Long Tubes a waste on N/A cars.

Sleeper 362 · Feb 26, 2004

5111 said:
That is a good price, but I would need an extra $500 for a dyno tune. I don't think that you can drive around on the stock computer for that I need to forge my bottom end first, but them come heads and cams!

Thanks for the price, I will keep them in mind.

I believe thats tune included on a mustang dyno.

5111 · Feb 26, 2004

Sleeper 362 said:
I believe thats tune included on a mustang dyno.

Really?!? Where is this place at and can you check on that for me? $1000 for springs, cams, installation and a dyno tune may be worth the time for me to drive there. I will be in Virginia and Boston this summer and might stop off with my car.

Please check into this for me.

2000GT · Feb 26, 2004

5111 said:
Okay, drop the 5 for a catback and make the midpipe add 10 (a more realistic number anyhow) and you are still really close (248). Most '03 stockers are seeing more than 225 anyhow. But again, we are playing the numbers game again which never works

---------
$250 for a chip AND a dyno tune?!?! That is a killer price! I wish that I could find a price like that. Most places want $250-$300 just for an off-the-shelf chip. We do mean the same thing when we say "dyno-tune", right? You are strapped on the dyno while they burn your chip between runs based on your A/F, right?
-----------
Also, I didn't promise 15-20rwhp, I said 13rwhp. That is what I got with just the headers (midpipes being the same). I don't see why you shouldn't get it.

Here is my final bit of evidence that you can't argue with: Matt (03trubluGT) has the following mods:
BBK LT's, O/R X-pipe, Magnaflow catback, CAI,Accufab Plenum/TB.
His SAE dyno is 264rwhp/297rwtq. That is on the stock computer. NO CHIP!

He did his own wrenching on the car so he has spent under $1300 for 264rwhp! Can't really beat that without NOS. Slap a tune on it and he is easily over 270

What you are not realizing is that I am not saying that your system is wrong, I am saying that MY system is not wrong either. I have posted a 20+rwhp gain (headers and midpipe) for about $1000 installed and you are telling me that I am not gaining anything Where is the logic in that?

Yes, by dyno tune I mean tweaking the a/f ratio and engine timing while doing pulls on a dyno with wideband O2 strapped to my exhaust pipes. My dyno tune was group tune. We basically rented out the shop for the day. It was long day if you car was last. Luckily, my car was tuned second. I agree $250 is a great price including the chip. Perhaps my shop doesn't like to rip people off as much as other shops do. Again, $500 is nuts.

You say Matt's car is producing 264/297 with his mods. I say I can bolt-on an Accufab TB/plenum and gain maybe a conservative 6-7 rwhp at my peak and hopefully the same or more throughout the powercurve. That would put me at 256-7 hp. or only 7-8 rwhp less than Matt's car with LT's. Would agree with my car gaining at least 6-7 from the Accufab set-up? With that logic, to add LT's on my car for 6-7 more rwhp would never be worth it my mind.

2000GT · Feb 26, 2004

BMan5150 said:
Are your hp numbers corrected or uncorrected? The just seem really high given your mods. What mph are you running in the 1/4 mi? I would expect if you are making over 250 you must regularly be 101-ish.

On 10/28/2000 my car ran 13.89@101 with drop-in K&N filter, pullies, and Borla cat-back. My car might have been making 235 rwhp at that time, but I never dynoed it back then. I can assure you don't need 250 rwhp. to trap at 101 mph. My car trap speed that day was between 100.3-101.9 mph. The 101.9 mph was freak. Couldn't do better than 101 mph on all other runs that day.

As of 3/23/2002 (the day of my dyno tune) my SAE corrected numbers were 250/292. I have not been to the track since 10/28/2000. I plan on going when it gets warmer.

2000GT · Feb 26, 2004

StangLou said:
2000GT So your saying that since my car is already at 252rwhp with no mid pipe, no headers, no tb/plenum combo, that adding these parts will only get me around 8 or so more hp since a GT cant break 260rwhp NA Give me a break man! Granted I do have a chip for my car, but it has by no means an aggressive tune to it. It is very streetable with the tune I had put on. I only had a bit timing added, and havent even touched my a/f since my mods havent gotten to serious yet. Give me another month and Ill have some #'s that will shoot your little theory out of the water .

I do agree that L/T's are not the cheapest mod for our cars, I will definately agree there, but for someone who is staying NA and wants to get the most out of their cars before they start messing with cams, heads, intakes, superchargers ect... they are one of the best mods we can do for all around #'s both peak and throughout the curve.

I'll assume your numbers at not SAE corrected. If your produced 236 SAE rwhp with just pullies and CAI, then you have a factory freak. Most GT's dyno SAE around 223-225 in stock form. That means your car gained anywhere from 11-13 rwhp SAE from just pullies and a CAI. Amazing.

