LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

Is upgrading from shorties to Long tubes worth the $$ ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-29-2004, 01:39 PM
  #106  
Registered User
 
hsyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada
Posts: 1,025
Originally posted by Haskin Z28
im only curious about one thing through all this rubbish, stock motored here and plan to stay it for a while, prices and what not aside which would benfit me more, hooker LTs or macs, i dont care about how low they hang, looks, price etc., i just want to hear about the performance
Yes I would highly recommend LT's over mids. That way if you ever do decide to do like a H&C combo, you have the best headers to support it.
hsyr is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 04:33 PM
  #107  
Registered User
 
12SCNDZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Newark, Delaware
Posts: 3,634
Originally posted by hsyr
Yes I would highly recommend LT's over mids. That way if you ever do decide to do like a H&C combo, you have the best headers to support it.
That's a matter of definate opinion! I have a H&C combo...And I have the best header for my combo.

Frank
12SCNDZ is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 04:48 PM
  #108  
Registered User
 
Fastbird93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Waynesboro, PA
Posts: 4,827
Ditto
Fastbird93 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 05:39 PM
  #109  
Registered User
 
12SCNDZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Newark, Delaware
Posts: 3,634
Ok...After 8 pages of replies on this, one thing is very apparant. It's turned into an "opinion" post, instead of a "fact" post.

Who cares if your car FEELS better after doing LT's?

One thing is a common denominator...Those who have LTs will tell you that you won't run quick, or make HP without them (or atleast not as much). Those of us with shorties/mids will tell you you can do both.

Let's start over with some FACTS! If you have LT's, mids, or shorties post your ET's and/or HP numbers. Please include some other stats on the car so we're comparing apples to apples.

I'll go first...All the stats and times are in my sig.

Fastbird93 has also proven to make 375 RWHP with shorties. With some pretty impressive torque numbers to back it up.

So...Now, those with longtubes, PROVE to everyone that they're better! Also tell us how you get your cars through emissions?...I've still got AIR tubes and an EGR hooked up to my MACs. We all already know the price difference. Not only for the LT's, but you'll also need a new Y-pipe. My MACs cost me $389 with a Y-pipe.

Frank
12SCNDZ is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 05:53 PM
  #110  
Registered User
 
joeSS97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 1,781
The facts have been stated,the rest is preference.
joeSS97 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 06:19 PM
  #111  
Registered User
 
engineermike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 2,743
Originally posted by engineermike
- Thunder Racing did a shorty versus LT dyno test on a 350 LT1 with ported LT4 heads and CC306 cam. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it picked up around 30 - 35 ft-lb low-end torque, but only about 5 - 10 rwhp. If you want the exact numbers, call Thunder, ask for David, and ask him about Hoffpauer's car (pronounced Hof-power). The shorties were 1 5/8". Perhaps the gains would have been less if he had 1 3/4" shorties.

Mike
engineermike is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 06:21 PM
  #112  
Registered User
 
engineermike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 2,743
Originally posted by EDS Z28
I made 480 rwhp with edelbrock shorties, cat converter, stock midpipe and flowmaster muffler. I knew that there was more power to be had due to the fact I was using only 1 cat converter and a pretty restictive y-pipe.

After changing the entire exhaust system out to flp longtubes, 2 cat converters, custom single 3" exhaust and dual magnaflow mufflers (strait thru) my engine made 525 rwhp and gained torque everywhere above 3500 rpm. I was impressed with the new exhaust, but it wasn't cheap.
engineermike is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 06:26 PM
  #113  
Registered User
 
QCKZ28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Christiansburg, VA
Posts: 1,853
i trapped 115.38mph, with a raceweight of 3540lbs.

ported heads-xe224/230-rksport headers (mids 1 3/4")
and the usual bolt ons.

i dynoed 356rwhp/349rwtq with a failing fuel pump and traps speeds of 104-106mph.

i dont have any new dyno # after the fuel pump install, i suspect close to 380rwhp with the trap times. thats not to bad for mids?

im upgrading to jet hot LT because i wanted true duals (sound preference)
will i gain or lose any performance? who knows, i guess we will see

jesse
QCKZ28 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 07:23 PM
  #114  
Registered User
 
engineermike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 2,743
Originally posted by QCKZ28
i trapped 115.38mph, with a raceweight of 3540lbs.

ported heads-xe224/230-rksport headers (mids 1 3/4")
and the usual bolt ons.

i dynoed 356rwhp/349rwtq with a failing fuel pump and traps speeds of 104-106mph.

i dont have any new dyno # after the fuel pump install, i suspect close to 380rwhp with the trap times. thats not to bad for mids?

jesse
356 rwhp sounds about right for 115.4 mph.

I trapped 114 with 350 rwhp with an old combo.

I would expect 380 rwhp to run closer to 118 mph.

Mike
engineermike is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 07:44 PM
  #115  
Registered User
 
QCKZ28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Christiansburg, VA
Posts: 1,853
Originally posted by engineermike
356 rwhp sounds about right for 115.4 mph.

I trapped 114 with 350 rwhp with an old combo.

I would expect 380 rwhp to run closer to 118 mph.

Mike
what was the race weight?

i was trapping 104-106mph with a bad fuel pump, dynoed those numbers, and the DA was 3000

upgraded to a walbro 255, lowered my 60 from 2.5 to 2.0 and trapped 115. but this was at a different track around -1000 DA

would you say that im still in the 360rwhp range?

jesse
QCKZ28 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 11:13 PM
  #116  
Registered User
 
Fastbird93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Waynesboro, PA
Posts: 4,827
Originally posted by 12SCNDZ
Fastbird93 has also proven to make 375 RWHP with shorties. With some pretty impressive torque numbers to back it up.

Frank
Ahem.......

ASM's are Mid-length deisgn.

On another note, I really need to get my rich issue fixed if QckZ28 is trapping 115 with a 356 RWHP rating. I'm dying to see what I get running at.
Fastbird93 is offline  
Old 01-29-2004, 11:22 PM
  #117  
Registered User
 
S.J.S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: HI.
Posts: 2,201
Personally I don't think they are worth the extra money if you have the shorties in already. Not to mention the pain and oweees.
S.J.S. is offline  
Old 01-30-2004, 04:05 PM
  #118  
Registered User
 
QCKZ28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Christiansburg, VA
Posts: 1,853
Originally posted by Fastbird93
Ahem.......
On another note, I really need to get my rich issue fixed if QckZ28 is trapping 115 with a 356 RWHP rating. I'm dying to see what I get running at.
i trapped 104-106 when i dynoed those numbers, i fixed my dying fuel pump and picked up a set of DR, and then i trapped 115. i suspect i might be making a little more now

jesse
QCKZ28 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RUENUF
Cars For Sale
1
05-25-2016 08:10 PM
RUENUF
South Atlantic
4
03-13-2016 03:39 PM
4586
LT1 Based Engine Tech
4
03-18-2015 06:31 PM
Cam's maro
LT1 Based Engine Tech
1
01-30-2015 09:21 PM



Quick Reply: Is upgrading from shorties to Long tubes worth the $$ ?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:06 AM.