The JBA's Went ON!!!
03-24-2011, 12:42 PM
#1
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 110
The JBA's Went ON!!!
Here's some pics from the install. Before and after. Well, I added a couple underhood shots too hehehe.
With the BMR bracing and the space they gav e me, I did everything from the top. You can see the top part of the BMR K member and polyurethane motor mount in the one pic.
Except for 2 bolts on drivers side and one on pass, these were an easy install job.
BTW, the stock iron headers weighed just over 10 lbs a piece. The JBA's were just under 5lbs a piece.
With the BMR bracing and the space they gav e me, I did everything from the top. You can see the top part of the BMR K member and polyurethane motor mount in the one pic.
Except for 2 bolts on drivers side and one on pass, these were an easy install job.
BTW, the stock iron headers weighed just over 10 lbs a piece. The JBA's were just under 5lbs a piece.
03-24-2011, 02:29 PM
#3
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 110
Hey my East Coast Mustang Brother!
I hate to say this Alec, because as you know I was really just going for the weight reduction, some improvement in exhaust tone perhaps, and the cosmetic improvement under the hood. And you know how I feel about modding our 4.0's N/A and how I'm a big advocate for cai/tune AND gears/tlock before anything else so this is kinda humbling to say an exhaust mod on our 4.0 had a noticeable seat dyno gain.
But, when I drove out for the first real heat cycle, I first noticed the (slightly) louder and deeper exhaust note. Better yet, it's pretty much removed the raspyness at WOT now, and it's only noticeable at all during the initial warmup. Check one! Also, right off the bat they looked good, even after initial blueing of the stainless. Check two! Weight reduction? Check three!
...BUT, I did notice an improvement in throttle response as well as acceleration. I say this because I do enough burnouts regularly to pretty much know in the back of my mind when and at what point the tire barking should stop.
During the intial driving test on my 'test track', the burnouts lasted slightly longer and the barking was substantially louder leaving longer tire patches. That tells me that I must be freeing up a least some amount of HP (and TQ perhaps more so). Again, it pulls harder and the tires definitely bark louder with the increased wheel spin. I gotta stop this because I've been doing more burnouts than usual just to see if it's 'still there' and if I'm simply imagining this. My buddies also notice this difference.
I'm sure it's really a factor of a combination of things, because as soon as I installed the BMR bracing, I also noted improved acceleration and throttle response. When I think about this, it must do with eliminating motor mount compliance and instead the polyurethane mounts allow immediate transfer of flywheel to drive shaft instead of some of that energy going towards motor movement within the cradle?
I hate to say this Alec, because as you know I was really just going for the weight reduction, some improvement in exhaust tone perhaps, and the cosmetic improvement under the hood. And you know how I feel about modding our 4.0's N/A and how I'm a big advocate for cai/tune AND gears/tlock before anything else so this is kinda humbling to say an exhaust mod on our 4.0 had a noticeable seat dyno gain.
But, when I drove out for the first real heat cycle, I first noticed the (slightly) louder and deeper exhaust note. Better yet, it's pretty much removed the raspyness at WOT now, and it's only noticeable at all during the initial warmup. Check one! Also, right off the bat they looked good, even after initial blueing of the stainless. Check two! Weight reduction? Check three!
...BUT, I did notice an improvement in throttle response as well as acceleration. I say this because I do enough burnouts regularly to pretty much know in the back of my mind when and at what point the tire barking should stop.
During the intial driving test on my 'test track', the burnouts lasted slightly longer and the barking was substantially louder leaving longer tire patches. That tells me that I must be freeing up a least some amount of HP (and TQ perhaps more so). Again, it pulls harder and the tires definitely bark louder with the increased wheel spin. I gotta stop this because I've been doing more burnouts than usual just to see if it's 'still there' and if I'm simply imagining this. My buddies also notice this difference.
