't argue timeslips. :bored:
You go off of what you see on the internet/forums bro! Time to get out there and see what the track is really like. If you trap higher on a run where you let off and bog i don't think that trap speed should be considered a legitimate trap speed. His run where he trapped 122.8 was a 12.1 and the other one was a 11.8 at 119 so he didn't even match his old et!
oke: All im saying is that lt's DIDN'T give him 4 mph. More like 2 mph tops!
back to the topic :fart:
You go off of what you see on the internet/forums bro! Time to get out there and see what the track is really like. If you trap higher on a run where you let off and bog i don't think that trap speed should be considered a legitimate trap speed. His run where he trapped 122.8 was a 12.1 and the other one was a 11.8 at 119 so he didn't even match his old et!
Well there is a rule when it comes to MPH and your ET... it all starts in the first 60' equal powered cars with equal driving... the one with more traction is always going to win, but will MPH a few slower 11.9/118 vs. a car that doesn't hook will PMH more. 12.1/122
Users who are viewing this thread
