200 dollar headers???
05-26-2011, 08:23 AM
#7
TECH Addict
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Where the Navy tells me to go
Posts: 2,397
Received 106 Likes
on
88 Posts
Interesting. I've always been surprised that there aren't any "shorty" header options for these cars. I've had a 5.0L Mustang for years, and with those the shorties have always kind of been the "entry level" headers, retaining the stock H-pipe and cats. The majority of guys do shorties rather than long tubes - easier to install, cheaper, quieter, more likely to pass smog (sometimes even have CARB EO numbers), etc.
The ones in the ebay ad would take some work to make fit - either modifying/extending the stock cat pipes, or making "track pipes" to delete the cats. I'm not even sure you could make them work based on where the outlet flange is.
The ones in the ebay ad would take some work to make fit - either modifying/extending the stock cat pipes, or making "track pipes" to delete the cats. I'm not even sure you could make them work based on where the outlet flange is.
Last edited by AAIIIC; 05-26-2011 at 02:48 PM.
Trending Topics
05-26-2011, 08:22 PM
#10
Here's the oem manifolds; least for an LS2:
e
They aren't awful for manifolds and you may be just as beneficial to clean up the ports and extrude hone the walls, or something....
The shorties may provide a slight improvement, but just depends on the effort required to adapt a set of universal 'hugger' headers. Remember to factor in the cost of coating too, so by that time may as well get some pacesetter or something, price wise...(unless it has a CARB approval, it will not pass CA smog even though it doesn't move cat). Besides, you're moving the cat anyway with the flange location, so not sure this would be worth it.
What would be cool though is to cut the flange off and lengthen the primaries whatever you can get away with to make it somewhat stock cat location, but without looking at it, probably be easier to design a custom set then.
Short length headers are *generally* not worth much unless you are starting with a really restrictive manifold or maybe on a turbo application, etc. Otherwise, the engine likes the longer primary lengths when talking about noticable gains...
eThey aren't awful for manifolds and you may be just as beneficial to clean up the ports and extrude hone the walls, or something....
The shorties may provide a slight improvement, but just depends on the effort required to adapt a set of universal 'hugger' headers. Remember to factor in the cost of coating too, so by that time may as well get some pacesetter or something, price wise...(unless it has a CARB approval, it will not pass CA smog even though it doesn't move cat). Besides, you're moving the cat anyway with the flange location, so not sure this would be worth it.
What would be cool though is to cut the flange off and lengthen the primaries whatever you can get away with to make it somewhat stock cat location, but without looking at it, probably be easier to design a custom set then.
Short length headers are *generally* not worth much unless you are starting with a really restrictive manifold or maybe on a turbo application, etc. Otherwise, the engine likes the longer primary lengths when talking about noticable gains...
05-26-2011, 11:13 PM
#11
TECH Addict
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Where the Navy tells me to go
Posts: 2,397
Received 106 Likes
on
88 Posts
I thought I remembered the LS6 manifolds being more log-style, but I found some pics here on LS1tech and they're actually not that bad. Pictures here. So, as JNR said, the shorties that prompted this thread probably wouldn't gain you much at all, since the stock manifolds aren't that terrible.
05-27-2011, 08:18 AM
#13
TECH Addict
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Posts: 2,485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought I remembered the LS6 manifolds being more log-style, but I found some pics here on LS1tech and they're actually not that bad. Pictures here. So, as JNR said, the shorties that prompted this thread probably wouldn't gain you much at all, since the stock manifolds aren't that terrible.
05-27-2011, 03:02 PM
#15
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if LSA factory stuff would be a closer match? The pictures look the same as the LS2 ones, but perhaps they are bigger?
05-27-2011, 03:48 PM
#16
TECH Addict
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Posts: 2,485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've attached a pic of the Z06 manifolds that show the D shaped ports. All 3" piping leading from the manifolds.
Last edited by Larry; 05-27-2011 at 04:15 PM.
05-28-2011, 07:22 AM
#17
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the port shape really matters that much. 'Vette people put LS7 manifolds on their LS2's and gain power with no issues from the port shape.
Also you can see in the picture I posted, the LSA doesn't seem to have D-shaped ports on the manifold.
Also you can see in the picture I posted, the LSA doesn't seem to have D-shaped ports on the manifold.
05-28-2011, 07:47 AM
#18
TECH Addict
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Posts: 2,485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are most likely correct, it may not make any or much difference for sure in power but it's the difference in doing things right or not so right. I prefer right!
05-28-2011, 03:21 PM
#19
As far as port shape, I would think it has more to do with whether the flange opening/tube id fully clears the combustion chamber (exhaust) outlet, more than anything. In a perfect world, I would think having a 'D' shape primary that matched the outlet 100%, then transitioned into round would be the best scenario for D-ports, but realistically, so long as the round fully encompassed the port (as in no 'steps' for the exhaust to overcome), it would work fine and probably not worth the (manufacturing) effort, unless you were going for every single last hp.
More importantly though, the primary size and length should be matched for whatever you intend the engine to do, or what scenario you want it to perform its best at and/or what setup you have. Obviously, a hotter cam and bigger displacement, higher in the rpm range would want larger diameter, etc.
However, everything is a compromise. Nobody makes the ideal header anyway, since most all engine compartments are too tight...the absolute best thing would be to have the primary come out straight for a good distance, then gradually bend and have all the lengths the same, coming into the collector just 'so'. Further beyond this, engine timing could come into play, as far as which cylinder fires first, etc...The "Tri-Y" and "step up" design is a good example of a nice design for *some* applications, but not all and not very many manufacturers make that/those designs; not saying those are ideal necessarily for a built LS engine, just using as an example...
Point is, there is a lot more consideration than just some long tubes that look nice if we're talking about a really good, functional header design. Not sure how many of you were into cars several years ago when they had all sorts of headers for the sbc...Many looked similar, but there were some that stood out (as far as performance goes)...Most all of them were better than the really restrictive manifolds (and rest of exhaust) those cars came with, but there was a big difference in say a hooker super comp vs. a hooker competition vs. a blackjack header!
More importantly though, the primary size and length should be matched for whatever you intend the engine to do, or what scenario you want it to perform its best at and/or what setup you have. Obviously, a hotter cam and bigger displacement, higher in the rpm range would want larger diameter, etc.
However, everything is a compromise. Nobody makes the ideal header anyway, since most all engine compartments are too tight...the absolute best thing would be to have the primary come out straight for a good distance, then gradually bend and have all the lengths the same, coming into the collector just 'so'. Further beyond this, engine timing could come into play, as far as which cylinder fires first, etc...The "Tri-Y" and "step up" design is a good example of a nice design for *some* applications, but not all and not very many manufacturers make that/those designs; not saying those are ideal necessarily for a built LS engine, just using as an example...
Point is, there is a lot more consideration than just some long tubes that look nice if we're talking about a really good, functional header design. Not sure how many of you were into cars several years ago when they had all sorts of headers for the sbc...Many looked similar, but there were some that stood out (as far as performance goes)...Most all of them were better than the really restrictive manifolds (and rest of exhaust) those cars came with, but there was a big difference in say a hooker super comp vs. a hooker competition vs. a blackjack header!
