SPANKY LS1

iTrader: (24)

I currently have Macs, and am wondering if it would be worth it to go to a longtube header, such as a FLP, Dynatech, or Hooker, for a bolt on car. My car has all of the bolt ons as listed below, how much would I gain in goint from Macs to one ofthe above. Thanks, Shawn

FTRA, K+N, LID, MAF, !EGR, !AIR, MAC/ORP, TP4400, MAFT, ATAP, PORTED TB, LS6 INTAKE, !FERNCO, HPPIII, 160 THERMOSTAT, ASP PULLEYS, ETC.

<img src="graemlins/camaro.gif" border="0" alt="[Chevrolet]" />

Bad Habit Bird

iTrader: (12)

Not much up top but you will notice a lot more low end torque, which is nice for around town driving but not worth much at the track.

TA_2001

a vendor comparison

http://ls1info.com/article.php?sid=189

Paul F

iTrader: (2)

[quote]Originally posted by SPANKY LS1:
<strong>I currently have Macs, and am wondering if it would be worth it to go to a longtube header, such as a FLP, Dynatech, or Hooker, for a bolt on car. My car has all of the bolt ons as listed below, how much would I gain in goint from Macs to one ofthe above. Thanks, Shawn

FTRA, K+N, LID, MAF, !EGR, !AIR, MAC/ORP, TP4400, MAFT, ATAP, PORTED TB, LS6 INTAKE, !FERNCO, HPPIII, 160 THERMOSTAT, ASP PULLEYS, ETC.

<img src="graemlins/camaro.gif" border="0" alt="[Chevrolet]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>


We've done a few of those swaps on the dyno here and there is almost no gain on a stock motor. Jason99TA went from Macs to Grots with a a B1 cam and I think he only picked up like 3-4 peak hp and lost a little down low.

If you already have Macs on the car it's probably not worth switching.

2000SS

[quote]Originally posted by TA_2001:
<strong>a vendor comparison

http://ls1info.com/article.php?sid=189</strong><hr></blockquote>

man nice comparison!!!

Damian

iTrader: (89)

Port out your primaries on the Macs, and have a 3 inch collector welded in. Do those and it will be a waste of money going to longtubes. I only see LT's being worth the extra cash when you're making 550+ rwhp.


Josh

Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

[quote]Originally posted by Damian:
<strong>I only see LT's being worth the extra cash when you're making 550+ rwhp.

Josh</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't know if you saw the thread a week or so ago, but I posted a pic of the dyno graph right after I switched to a set of FLP's from Macs on my T/A w/ the 383. I gained right at 10 RWHP and 10 RWTQ at 7,000, but I also gained 35 RWHP and 40 RWTQ lower in the powerband! <img src="gr_eek2.gif" border="0"> This wasn't an incredibly stout setup IMO. It dynoed 434 RWHP w/ a locked converter, and that's nothing special these days with what's being accomplished w/ heads/cam setups now. I feel that longtubes are worth the cash if you're looking to go with a stout heads/cam package or more. If the car is staying a bolt-on car and you already have the Macs installed, then I wouldn't worry with it. It will be a lot of added cost, time, and effort for a few more HP. Like Paul said, Jason only gained 3-4 RWHP w/ a B1 cam by going to LT's from Macs, but every little bit counts if you're trying to milk all that you can from the car. <img src="gr_grin.gif" border="0">

Jim Mills

It started off as a good article until he got to the SLP product.... It's not a very good article if he can't be bias against them while doing an article like that...

99 Black Bird T/A

iTrader: (4)

Sounds like the MAC design is pretty decent.

[quote]Originally posted by Jim Mills:
<strong>It started off as a good article until he got to the SLP product.... It's not a very good article if he can't be bias against them while doing an article like that...</strong><hr></blockquote>

At least he was honest about his view and with held commenting on SLPs

rick

[quote]At least he was honest about his view and with held commenting on SLPs <hr></blockquote>

yeah, honest in showing his ignorance <img src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" border="0">


anyway, a few month backs, someone had gone from MACS to SLPs and posted the results.

Here are the power increases, going from MACS to SLPs:

RPM TQ HP
2500 5.6 2.7
2750 9.8 5.1
3000 9.5 5.5
3250 7.7 4.8
3500 6.2 4.1
3750 5.7 4.1
4000 5.6 4.2
4250 7.1 5.8
4500 6.8 5.2
4750 9.4 8.5
5000 8.7 8.3
5250 4.2 5.2
5500 0.3 2.1
5750 -4.1 -4.5*
6000 -7.3 -8.4*
6250 -7.3 -8.6*

these particular longtubes make more power than the MACS up to 5750 rpm. Only then do they drop off, but you're already out of rpm by then anyway, seeing that most cars shift at 5900 - 6000.

so longtubes seem to be a bit better at increasing the power 'under the curve'.

[ March 02, 2002: Message edited by: rick ]</p>

Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

[quote]Originally posted by rick:
5750 -4.1 -4.5*
6000 -7.3 -8.4*
6250 -7.3 -8.6*

so longtubes seem to be a bit better at increasing the power 'under the curve'.

<hr></blockquote>

The SLP longtubes seem to be a bit better at increasing the power under the curve but suffer in the upper RPM's. The other LT's would show different results in the upper RPM's. You can thank the spaghetti bends in the SLP headers for that. More bends equal less HP, plain and simple. FWIW, I shift at 6,200 on my stock-internal engine. My engine carried peak HP out to 6,200 on the dyno.

rick

yeah, but when you're racing down the 1/4 mile, do you spend most of your time between 5800 - 6200rpm, or 4500 - 5800 ??? the answer is obvious.

unless you've got a 12 speed, close ratio tranny, you're gonna spend more time under 5800. Power under the curve is important, even more so than peak.

[ March 02, 2002: Message edited by: rick ]</p>