LONG TUBE VS SHORTY HEADERS

I've got long tube Heddmans on my '70 and have no issues with them. The front is dropped 1" and I have not clearance problems. Of course, I drive very slowly over speed bumps and would even without the lower headers. In fact, I think it looks very cool that you can see the headers dropping down under the chassis from the side of the car. I have a small block w/o PS and have a toploader trans. Again, no clearance issues except that the clutch lever bolts through the tubes on the driver side and has to be removed to remove the header. I second the ceramic coating advise, definitely money well spent if for nothing other than how nice they look. No advise regarding shorties but sounds like some folks like them. Good luck.

I use something in between.........on my 351w I use 1 3/4 3/4 length try-ys. They dont hang under the car, no PS bracket needed, they make as much power or more than long tubes.........

my 67 vert http://htwheelz.smugmug.com

Looks like it's a dead heat. Use whatever you feel comfortable with and is easiest to live with. Big block Stang? Done the long Hookers once....................NEVER do that again. The Hedman long tubes I have for the 77 Comet fit fine on the 331. My Ranger's got Shelby tri-Y's, tried the Hedman Ranger swap shorty's. Left side fit perfectly, right side was the deal breaker and the reason for the switch to the Tri-Y's.

garner67 said:

Has anyone published dyno comparisons between long tube and short tube headers to see the true power differences between both designs? If yes, can someone point me to those numbers?

Click to expand...

Yes CarCraft, a long vs mid-length shortys on a smallblock Chevy. The result was not what most people think. Both made the same peak torque! The long tubes made most torque under 3600 rpm, but the shortys more hp! Because the shorter tubes move the torque curve higher up on the rpms.

Here "The Long and the Short of It" (test 5 and 6) om page 2: http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/116_0312_exhaust_pipes_test/