I'm sure it's really a factor of a combination of things, because as soon as I installed the BMR bracing, I also noted improved acceleration and throttle response. When I think about this, it must do with eliminating motor mount compliance and instead the polyurethane mounts allow immediate transfer of flywheel to drive shaft instead of some of that energy going towards motor movement within the cradle?
03-24-2011, 02:34 PM
#4
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Henry County, Georgia
Posts: 1,636
Nice! I installed my BBK headers on my GT myself as well. Wasnt too bad with the help of my dad (he did more work then me!)
I didnt notice any more power really but the exhaust note change was nice and definitely a few pounds shaved but considering ive added probably 150 lbs im merely offsetting that weight.
I didnt notice any more power really but the exhaust note change was nice and definitely a few pounds shaved but considering ive added probably 150 lbs im merely offsetting that weight.
03-24-2011, 02:41 PM
#5
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 110
If my motor mount theory is correct, then you should be able to gain this benefit from simply swapping out the fluid mounts with polymounts rather than replace the entire K-member with the built in mounts. The only downside of this is you don't gain the benefit of dropping 20lbs off the nose.
Still, a motor mount swap should provide noticeable improvement. Sorry gettin off on a tangent now.
Still, a motor mount swap should provide noticeable improvement. Sorry gettin off on a tangent now.
03-24-2011, 02:44 PM
#6
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 4,256
Very nice! I somewhat feel like I've gotten to the point where it's just nickel and dime hp here and there (besides F/I) so I've been looking into all the options (headers, driveshaft etc). I've even experimented in weight reduction, following your lead. I wasn't expecting much in terms gains eventually swapping out for shorty headers but the more the better. Plus I like the fact that it's not just a one-sided mod with improvements in looks, sound, power, weight...
Which coating did you go with? I'm debating whether it's worth the extra $$ for a better coating or if stainless steel is sufficient
Which coating did you go with? I'm debating whether it's worth the extra $$ for a better coating or if stainless steel is sufficient
03-24-2011, 02:46 PM
#7
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 110
Hey Shadow! Right on bro! I've always been a pickup guy in the past and even then I was never as 'connected' with the vehicle as I am with this darn Mustang!!! Doing the mod installs myself does 2 things for us: 1) We become knowledgeable about how our cars run, are put together, and how to repair/replace broken parts. 2) The money we save not paying someone for labor stays in our pockets so we can put that towards that next part!
03-24-2011, 02:56 PM
#8
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 110
I went with the plain stainless steel. They were 'only' around $314 from Late Model Resto. I guess that's one benefit I'll miss out on and that's keeping the heat in the tubes.
Yep. I'm also at that nickel and dime stage. Speaking of weight reduction, UPR has double adjustable lower control arms with solid aluminum ball end-links for $99. These are made from chrom moly aluminum tubing. I've heard these shave 10lbs versus stock stamped steel and it's all unsprung. If/when I get these I'll weigh them and report back.
Yep. I'm also at that nickel and dime stage. Speaking of weight reduction, UPR has double adjustable lower control arms with solid aluminum ball end-links for $99. These are made from chrom moly aluminum tubing. I've heard these shave 10lbs versus stock stamped steel and it's all unsprung. If/when I get these I'll weigh them and report back.
03-24-2011, 03:38 PM
#9
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 4,256
I went with the plain stainless steel. They were 'only' around $314 from Late Model Resto. I guess that's one benefit I'll miss out on and that's keeping the heat in the tubes.
Yep. I'm also at that nickel and dime stage. Speaking of weight reduction, UPR has double adjustable lower control arms with solid aluminum ball end-links for $99. These are made from chrom moly aluminum tubing. I've heard these shave 10lbs versus stock stamped steel and it's all unsprung. If/when I get these I'll weigh them and report back.
Yep. I'm also at that nickel and dime stage. Speaking of weight reduction, UPR has double adjustable lower control arms with solid aluminum ball end-links for $99. These are made from chrom moly aluminum tubing. I've heard these shave 10lbs versus stock stamped steel and it's all unsprung. If/when I get these I'll weigh them and report back.
