Shorty & LT Comparison Pulls

[final5-0]

I was doing a bit of research and I stumbled upon these combos

Thought ya'll might like to S E E something I've been saying

These FTI AFR Edel combos are very similar EXCEPT for the headers

Now Mr. C likes to keep his specs on the QT
but
I'm sure I won't be doing anything wrong when I say I've seen others

True ... they are all different
but
They don't seem to be that much different

IMHO ... I feel the difference you see between these two combos
Its mostly due the the header choice

If you got Q's or comments ... feel to let em rip

Here is the hard data

Here they are! ... Side by Side

Grady

 

[94CobraPace]

There was a article in MM&FF that did a comparison of equal, un equal & full length headers. The difference between the 3 was around 10 hp difference between the highest and lowest. Take it how you want from MM&FF?

 

[cbarr300]

interesting comparison

look at that low-end

 

[DDSTANG94]

at 3250 rpms the long tubes are beating the shorties by 30 lbs of torque, thats a BIG margin if u ask me. This is what i like to see.....i try telling my friends all the time peak numbers ant ****......ITS the whole CURVE....the longtubes are definitely worth it in this comparison

 

[Pokageek]

WOW! LT = incredible driveability difference on the 5.0. LT's should be a MUST for auto's. Imagine the difference when there is no clutch!

Hey Grady, with my 414ci, do you think I will be missing ALOT of low end TQ? I mean do you think it applies to larger motors as well? The engine is by definition excellent low end of course...but do you have any graphs for big blocks (so to speak)..I am curious.

 

[final5-0]

at 3250 rpms the long tubes are beating the shorties by 30 lbs of torque, thats a BIG margin if u ask me. This is what i like to see.....i try telling my friends all the time peak numbers ant ****......ITS the whole CURVE....the longtubes are definitely worth it in this comparison

DING DING DING

We got a Winner

Give this man a Cigar

Grady

 

[final5-0]

interesting comparison

look at that low-end

You picked up on what I been saying for a while now ... didn't you Clay

Funny ... not funny ha ha ... but ... Funny strange
I've posted up strong low end curves before
but
Not much has ever been said about it

40#'s at 3K

heck fire ... look at 2800 ... a tad over 50#'s

Grady

 

[final5-0]

WOW! LT = incredible driveability difference on the 5.0. LT's should be a MUST for auto's. Imagine the difference when there is no clutch!

Hey Grady, with my 414ci, do you think I will be missing ALOT of low end TQ? I mean do you think it applies to larger motors as well? The engine is by definition excellent low end of course...but do you have any graphs for big blocks (so to speak)..I am curious.

Well Keith

One usually doesn't worry about low end torque with B I G cubes

Grady

 

[urban96]

also look at the trans, arent the TKO's supposed to eat up more hp/tq?


but i do agree that low end TQ is exactly what you want when building a combo tho

 

[final5-0]

There was a article in MM&FF that did a comparison of equal, un equal & full length headers. The difference between the 3 was around 10 hp difference between the highest and lowest. Take it how you want from MM&FF?

Peak ain't always what a combo is about

Grady

 

[Pokageek]

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/techarticles/29618_short_long_tube_headers_test/index.html

Ok. Now for the cross debate... For folks that haven't noticed ANY difference with LT's... What do you make of the article above?

I think the moral here might be that long-tubes will make a difference on h/c/i but not mild bolt on stock..

 

[final5-0]

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/techarticles/29618_short_long_tube_headers_test/index.html

Ok. Now for the cross debate... For folks that haven't noticed ANY difference with LT's... What do you make of the article above?

Thats a little baby stocker

N O kinda header is gonna do much for it :Word:

Grady

 

[cbarr300]

the more air you flow, the more difference it'll make.

and yup, been following that one for a while now, Grady. I've always seen the great low-end torque a lot of guys on this forum put out...and I also noticed that a majority had LTs...I wanted some low-end..so I got LTs, and I'm more than happy. My philosophy was....if I was to go and build a house for the first time...would I listen to the guy who is having the house built for him, or would I listen to the guy that's been doing this his whole life. Obviously I would ask the guy with the experience. The same holds true with modding cars.....I don't like going off of just word of mouth....actual proof is what it's all about.

I was talking to a few people the other day about the diff. in LT vs. shorty. One guy said that he gained horsepower with the shorties and he only lost a bit of torque....so he concluded the shorties were better. Welllll, I asked him if those were peak numbers...and of course he said, "Yeah." I'm trying to get him to get another dyno chart so I can compare and show him his before and after area under the curve.

Look at my curve...I'd be willing to bet my bottom dollar that if I put some shorties on there....my low end would look like poopy. Granted, my top end *may* look a bit better......I don't think the top-end gain would equal out the low-end loss.

 

[Therian]

I love my rusty longtubes

 

[cbarr300]

It's a mustang....it's dirty but quick

 

[RAD]

Is there a brand of longtubes that will give the most gains ?

 

[earleys94gt]

Not that it really matters, but I have heard that LT's arn't emissions legal...confirm/deny anyone???

 

[Pokageek]

Not that it really matters, but I have heard that LT's arn't emissions legal...confirm/deny anyone???

Depends on state. Here in MD they are not looking for for it. May depend on whether they have an EGR bung. Most I have seen don't.

 

[5spd GT]

Good stuff Grady, I like comparisons...

A few things I noticed, the longtube combo had a tweecer and t5, compared to the shorty header one (fms) with a tko, which eats up a bit more power if I understand correctly. 3% more?

Now onto my own observations...

I really looked into the longtube vs. shorty debate when I was deciding and it appeared to me to not really be worth much, as far as the price goes...

Cammin2v swapped from shorties to longtubes on his FTI h/c/i car and gained .05 on his e.t. if I recall, when he PM'ed me about it sometime back. My numbers maybe off a bit...

Now, I swapped from some dented-in rusty Mac shorties, to new BBK longtubes, along with having my Performer lower ported by tmoss (great job by the way), and a 306 (rebuilt 302) by Keith Craft. I have gained 1.3mph with those 3 changes. It is my personal belief that the added power did not come from the longtubes, but more so from the other changes: Ported to match lower and slightly higher compression 306...

Longtubes pick up a bit down low and in the mid-range, but most of my racing is from the upper midrange to higher rpm, so the longtubes don't get much of a chance to shine 95% of the track.

The one pro I have about longtubes is the sound I love it...

To each his own, we all have our opinions and we have good reasons, like Grady who puts pen to paper, but I think for the majority of combos, longtubes should be gone with if you are looking for every last bit of edge you can get

 

[final5-0]

I always try to keep an open mind and be fair with these kind of
things so I feel the need to point this out

Working with the spark and fuel tables can make a difference in the
low and mid range as well

It is possible the LT combo may have a leg up on the shorty combo in
that department

But ... Never the Less .............

I have seen over the years the scavenging benefit that goes along with
LT's can make a difference.

Simply Put ... Look at enough combos ... You'll see tendencies develop

Grady