• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech

BBK shorty headers

  • Thread starter Thread starter fast97gt
  • Start date Start date Feb 18, 2010
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next
First Prev 4 of 5 Next Last

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 9, 2010
#61
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #61
40oz said:
If you increase the hp at any given rpm, you also increased the torque at that rpm. In other words, in order to increase horsepower, you need to increase torque at that rpm.

You cannot separate torque and hp as if they are independent variables.

Horsepower is simply a way to compare two similar engines.
Click to expand...

All true, except for one thing. Tq can be manipulated by gearing. Knowing that Tq is the only thing that will increase acceleration (except for lowing mass), one could just use larger and larger gear ratios to get more acceleration. The problem with this is what I was getting at above. More gearing makes more acceleration, but at a lower speed.

Above I defined and proved why increasing hp is what you want to do if you are interested in increasing acceleration at any given speed.

Obviousely increasing engine tq at a given engine speed will increase engine hp. However, engine tq does not move the car. The tq at the wheels does, which is engine tq multiplied by overal gearing. This makes engine tq meaningless without knowing the engine speed that its made at (or, more importantly, vehicle speed).

Hp is different. Hp gets to the wheels the same no matter what the gearing is (ignoring insignificant changes in losses).

This is why hp is a better measure for acceleration if you want a specific vehicle speed operating range.

300 ehp, 250 etq will accelerate a car just the same as 300 ehp, 350 etq. You just have to set the gearing so that you get the same wheel tq for each car.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 9, 2010
#62
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #62
40oz said:
If you increase the hp at any given rpm, you also increased the torque at that rpm. In other words, in order to increase horsepower, you need to increase torque at that rpm.

You cannot separate torque and hp as if they are independent variables.

Horsepower is simply a way to compare two similar engines.
Click to expand...

They are two independent variables. Max tq and max hp are almost never at the same engine speed. When do you shift, to maintain peak hp or tq? Think about it. If you shift to maintain peak ENGINE tq, you are now in a gear with less mechanical advantage, less wheel tq, less acceleration.
 
0

007

Founding Member
Jan 29, 2002
3,287
24
69
Broke
Mar 9, 2010
#63
  • Mar 9, 2010
  • #63
Ricky is correct. Remember he is talking about wheel torque and not just the engine.
 
4

40oz

Member
Jan 9, 2006
499
3
18
Minneapolis
Mar 10, 2010
#64
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #64
007 said:
Ricky is correct. Remember he is talking about wheel torque and not just the engine.
Click to expand...

I agree with him. I just think it is important to understand that horsepower is *directly* related to torque. You can't increase horsepower without increasing torque. Pretending that isn't so is ignorant, not an insight.

Nobody gets a dyno graph showing the actual measurement of rear wheel torque. Gear ratio is always factored in. Horsepower is calculated from the math that gives engine torque at the wheels based on rear gear ratio. Installing 4.10's increases torque to the wheels, making the car faster through the gears, but horsepower hasn't changed. It actually drops since shorter gears eat up more power through friction.

The idea that changing rear gearing changes horsepower is ludicrous.

Nobody said you shift to maintain maximum torque. You need to do the math in each gear to find out the ideal shift point. Based on torque, NOT horsepower.

The relationship between torque and horsepower should be self-evident. The relationship between torque and acceleration vs. horsepower and acceleration is not so obvious. I needed to put an accelerometer in my car and test it on the highway to clarify it in my own mind. Botom line - peak torque is peak acceleration. Horsepower is a fabricated number that means nothing at the end of the day. Tourque at rpm and gear multiplication is all that really matters.

***

But all I really wanted to know is how much factory GT headers weighed compared to BBK shorties.
 

mogs01gt

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
3,113
30
119
Ohio
Mar 10, 2010
#65
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #65
fast97gt said:
for the money are the bbk shorty headers worht it, i dont like the look of the long tubes and dont like the ideas of the mid length. another reason for the shortys is i want to retain the factory style of the way they bolt up, i have the bassai o/r-x bolted to the stock manifolds, so i know these headers will bolt up as a direct bolt on. and is true the claim of ~8-12hp
Click to expand...
I've had both Long Tubes and shorties. I currently am running the BBK shorties. I understand the power difference but I'd rather be able to remove my transmission if need be rather than trying to remove a long tube header than remove the tranny.

I trap the same MPH with the shorties as I did with the long tubes.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#66
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #66
mogs01gt said:
I've had both Long Tubes and shorties. I currently am running the BBK shorties. I understand the power difference but I'd rather be able to remove my transmission if need be rather than trying to remove a long tube header than remove the tranny.
Click to expand...

