5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

long tubes

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-12-2007, 01:27 PM
  #21  
83gtragtop
5th Gear Member
 
83gtragtop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DTLA, CA
Posts: 4,897
Default RE: long tubes

Ya exactly it is the whole package...which why you have to make the power to deam the LT's worth your $$. The LT's start making power right about where the stock heads and valve train say goodnight. With the way our 5.0's are built from the factory they are built to have a stout bottom end. You need to put a performance exhaust system on the car that complements the engine.
83gtragtop is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 01:35 PM
  #22  
19stang86
1st Gear Member
 
19stang86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 110
Default RE: long tubes

i have had my Macs for 9 months and have no rust at all, but i do live in texas. andwithflowtechs you do get what you pay for. It has to do with getting a good and quality of the product. it like zoom gears or richmond you pay for what you get. so dont knock on nobody because your trying to build flowtechs nuts up just because you got them. I would get hooker mac bbk or some other good company and not just go and buy stuff through jegs because its a good deal
19stang86 is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 01:38 PM
  #23  
19stang86
1st Gear Member
 
19stang86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 110
Default RE: long tubes

and plus when the h pipe costs more than the headers theres something wrong
19stang86 is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 01:39 PM
  #24  
19stang86
1st Gear Member
 
19stang86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 110
Default RE: long tubes

Its like paying for some A$$..... LOL.... you spend 20 you get some head you spend 40 you get some Booty, again you pay for what you get.!!!!!!!
19stang86 is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 01:45 PM
  #25  
mrWilson
 
mrWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 25
Default RE: long tubes

ORIGINAL: 83gtragtop

Hey if you're notmaking 300hp then you really have no business putting
LT's on your car. Read this. http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec...est/index.html
The numbers are a little low because the tests were done on a mustang dyno.
lol. Who cares about peak hp/tq? The avg hp/tq for the shorts in that article is- 136/165, whereas the longs are - 137.9/196 The averages speek for themselves. 31 avg more tq, with a small gain of hp. Peak power is meaningless. Just look at the "dyno" chart. Both are equally lame down low, but the extra power from 4-5500 is very helpful, especially when racing, because thats where you are. The lack of thought in that post is astounding.
mrWilson is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 02:02 PM
  #26  
19stang86
1st Gear Member
 
19stang86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 110
Default RE: long tubes

Mr. Wilson would you pick flowtechsfor your number 1 pick out of everything else? MAC BBK HOOKER ECT?????
19stang86 is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 02:13 PM
  #27  
mrWilson
 
mrWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 25
Default RE: long tubes

ORIGINAL: 19stang86

Mr. Wilson would you pick flowtechsfor your number 1 pick out of everything else? MAC BBK HOOKER ECT?????
Im not horribly familear with the quality of the individual products, but I was just stating that longtubes will be better than shorties. Whatever you get, id suggest getting ceramic coated. I have a set in my truck for a year and they still look like the day they were new. I used a set of hookers in my 85 monte ss that werent coated and they rusted in a month. Dont be affraid of spending more than $200 for headers. Like someone stated, you get what you pay for. The extra 200-300 for quality coated headers will pay dividends in asthetics and longevity in the end. (immagine trying to show off your car with a bunch of rust under the hood)
mrWilson is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 03:08 PM
  #28  
83gtragtop
5th Gear Member
 
83gtragtop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DTLA, CA
Posts: 4,897
Default RE: long tubes

ORIGINAL: mrWilson

ORIGINAL: 83gtragtop

Hey if you're notmaking 300hp then you really have no business putting
LT's on your car. Read this. http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec...est/index.html
The numbers are a little low because the tests were done on a mustang dyno.
lol. Who cares about peak hp/tq? The avg hp/tq for the shorts in that article is- 136/165, whereas the longs are - 137.9/196 The averages speek for themselves. 31 avg more tq, with a small gain of hp. Peak power is meaningless. Just look at the "dyno" chart. Both are equally lame down low, but the extra power from 4-5500 is very helpful, especially when racing, because thats where you are. The lack of thought in that post is astounding.
I'm sorry but work on your long division. The average TQ was 194 for the short tubes...so ya three times the price, three times the effort to get them in all for an average of 2hp and 2ftlbs.
83gtragtop is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 05:09 PM
  #29  
mrWilson
 
mrWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 25
Default RE: long tubes

ORIGINAL: 83gtragtop

ORIGINAL: mrWilson

ORIGINAL: 83gtragtop

Hey if you're notmaking 300hp then you really have no business putting
LT's on your car. Read this. http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec...est/index.html
The numbers are a little low because the tests were done on a mustang dyno.
lol. Who cares about peak hp/tq? The avg hp/tq for the shorts in that article is- 136/165, whereas the longs are - 137.9/196 The averages speek for themselves. 31 avg more tq, with a small gain of hp. Peak power is meaningless. Just look at the "dyno" chart. Both are equally lame down low, but the extra power from 4-5500 is very helpful, especially when racing, because thats where you are. The lack of thought in that post is astounding.
I'm sorry but work on your long division. The average TQ was 194 for the short tubes...so ya three times the price, three times the effort to get them in all for an average of 2hp and 2ftlbs.
193, but still, your right, I must have missed a number. Still couldnt convince me that lts are better, because obviously they have a 2/2 avg gain over the shorties in stock form, and according to you when you hit the magic 300# they give gains in leaps and bounds. Sarcasam aside they will be better once you ad more work to the vehicle, especially if you talk forced induction and more agressive heads. Why pay for shorties when you could wind up needing them in the end anyways. No one should complain about doing the work. Its a car, its not a scratch off lottery. Your going to be doing work. Lifting the motor isnt a big deal. Try putting longtubes on an lt1 fbody, or a 4v 4.6 those are b**ches.
mrWilson is offline  
Old 11-12-2007, 05:50 PM
  #30  
83gtragtop
5th Gear Member
 
83gtragtop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DTLA, CA
Posts: 4,897
Default RE: long tubes

193, but still, your right, I must have missed a number. Still couldnt convince me that lts are better, because obviously they have a 2/2 avg gain over the shorties in stock form, and according to you when you hit the magic 300# they give gains in leaps and bounds. Sarcasam aside they will be better once you ad more work to the vehicle, especially if you talk forced induction and more agressive heads. Why pay for shorties when you could wind up needing them in the end anyways. No one should complain about doing the work. Its a car, its not a scratch off lottery. Your going to be doing work. Lifting the motor isnt a big deal. Try putting longtubes on an lt1 fbody, or a 4v 4.6 those are b**ches.
Well 193.6 so i rounded. But ya if you know that you are going to do h/c/i in the future or forced induction then ya definetly. Ow ya I helped my buddy put LT's on his '03 Mach so been there done that.
83gtragtop is offline  


Quick Reply: long tubes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:26 AM.