SMOKEDYA said:how hard are long tube's to put on a 95? and will it pass emisions with them on there? right now i have a bassani O/R X-pipe all i should have to do is cut off the flang to the collector and reweld the long tubes to it right? does bassani make long tubes for a 95? peace
john
(aka rootus)
ddonaca351 said:
Easy. I jacked up the motor about an inch, unhooked the steering shaft (one bolt) and pulled the starter (two bolts), then the long tubes dropped right in. Access to the starter is a little tight with LT's, but not too bad.SMOKEDYA said:
Probably. Between my cam and the LT's, mine ran too rich to get through emissions without cheating. The two issues with LT's and tuning is 1) the O2's will cool off at idle being so far from the heads (>600* is where they need to be for accuracy) and 2) the EEC does tuning based on the assumption that the O2's are a certain distance from the heads. It'll still make closed loop adjustments with LT's, but it would be better to tell the EEC that the O2's are farther away. If you have underdrive pulleys, you might consider switching back to stock crank & alternator pulley with LT's, so that the O2's always get as much juice as possible, especially when it's cold outside (<50).
I had Ed's Muffler shorten my Magnaflow H-pipe so I could bolt it up to the LT's. With an O/R pipe it is easy.
No. You might be able to get Fox LT's to fit, the biggest difference between a Fox & 94/95 header is the EGR bung on the passenger side. 'Course, that means deleting the EGR or switching to a Fox-style TB.
Dave as far as running rich will the adjustable fuel regulator i have help this part? so the $100 i spent on the underdrive's was useless? or could i just reweld in bungs to shorten up the O2's to put them back to stock locations? it's no big deal cause i have the stock headers and catted mac h pipe for emissions. and when i did the header's that i have now the EGR tube to the headers isnt even hooked up, i caped it off at the header's and the EGR. even if i dont go with long tubes would or does a fox throttle body work better then a S/N 95? or should i stay with the S/N 95 one? going with long tubes dont one loose low end tourque? butgain high end H.P? BTW did you get rid of you stuff from your 95 are you still needing stock stuff for it? peaceRootus said:
Easy. I jacked up the motor about an inch, unhooked the steering shaft (one bolt) and pulled the starter (two bolts), then the long tubes dropped right in. Access to the starter is a little tight with LT's, but not too bad.
Probably. Between my cam and the LT's, mine ran too rich to get through emissions without cheating. The two issues with LT's and tuning is 1) the O2's will cool off at idle being so far from the heads (>600* is where they need to be for accuracy) and 2) the EEC does tuning based on the assumption that the O2's are a certain distance from the heads. It'll still make closed loop adjustments with LT's, but it would be better to tell the EEC that the O2's are farther away. If you have underdrive pulleys, you might consider switching back to stock crank & alternator pulley with LT's, so that the O2's always get as much juice as possible, especially when it's cold outside (<50).
I had Ed's Muffler shorten my Magnaflow H-pipe so I could bolt it up to the LT's. With an O/R pipe it is easy.
No. You might be able to get Fox LT's to fit, the biggest difference between a Fox & 94/95 header is the EGR bung on the passenger side. 'Course, that means deleting the EGR or switching to a Fox-style TB.
Dave
No, I didn't end up cheating at all, I tried a half dozen times to get it through with tuning, and then about that time made the decision to de-mod the car anyway. It'll pass with flying colors with the stock heads, cam, and 4-cat H-pipeWaterPog said:
.
Nope. IMO an adjustable regulator is a 100% waste of money unless you need to raise the pressure to make your injectors act bigger than they are. Ultimately the EEC is going to use feedback from the O2 sensors to adjust fuel delivery, so changes due to fuel pressure are temporary. The reason LT's tend to make the engine run rich (mostly at idle) is because of inaccurate data from the O2's when they cool off a little. As they go below 600*, they start reading leaner than actual, and the EEC adds fuel to compensate for a lean condition that doesn't really exist.SMOKEDYA said:
Not necessarily. You may not be affected enough by the O2's cooling off for it to be a huge issue. If you go through emissions when it's warmer outside, it'll probably work out okay. Worst case you would see some idle surging in cold weather.
Some people do that, and some headers are already built that way (AFAIK only Kooks). The downside to moving the O2 back up near the head is that you are putting it into one primary, so you are tuning the entire bank of cylinders from just one point of feedback.
That is a point of much discussion over in the 94/95 forum. I got a definite increase by switching to the Fox-style TB. But I was using the Edelbrock intake elbow, which is arguably the worst of the aftermarket 94/95 elbows in terms of restriction. The downside to switching to a Fox-style TB is that the throttle gets a lot more sensitive (you get used to it). You also have to get new cables for throttle & cruise control as they are different.
Myth, as far as I can tell. My car felt better at every RPM when I put on the LT's. Maybe if you did LT's on a basically stock 5.0 you'd feel a loss in torque.
I'm going to need stock headers, cat-back, pulleys, driveshaft, and air filter. Everything else I have in storage.