Can the transmission be removed from the bellhousing with the longtubes in place or do the long tubes get in the way? I understand that some transmissions cant be removed from their bell housings from the outside, but my t56 can.

mogs01gt said:
I trap the same MPH with the shorties as I did with the longtubes.
Click to expand...

Interesting... any other changes?
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#67
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #67
40oz said:
I agree with him. I just think it is important to understand that horsepower is *directly* related to torque. You can't increase horsepower without increasing torque. Pretending that isn't so is ignorant, not an insight.

Nobody gets a dyno graph showing the actual measurement of rear wheel torque. Gear ratio is always factored in. Horsepower is calculated from the math that gives engine torque at the wheels based on rear gear ratio. Installing 4.10's increases torque to the wheels, making the car faster through the gears, but horsepower hasn't changed. It actually drops since shorter gears eat up more power through friction.

The idea that changing rear gearing changes horsepower is ludicrous.

Nobody said you shift to maintain maximum torque. You need to do the math in each gear to find out the ideal shift point. Based on torque, NOT horsepower.

The relationship between torque and horsepower should be self-evident. The relationship between torque and acceleration vs. horsepower and acceleration is not so obvious. I needed to put an accelerometer in my car and test it on the highway to clarify it in my own mind. Botom line - peak torque is peak acceleration. Horsepower is a fabricated number that means nothing at the end of the day. Tourque at rpm and gear multiplication is all that really matters.

***

But all I really wanted to know is how much factory GT headers weighed compared to BBK shorties.
Click to expand...


4.10 gears will make you accelerate faster in any given gear, but your top speed in that gear will be less than if you had stock 3.27 gears.

No one said gears increase hp.

Shift to maintain max hp output, and I think you will find that you are maintaining max wheel tq.

Hp is not a fabricated number.

It is contradictory to state that hp is meaningless and that rpm and tq is important. Horsepower is rpm and torque!

Hp = rpm * eTq

Why do you think hp is used to compare engines? Why do you think power to weight ratios are used to compare vehicles? Why not etq to weight ratio?


Their is a good reason why it has been done this way and you are missing it.
 

mogs01gt

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
3,113
30
119
Ohio
Mar 10, 2010
#68
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #68
Rickyll7 said:
Can the transmission be removed from the bellhousing with the longtubes in place or do the long tubes get in the way? I understand that some transmissions cant be removed from their bell housings from the outside, but my t56 can.
Click to expand...
Never tried it, I got fed up with the Mac long tubes and the other headers that allow the tranny to be removed are a complete rip off.

Interesting... any other changes?
Click to expand...
Other than the BBK o/r X connected to the shorties that replaced the shorty o/r H pipe, no other changes.

Technically speaking, HP is a mathematically created number. It is not measurable. The only meaningful measurement taken from an engine is Torque. HP is a way to make people feel all warm and cozy about their cars.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#69
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #69
mogs01gt said:
Technically speaking, HP is a mathematically created number. It is not measurable. The only meaningful measurement taken from an engine is Torque. HP is a way to make people feel all warm and cozy about their cars.
Click to expand...

Would you buy an engine without knowing what its hp curve is?

You cant measure an engines performance without knowing it's hp.

Show me a calculation that shows an engines ability to accelerate a given weight through a 1/4 mile in a given time that only considers torque (and not engine speed) as a mesure of performance of the engine. Knowing tq and engine speed means you know hp by definition.

I dare you.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#70
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #70
http://www.vettenet.org/torquehp.html
 

mogs01gt

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
3,113
30
119
Ohio
Mar 10, 2010
#71
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #71
Rickyll7 said:
Would you buy an engine without knowing what its hp curve is?
You cant measure an engines performance without knowing it's hp.
Show me a calculation that shows an engines ability to accelerate a given weight through a 1/4 mile in a given time that only considers torque as a mesure of poerformance of the engine.
I dare you.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? You cannot measure HP. You measure Torque. Hp is a conversion of Torque over time. HP is a selling point. Torque is what moves the vehicle, not HP.

You just posted a link that shows you are arguing with yourself.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#72
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #72
mogs01gt said:
What are you talking about? You cannot measure HP. You measure Torque. Hp is a conversion of Torque over time. HP is a selling point. Torque is what moves the vehicle, not HP.

You just posted a link that shows you are arguing with yourself.
Click to expand...

Read the whole thing before you respond.

And again... I DARE YOU to do what I asked in post 69.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#73
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #73
mogs01gt said:
What are you talking about? You cannot measure HP. You measure Torque. Hp is a conversion of Torque over time. HP is a selling point. Torque is what moves the vehicle, not HP.

You just posted a link that shows you are arguing with yourself.
Click to expand...