LS2 KLR · Feb 27, 2004

The fact is, if you want to get everything out of your car then LTs are a necessity! I have bought every bolt on available and can tell you they make a considerable difference. How can you get serious if you don't get long tubes for an NA application? Your car needs to breathe.

CottonBurnerz · Feb 27, 2004

2000GT said:
I beg you to show me stock 5 speed GT with only an x or h pipe and LT's make 250 rwhp with EVERYTHING ELSE STOCK AS YOU LISTED ABOVE.

Here's my graph.

stock vs BBK LT/BBK Catted X/Magnapack cb

And here's 03trublugt's graph

stock vs BBK LT/BBK O/R X/Magnaflow cb

Silverpony00 · Feb 27, 2004

To end this, we have learned that 2000gt will never be anything special to worry about at the track or on the street because he thinks that longtubes are worthless NA. Joe347r6 and me were in the same boat, we ran out of bolt ons to put on our car without breaking in the motor. Peak hp once again as stated doesnt mean crap. I cant wait to put your theory to rest when I dyno my car. Oh and mines an auto vs. your manual. Of course then you will say some crap that I have more mods than you but what it all boils down to is that you dont have a clue about mod motors and what makes power.

BanginStang97GT · Feb 27, 2004

Yo Stark its Atco time again PM me when you are going, I'm going on Sunday w/o UCA's and LCA's then tuesday with LCA's and UCA's to see what all the hype is about lol.

NasaGT · Feb 27, 2004

Dynos don't lie. Headers = teh win.

jstreet0204 · Feb 27, 2004

This is about the dumbest thread ever. Headers have been around since hot-rods began. There is a reason they are on every type of race car. They are a PITA to install, but they work...

StangLou · Feb 27, 2004

Ive never ran it at the track I have been trying to get out there, but I just bought a house and Im still in the process of moving.
As for my #'s, you are correct, they are STD not SAE. Given that it was a pretty hot and muggy day, I might have a few extra ponies laying around if it was corrected, or I may very well drop a few, who knows, its just #'s .
I think they would have been pretty much identical though. When we were looking at the comp screen he was showing us how all the different settings affected #'s. There was only around a .5hp difference between the SAE and STD on mine even with the muggy weather
Again, its only #'s . I would love to hit around 300hp in mine NA, and Im going to do what I can to reach it. If it doesnt happen oh well, Ill have one mean combination waiting for a S/C to be strapped to it after I forge the bottom end

2000GT · Feb 27, 2004

CottonBurnerz said:
Here's my graph.

stock vs BBK LT/BBK Catted X/Magnapack cb

And here's 03trublugt's graph

stock vs BBK LT/BBK O/R X/Magnaflow cb

Both of those cars run off the stock computer program?

Anyway, to be accurate, so me 250 rwhp without a cat-back exhaust. I guarantee the Magnaflow CB added power after the headers and mid pipe changes. I am just going by what 5111 posted:

Longtube 250 rwhp:
X or H pipe (needed for both applications)
Longtubes ($450)
Gaskets ($50)
Installation ($400...What I paid at S.E.Racing)
____________
Total ($900)

You won't make 250 on a stock GT with just headers + LT's using the stock CB. That's exactly what I said. Go back and read my posts. Your graphs include CB's. Don't even try to tell me the CB adds zero power after adding LT's and a mid-pipe.

Anyway, your graphs are impressive and LT's, mid-pipe, AND a cat-back does make 250 rwhp. However, so do a lot of GT's WITHOUT headers. That's my point for 5111. The graphs above are no different than my dyno graph. If someone wants to post my graph, I'll e-mail it to you. My car is making 250/292 SAE with an K&N filter, x-pipe, CB, pullies, and dyno tune. My C&L MAF is worthless with the tune in place (it's basically a $250 K&N filter!) Pullies are nearly worthless too IMO.

Now here's a good test - through a plenum/TB combo on your LT cars and let me know how much you gain. I'll do the same thing to my GT with stock manifolds. I'll bet the gains are very similar.

The stock manifolds are not restrictive on N/A applications.

2000GT · Feb 27, 2004

StangLou said:
Ive never ran it at the track I have been trying to get out there, but I just bought a house and Im still in the process of moving.
As for my #'s, you are correct, they are STD not SAE. Given that it was a pretty hot and muggy day, I might have a few extra ponies laying around if it was corrected, or I may very well drop a few, who knows, its just #'s .
I think they would have been pretty much identical though. When we were looking at the comp screen he was showing us how all the different settings affected #'s. There was only around a .5hp difference between the SAE and STD on mine even with the muggy weather
Again, its only #'s . I would love to hit around 300hp in mine NA, and Im going to do what I can to reach it. If it doesnt happen oh well, Ill have one mean combination waiting for a S/C to be strapped to it after I forge the bottom end

STD vs. SAE made a big difference on my car.

My car: SAE 250/292 vs. STD 257/300

Now it's only about 2 or 3% difference, but it pretty signifcant against a big number (3% of 250 is 7 rwhp)

Anyway, nice numbers and thanks for sharing.

