headers anyone?

is anyone using headers on their third gen and if so which ones?
mine has a 350 instead of the stock 305.

anyone got a link or advice?
thanks

edlebrock TES, flows better, sounds better, and still keeps it emissions friendly. :thumbsup:

well the smog pump has been removed by the previous owner.
i would like to reatain my O2 sensor if possible

You need to retain the o2, no way around that one. the bung is on the y-pipe and ready.

but what about the smog pump.
i dont have it.
everything having to do with a smog pump on that car is gone.
can i get a suggestion of headers that will work and dont have piping for a smog pump?
(i dont like the looks of capping it off, but i know thats a possibility.)

also, how much harder will it be to change sparkplugs with headers?
as i understand it, shortys make it damn near impossible and full lengths will make it possibly easier depending on how they are made.

links?

SLP stainless headers...love em.

What is the purpose of headers? Making horsepower... "Shorty" headers are not for power production, but for ease of installation and bragging rights. Full-length headers make power. Hooker is the best for anything "production". Mad Dog is another brand of high quality, power-producing headers. Certain compromises may be necessary for ground clearance and exhaust systems.

What ever brand you choose, get them "uncoated" and have a professional coating shop (not a header company) coat them with a thermal barrier. We use Thermal Tech in Hopewell, Virginia, but there are others. Jet Hot and Swain come to mind. The cermaic coatings provided by header companies does not hold up over time. The "good stuff" does.

Jim

What is the purpose of headers? Making horsepower... "Shorty" headers are not for power production, but for ease of installation and bragging rights. Full-length headers make power......

Jim


not really true. depending on application the long tubes can make more power, but it varies. You can loose power with long tubes, depending on what you define as power. long tubes can boost top end hp, which most people will never use, at the cost of low end torque which everyone uses on a daily basis.

i have edelbrock TES headers on my IROC, and i can happily attest that there was a huge seat of the pants difference in the power underfoot. i would estimate (with a full catback and high flow converter) at least a 30hp increase with the small diameter (around 1.5in) shorty headers i installed. Thats with everything else on the engine bone stock.

to say that only long tubes are for power and shorties are for bragging rights, is kinda like saying you have to have a 800cid mountain motor to have actual power, and anything less is just for bragging rights. and in reference to a daily driven vehicle is arguably bad advice.

all that being said, i strongly support the edelbrock TES headers for your application, if the A.I.R. tubes really annoy you that much, talk to edelbrock and see if they have a part number for a set without them, and if worst comes to worse, cut them off and have the holes welded shut.

just my :2cents:

so you recommend edelbrock tes shorties?

p.s.
you wouldnt have any connection with blownalcoholboy would you?
i remember he had a similar looking avatar and was into camaros...

so you recommend edelbrock tes shorties?

p.s.
you wouldnt have any connection with blownalcoholboy would you?
i remember he had a similar looking avatar and was into camaros...

um.... yup, i recommend the edelbrock tes headers. pretty sure i covered that.


as for blownalcoholboy, the name sounds familiar, from back when i was a mod on here, but we are two different people, dont tell me he was using my avitar while i was away????

Headers are designed to separate the exhaust pulses from each other. By tuning the soundwave to a given point, one can enhance the peak power point in any engine. It isn't a matter of "flow", though a bit of consideration is made there.

Sound travels at a given speed, approximately 735 MPH. When the cylinder fires, it makes a soundwave. That wave "bounces" around until the exhaust valve opens. It jumps out and travels down the tube to the collector. When it hits the air behind the collector, it rebounds (or bounces back). It then travels back through the cylinder, up the intake tract, hits the throttle body and bounces back again. THERE'S where the biggest gains from headers come from. The intake "charge" actually rides the soundwave back in, helping to pack the cylinder a little tighter than it could on its own. The primary tube also reduces the amount of absolute pressure in the exhaust, helping the "scavenging" effect.

All that being said, BECAUSE sound travels at that given speed, the shorter the header primary tube, the faster the wave bounces back and forth. As it also takes time (in clock time, not degrees) for the mixture to travel through the runners, the flame to propegate and the exhaust to scavenge, the longer the header, the better the performance at LOWER engine speeds. The shorter header will improve high-end performance.

89IROC,

As your car has a complete exhaust system, the performance of the headers involved aren't as pronounced or significant as with a system that's "open". The Edelbrock system IS a good one. An X-pipe always makes good power for a streeter. However, what you have said is backwards as far as header length versus power production. "Shortie" headers were unheard of until AFTER the Mustangs of the mid '80s began coming from the factory with them. They ARE much easier to install in most applications, and many choose them based on that. Ford used them because they realized they were much cheaper to manufacture than high-flow cast manifolds, and would outlive the warranty period. In back-to-back tests at Virginia Motorsports Park year-before-last, using a '98 RS with LS-1, installing Hooker headers gained .2 seconds and about 4 MPH over the factory headers with a small extension attached, no cats, no mufflers, no other changes.

