Shorty Headers
04-21-2006, 10:54 AM
#81
Originally Posted by ks my ss
ok mr. big shot car guy that knows all. judging by your post history i would say you dont have any experience at all with cars just from what you read on the net.
im not saying midlenghts are better im just saying that they arent nearly as bad as people make them out to be.
if you are running a big solid roller 355 or 383 or something thats making decent power then yes step up to longtubes but if you want a small to mild setup then both headers will work just fine and there prolly wont be much of a difference between the 2.
im not saying midlenghts are better im just saying that they arent nearly as bad as people make them out to be.
if you are running a big solid roller 355 or 383 or something thats making decent power then yes step up to longtubes but if you want a small to mild setup then both headers will work just fine and there prolly wont be much of a difference between the 2.If we are going to judge by history, then we've got all we need on you in this one thread. Judging by your bass ackwards posts, you have no clue what you are talking about mr. car guy! Yeah, longtubes are similar to shorties on anything but a high hp solid roller lol! This post pretty much sums up your car knowledge mr. post researcher lol!
Last edited by Redneck Z; 04-21-2006 at 11:01 AM.
04-21-2006, 12:13 PM
#82
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
If we are going to judge by history, then we've got all we need on you in this one thread. Judging by your bass ackwards posts, you have no clue what you are talking about mr. car guy! Yeah, longtubes are similar to shorties on anything but a high hp solid roller lol! This post pretty much sums up your car knowledge mr. post researcher lol!
you even agreed with me in the link i posted.
04-21-2006, 12:31 PM
#85
Originally Posted by blkchevyz
not argueing proving.
Proving haha! Now this is getting good!
Why don't you call up some of the sponsors and school them on shorties. Explain to them how much of a waste longtubes are because shorties are just as good. Instead of worrying about smogging my car with longtubes, maybe I should put the JBA's back on lol! 
04-21-2006, 12:50 PM
#87
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok one more time.
we are not talking about ls1s, or 96-97 shorties.
nore have we said shorties are better.
what i've proven is that i gained nothing... 0 nada zip... going from shorties to long tubes.
and if you think my cars just fucked up i'll put it this way
my car dynoed 344 hp 356 torque with common bolt ons and the hot cam no electric water pump.
from what your saying i should of gained what an extra 15 from long tubes... that would be me around 360? thats more then i've ever seen with the same mods.
ok dyno numbers dont mean ****... so now to track times... i ran the same before and after.
now again if you think my car is messed up i was trapping 111... thats pretty common if not high for similar mods. that would be trap speeds around 112-113... i guess thats doable on a light car, not my full weight.
now why dont you do a search on the lt4 hot cam and see what other dyno at and run. bet you wont find anthing in the 360 range with stock heads. and i bet all the numbers will be right along with mine for shorties and long tubes.
again saying that there is no gain at this power level.
we are not talking about ls1s, or 96-97 shorties.
nore have we said shorties are better.
what i've proven is that i gained nothing... 0 nada zip... going from shorties to long tubes.
and if you think my cars just fucked up i'll put it this way
my car dynoed 344 hp 356 torque with common bolt ons and the hot cam no electric water pump.
from what your saying i should of gained what an extra 15 from long tubes... that would be me around 360? thats more then i've ever seen with the same mods.
ok dyno numbers dont mean ****... so now to track times... i ran the same before and after.
now again if you think my car is messed up i was trapping 111... thats pretty common if not high for similar mods. that would be trap speeds around 112-113... i guess thats doable on a light car, not my full weight.
now why dont you do a search on the lt4 hot cam and see what other dyno at and run. bet you wont find anthing in the 360 range with stock heads. and i bet all the numbers will be right along with mine for shorties and long tubes.
again saying that there is no gain at this power level.
04-21-2006, 01:25 PM
#88
TECH Addict
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: TheNew home of the Cowboys
Posts: 2,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LT1 LT's make more power than Shorty's it is an overwhelming and obvious thing. Learn something about cars and engines then come talk. Until then stop making yourself look more uneducated than you alredy have.
04-21-2006, 01:30 PM
#89
this post look fimiliar?
it came from here
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...ghlight=shortys
im not saying that MIDLENGTHS are better than longtubes. i am just saying that they arent as bad as people make them out to be. and again im saying MIDLEGTHS not shorties.
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
I agree. Macs are MUCH better than shorties, and real close performance wise to longtubes, especially over 4000 rpm.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...ghlight=shortys
im not saying that MIDLENGTHS are better than longtubes. i am just saying that they arent as bad as people make them out to be. and again im saying MIDLEGTHS not shorties.
04-21-2006, 01:38 PM
#90
Originally Posted by ks my ss
this post look fimiliar?
it came from here
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...ghlight=shortys
im not saying that MIDLENGTHS are better than longtubes. i am just saying that they arent as bad as people make them out to be. and again im saying MIDLEGTHS not shorties.
it came from here
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...ghlight=shortys
im not saying that MIDLENGTHS are better than longtubes. i am just saying that they arent as bad as people make them out to be. and again im saying MIDLEGTHS not shorties.
We are all aware and probably agree with this. This isn't the debate! We are talking about shorties vs. longtubes, not mid-lengths vs. longtubes...
04-21-2006, 01:42 PM
#91
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
We are all aware and probably agree with this. This isn't the debate! We are talking about shorties vs. longtubes, not mid-lengths vs. longtubes...
04-21-2006, 03:35 PM
#92
Originally Posted by ks my ss
thats what we have been saying, midlenghts, the whole time. sometimes i say shorties/midlegths meaning the 93-95 style headers. the shorties are the 96-97 dual cat headers that suck.
04-21-2006, 04:40 PM
#93
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
Hmmm, all I've been hearing is that shorties are as good as longtubes. I never heard anything about mid-lengths. Mid-lengths are not anything like shorties, and are a different story.
04-21-2006, 05:25 PM
#96
Originally Posted by Redneck Z
Where have you been lol? This whole thread is about shorties vs. longtubes.
when lt1 guys are talking shorties they are usually meaning midlenghts unless they are a dual cat car. i just stated that mid lengths were decent becouse they were brought up
04-22-2006, 03:21 PM
#98
Originally Posted by urbanhunter44
Dude when someone says shorties they mean SHORTIES, when someone says mids they mean MIDS. WTF is the matter with your head?
+1 No matter what car you are talking about shorties are shorties, mids are mids, and longtubes are longtubes. Theres no such thing as shorty/mids and mid/longtubes. A header is either a shorty, mid-length or a longtube. This brings us to the threads title "shorty headers."