One more thing... Both tq and hp can move things. BUT, hp will tell you how fast you can do it (time) and at what speeds. Tq wont do either without knowing more information (such as rpm) which would actually define hp.

If you dont care about your ET or mph in the quarter, fine. The rest of us normal people do.
 

mogs01gt

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
3,113
30
119
Ohio
Mar 10, 2010
#74
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #74
Rickyll7 said:
Read the whole thing before you respond.
And again... I DARE YOU to do what I asked in post 69.
Click to expand...
To do what???You cannot measure HP. This is like speaking to a woman.

What you do think spins the tires? Torque from the engine
What do you think spins the rollers on the dyno? Torque from the engine


What do you not get?
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#75
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #75
mogs01gt said:
HP is a selling point.
Click to expand...

Let's keep the myths to ourselves.

mogs01gt said:
To do what???You cannot measure HP. This is like speaking to a woman.

What you do think spins the tires? Torque from the engine
What do you think spins the rollers on the dyno? Torque from the engine


What do you not get?
Click to expand...

You can measure hp. You would know that if you read ALL of the link I posted. What I dare you to do is to prove me wrong with science. Show me an equation that proves your point(s). I've given enough already.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#76
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #76
Here is something else for you to chew on. With the right gear ratios, a 500 ft-lb tq engine can put the same tq to the wheels as a 100 ft-lb engine. Do they both accelerate through a 1/4 mile the same? Maybe they do... Maybe they don't. You don't know without knowing the hp curve.
 
B

bboylobo

New Member
May 4, 2005
130
0
0
Lancaster PA
Mar 10, 2010
#77
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #77
Rickyll7 said:
Here is something else for you to chew on. With the right gear ratios, a 500 ft-lb tq engine can put the same tq to the wheels as a 100 ft-lb engine. Do they both accelerate through a 1/4 mile the same? Maybe they do... Maybe they don't. You don't know without knowing the hp curve.
Click to expand...

to answer the question of wich will cross the line faster, wouldnt you need to know the weight that is being moved by the torque? like if you moving 100 lbs with 100 pounds of torque over a quarter mile vs 5000 lbs with 500 lbs of torque, will the 100lbs be first?

i dont know the equations behind all this im just trying to logically understand it. all this argument on this thread is awsome information
 

mogs01gt

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
3,113
30
119
Ohio
Mar 10, 2010
#78
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #78
Rickyll7 said:
Here is something else for you to chew on. With the right gear ratios, a 500 ft-lb tq engine can put the same tq to the wheels as a 100 ft-lb engine. Do they both accelerate through a 1/4 mile the same? Maybe they do... Maybe they don't. You don't know without knowing the hp curve.
Click to expand...
So you are finally understanding that engines only produce torque?
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#79
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #79
bboylobo said:
to answer the question of wich will cross the line faster, wouldnt you need to know the weight that is being moved by the torque? like if you moving 100 lbs with 100 pounds of torque over a quarter mile vs 5000 lbs with 500 lbs of torque, will the 100lbs be first?

i dont know the equations behind all this im just trying to logically understand it. all this argument on this thread is awsome information
Click to expand...

Both would have to weigh the same for the comparison to be meaningful.

The point is that the question can't be answered without knowing what the hp is for each engine.
 

Rickyll7

Member
Dec 16, 2005
718
4
19
Mar 10, 2010
#80
  • Mar 10, 2010
  • #80
F = ma (definition)
a = F/m
F=eTq/r (definition)
eTq=Hp/rpm (definition)
a = Hp/(rpm*r*m)
rpm*r = v (definition)
a = Hp/(v*m) (acceleration is a function of vehicle speed, mass, and hp only!)
m = vehicle mass
Hp = horsepower
eTq = engine torque
F = thrust force at wheels
r = factor including total gearing and tire size to convert rotational movement into straight line movement or tq into force
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next
First Prev 4 of 5 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
bbk shorty header to mid pipe gasket
  • randyyy
  • Sep 29, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
316
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Sep 29, 2025
randyyy
R
E
1986 Convertable 5.0 GT
  • eneerg
  • Sep 24, 2025
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
4
Views
221
The Welcome Wagon Sep 24, 2025
Noobz347
BBK 351w headers
  • fully
  • Jan 30, 2025
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
5
Views
748
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Apr 4, 2025
dcm0123
D
G
2001 Mustang GT noise after header and control arm (x2) install
  • gilmo5
  • Jan 8, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
270
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jan 12, 2025
weendoggy
A
Discussion on mild budget build/ top end
  • Acesario
  • Feb 21, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
654
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 23, 2026
General karthief
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?