By the way, if the shop e-mails you your Dynojet files, you can download the Dynojet software from their website and convert your graphs to SAE. It's actually really cool if you have multiple dyno pulls. You can graph them all at once and see the differences. My shop e-mailed my dyno pulls.

2000GT · Feb 27, 2004

jstreet0204 said:
This is about the dumbest thread ever. Headers have been around since hot-rods began. There is a reason they are on every type of race car. They are a PITA to install, but they work...

Yes, LT's flow very well, but so do the stock manifolds in naturally aspirated engine conditions.

Sorry, but I'd hardly consider a GT with 250-260 rwhp a "race" car. We are not talking about GT's with blowers and 350+ rwhp. I am sure LT's would see good gains over the stock manifolds on those cars.

jstreet0204 · Feb 27, 2004

2000GT said:
Yes, LT's flow very well, but so do the stock manifolds in naturally aspirated engine conditions.

Sorry, but I'd hardly consider a GT with 250-260 rwhp a "race" car. We are not talking about GT's with blowers and 350+ rwhp. I am sure LT's would see good gains over the stock manifolds on those cars.

Not saying 260 HP GT's are race cars, but headers put it one step closer.

2000GT · Feb 27, 2004

Silverpony00 said:
To end this, we have learned that 2000gt will never be anything special to worry about at the track or on the street because he thinks that longtubes are worthless NA. Joe347r6 and me were in the same boat, we ran out of bolt ons to put on our car without breaking in the motor. Peak hp once again as stated doesnt mean crap. I cant wait to put your theory to rest when I dyno my car. Oh and mines an auto vs. your manual. Of course then you will say some crap that I have more mods than you but what it all boils down to is that you dont have a clue about mod motors and what makes power.

I thought this was tech. Is this the best you can do? Because I don't agree LT's gain much over the stock manifolds N/A, that means my car will be slow on the street and the track?

You really got me on that one. Yeah, my 250 rwhp GT is probably slower than a 250 rwhp GT with LT's.

BMan5150 · Feb 27, 2004

CottonBurnerz said:
Here's my graph.

stock vs BBK LT/BBK Catted X/Magnapack cb

And here's 03trublugt's graph

stock vs BBK LT/BBK O/R X/Magnaflow cb

Well, let's break this down a little. The first graph shows peak gains of 26 rwhp and 31 rwtq from three modifications:

LT headers (vs. stock manifolds)
o/r X pipe (vs. stock h-pipe)
catback (vs. stock catback)

How would you allocate the gains?

LTs - 10 / 13
X pipe - 10/10
cb - 6 / 8

To be fair, you added more than just LTs. I think the point 2000GT was trying to make was that you really are adding more than just LTs when you do this mod. First of all, you obviously have to use a new X or H pipe with LTs. CB is optional. However, this points out the large sum of money that this all requires. Do you really think you'd be over 250 rwhp with JUST LTs and an o/r X-pipe? You might be close, but I don't think you'd quite be there unless you tacked on a CB.

Just to clarify - did your car have pullies/intake/anything else besides the LTs, X-pipe, and CB? I guess if that's the case, then 2000GT is just saying that there's another much cheaper way to get to around 250 rwhp. I guess if you really want to take it to the next/ultimate bolt-on level, then, yes; you need to get LTs. No doubt those gains after peak would help you in the 1/4 mi.

FastRedPonyCar · Feb 27, 2004

thewheel82 said:
Can you please stay on this board only and not go to modulardepot.com, I went to that board to get away from people like you. I saw you posting nonsense there and it pissed me off. Good day.

Boy did you come to the wrong place!!

Silverpony00 · Feb 27, 2004

2000GT said:
I thought this was tech. Is this the best you can do? Because I don't agree LT's gain much over the stock manifolds N/A, that means my car will be slow on the street and the track?

You really got me on that one. Yeah, my 250 rwhp GT is probably slower than a 250 rwhp GT with LT's.

Yea you are going to be slower than a 250 rwhp gt with lt's because it has a better power curve than you. I will have 15+ more hp and tq than you in certain areas of my power band. Why dont you look at the curves on the dyno sheets, their is 15+ hp and tq increase all the way through the powerband. So how in the hell is your car as fast as a 250 rwhp gt with lt's when is has less 15+ hp and tq throughout the powerband. You need to learn how to read a dyno sheet and then learn how to mod mustangs.

Long Tubes a waste on N/A cars.

Sleeper 362

New Member

5111

2000GT

2000GT

2000GT

LS2 KLR

Member

CottonBurnerz

Banned

Silverpony00

BanginStang97GT

NasaGT

jstreet0204

Active Member

StangLou

Active Member

2000GT

2000GT

2000GT

jstreet0204

Active Member

2000GT

BMan5150

FastRedPonyCar

Silverpony00

Similar threads

Long Tubes a waste on N/A cars.

New Member

Member

Banned

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency