Longtube VS Shortys
10-26-2011, 02:06 AM
#6
http://www.clearimageautomotive.com/...Comparison.pdf
thats an interesting artical on the research clear image automotive did using the 2.4l solstice as a platform. this is as close as you will get
thats an interesting artical on the research clear image automotive did using the 2.4l solstice as a platform. this is as close as you will get
10-26-2011, 07:10 AM
#7
I was in a discussion about this the other day.
No, no one has really proven what long tubes can make on the LSJ yet (other than ZZP with their stroker motor, haha). I think a few have dyno'd with one, but I never saw any clear data on what kind of power it actually produced. In theory long tubes should produce more power at certain rpm's, but not all applications behave the same.
I've said this a million times.... The Time Attack SS/SC ran a shorty header, and made more power off nitrous than most kiddies on here will ever see with a supercharged LSJ.
I'm flowing more air now (35.03 - 36.41 lbs/min) with a 76mm pulley than I was when I had a 73mm pulley and GMPP manifold (33.95 - 35.03 lbs/min). The only thing I changed out was the GMPP manifold to a Badmab shorty header. It may be a cheap header, but it has been proven by many to work. I chose the shorty header not because it was cheap, but because I have been starting to follow the engine work in the LSJ build book.
Last edited by Staged07SS; 10-26-2011 at 07:25 AM.
10-26-2011, 07:57 AM
#8
i went long tube because ive seen the numbers for a small block chevy comparing shorties to long tube and the difference was as much as 20-30 horse. im sure its less with a small motor but the long tube have a higher cfm rating, they are the way to go.
10-26-2011, 08:48 AM
#9
Member
Join Date: 07-10-08
Location: Ft. Lauderdale fla
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am wandering the same. Ill prob. Be purchasing a hedder and dp next week. Idk if I should get bad mab and zzp 3" dp or zzp long tubes. Info would be nice. I'm thinking the long tube will gain more up top but lose some down at the bottom due to backpressure not being there for a foot more.. I may be wrong tho
10-26-2011, 09:44 AM
#11
I use a ZZP long tube with a TVS and the results are good, but not earth shattering compared to a mid length CTI. Supercharged cars dont care much about headers so long as the head is opened on the exhaust side and the header lets the exhaust out. BUT the long tube from ZZP is cleaner and nicer install and works just fine for me.
325 whp is all I need.
325 whp is all I need.
10-27-2011, 01:09 AM
#13
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 06-29-10
Location: NH
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honestly, with the blower the difference in price from a shorty to a generic long tube is greater than the power difference. Long tubes are used to increase scavenging, which leads to more mid and low end power in most applications. With the blower we are already forcing the air out during the overlap phase so it is of little consequence. Now if you are building a maximum effort car, you have no reason to not get a long tube header custom fabricated for your setup.
10-27-2011, 01:27 AM
#14
one thing to remember when considering what header design to run is that the increased scavaging during lower rpm operation does increase fuel economy. when i bought my car it had a cheap shorty header (may have been a TOG) and i changed it out for a clear image automotive stainless mid length header. i did notice more mid range power, and went from 8.2l/100km to 7.7l/100km, that works out to roughly 2mpg increase. i know we dont all mod our cars with fuel economy in mind, in fact, its often the last thing that would cross our minds, however most of us daily drive our cobalts, so it is something to consider.
The following users liked this post:
slow-ecotec (07-24-2021)
10-27-2011, 07:15 AM
#16
Honestly, with the blower the difference in price from a shorty to a generic long tube is greater than the power difference. Long tubes are used to increase scavenging, which leads to more mid and low end power in most applications. With the blower we are already forcing the air out during the overlap phase so it is of little consequence. Now if you are building a maximum effort car, you have no reason to not get a long tube header custom fabricated for your setup.
Thank you for posting this
I use a ZZP long tube with a TVS and the results are good, but not earth shattering compared to a mid length CTI. Supercharged cars dont care much about headers so long as the head is opened on the exhaust side and the header lets the exhaust out. BUT the long tube from ZZP is cleaner and nicer install and works just fine for me.
325 whp is all I need.
Last edited by Staged07SS; 10-27-2011 at 07:15 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
The following users liked this post:
slow-ecotec (07-24-2021)
10-27-2011, 01:33 PM
#17
Senior Member
Thank you for posting this man....
I was in a discussion about this the other day.
No, no one has really proven what long tubes can make on the LSJ yet (other than ZZP with their stroker motor, haha). I think a few have dyno'd with one, but I never saw any clear data on what kind of power it actually produced. In theory long tubes should produce more power at certain rpm's, but not all applications behave the same.
I've said this a million times.... The Time Attack SS/SC ran a shorty header, and made more power off nitrous than most kiddies on here will ever see with a supercharged LSJ.
I'm flowing more air now (35.03 - 36.41 lbs/min) with a 76mm pulley than I was when I had a 73mm pulley and GMPP manifold (33.95 - 35.03 lbs/min). The only thing I changed out was the GMPP manifold to a Badmab shorty header. It may be a cheap header, but it has been proven by many to work. I chose the shorty header not because it was cheap, but because I have been starting to follow the engine work in the LSJ build book.
I was in a discussion about this the other day.
No, no one has really proven what long tubes can make on the LSJ yet (other than ZZP with their stroker motor, haha). I think a few have dyno'd with one, but I never saw any clear data on what kind of power it actually produced. In theory long tubes should produce more power at certain rpm's, but not all applications behave the same.
I've said this a million times.... The Time Attack SS/SC ran a shorty header, and made more power off nitrous than most kiddies on here will ever see with a supercharged LSJ.
I'm flowing more air now (35.03 - 36.41 lbs/min) with a 76mm pulley than I was when I had a 73mm pulley and GMPP manifold (33.95 - 35.03 lbs/min). The only thing I changed out was the GMPP manifold to a Badmab shorty header. It may be a cheap header, but it has been proven by many to work. I chose the shorty header not because it was cheap, but because I have been starting to follow the engine work in the LSJ build book.
I went from about 232 to 240 with my ZZP Long Tube
10-27-2011, 01:37 PM
#18
Senior Member
I am wandering the same. Ill prob. Be purchasing a hedder and dp next week. Idk if I should get bad mab and zzp 3" dp or zzp long tubes. Info would be nice. I'm thinking the long tube will gain more up top but lose some down at the bottom due to backpressure not being there for a foot more.. I may be wrong tho
I got the ZZP Long Tube, with Catted 3" Downpipe.
I Love it. Sounds diffrent, but still sounds good. Picked up roughly 10 hp. Couln't tell for sure,
because I was still heat soaked after the install, so the only good dyno pull I got was the first pull
before the install.
When compareing that pull to the second pull before the header install, I found the divided of the two, and when useing it as a multiplier to the after install dyno run to calculat out the heat soak I came out to be arround 240 - 245 whp, up from 232 whp. I think I posted the dyno charts a few months ago somewhere on here.
10-27-2011, 01:48 PM
#20
So you gained about 8 whp.... Thanks for at least posting some results.
Did you perform the 232 whp dyno the same day as the 240 whp dyno? Was the ZZP long tube the only mod you changed between the 2 pulls?
Hmm, looks like you answered my question in psot #18.
Did you perform the 232 whp dyno the same day as the 240 whp dyno? Was the ZZP long tube the only mod you changed between the 2 pulls?
Hmm, looks like you answered my question in psot #18.
Last edited by Staged07SS; 10-27-2011 at 02:15 PM.
10-28-2011, 12:14 PM
#24
Senior Member
3 Pulls before and 3 pulls after. 232 was the only non-heat soak pull. So I had to calculate the non-heat soak pull for the header intall based on the heat soak runs before the install.