Have you taken your car to the track? I ask this because I have MANY customers that use the "seat of the pants" meter without verifying anything under real conditions. It is often very deceptive. Many years ago, a friend owned a '69 Road Runner, 383 car. It had a 4-speed and 3.90 gears. It would fling you back in the seat. Quite impressive to both ride in and drive. I owned a '70 GTO Ram Air car at the same time. If you drove his and then mine or vice versa, you would SWEAR, the Dodge would blow the Pontiac into the weeds BAD. At the track, the RR went 14.40s all day. Not bad for a stocker... The Judge went 13.60s the same afternoon at the same track. Even BETTER for a stocker. Of course, if you watch Muscle Car TV, you think the Dodges run better and the Pontiacs don't run that well. This is WHY there are tracks. This is why we race the races, just like why the Patriots are going to have to PROVE they can beat the Giants. As a Raider fan, I'm rooting for the underdog. I really like Don Shula, too, so another reason to root for the Giants...(:-

My point here is to be aware that your measurements may or may not be accurate. I learned this in the early '70s when racing the streets of SoCal. My 13 second GTO beat a WHOLE BUNCH of 12 second Camaros and Mustangs. Why? Because I had been to the track and raced the car. I KNEW what it took to get a small block into the 12s in those days, and they didn't. They "assumed" their cars were faster because they had read the magazines. Magazines lie too, you know... Or they stack the deck for what ever test they're performing. The only REAL proof is on the track. Your butt can and will lie to you!

This is not intended to invalidate your statements, just to clarify that there are more factors at work here than you're considering. Building high performance engines is a lot more complex than it may appear.

Jim

im gonna have fun with this when i get back, right now i have to go to aikido :evillol:

I really like my pacesetter monza's, best sound ever, plus a really good gain of output on my engine.

As I was driving home last night, I realized I had left out a "key word" that makes it all come together. That is: "resonance". The peak power point will occur at the point of resonance, where all the sound waves and vacuum signals are "in time". By moving the length of either the primary tube or collector, one can "adjust" the peak. No doubt, you've seen "adjustable" headers on certain race cars (Indy cars are a good example, as the exhaust system is in plain sight). This is the purpose.

89IROC,

You can all the fun with it you like. Whether or not you agree is of no concern, as this information comes directly from automotive engineering classes. I was even reading an old collection of Smoky Yunik's "Track Tech" column from Circle Track Magazine in the early '80s, and he described it to another doubter in a similar manner. I may not be in Smokey's league, but I am an educated professional in this business.

As for the seat-of-the-pants "meter", post track info to back up your claims. I have. And I mean REAL info, not something you glean out of a magazine or from another thread or site. YOUR CAR!

Jim

ohhh, I know I don't want to get in the middle of this, but maybe as a clarification.... Here goes nothing :(

In comaprison to the bulky stock AIR mamifolds, there is a bit of a improvement with the TES, while still remaining emissions legal. I'm not going to try and guestimate any numbers on how much "power" was freed up. Just overall, there is an improvement over stock.

I will say that as far as numbers go, I am contemplating doing just that when I begin to swap parts from my Z28 (RIP) to the stock GTA. I plan to do (funding permitting) a base line 'run' in stock then another run after each step to dtermine hp/tq gains. And one of the first ones will be the TES manifolds.

WrightZ28,

The info provided is relating to making power with headers. I have no doubt, the TES system is better than the stock system. And a full length system skews the results from header installation, as well. When discussing headers specifically, it is generally accepted that the engine will be run with open exhaust when trying to make max power.

FWIW

Jim

Ok, to start, the whole "seat of the pants" measurement was given, because i havent taken the car to the track, otherwise, i would have posted times. My experience and knowledge about cars in general, and small block chevy's is not in question on this forum, so im not going to justify myself and sound like a braggart, suffice it to say, that i also know what i am talking about.

Now, It is true that "tuned" headers aim to sync the exhaust pulses to aid in evacuating each cylender on the exhaust stroke, but not all headers are "tuned", that includes shorties and long tubes. And yes, this all does operate on the principle of the speed of sound, and the stack of air moving at that speed up and down the tubes. As for flow... it is very important as the flow rate of the tubes has a major impact on backpressure in the exhaust which impacts the volumetric efficiency of the engine, you can tune the length of your headers till youre blue in the face, but if the primary pipes have the diameter or soda straws, youre not making any power, because you have little to no flow. by the same token, you can over scavenge the cylinders with pipes that are too large, and cause a low flow condition. so size of the pipes and their flow rate cannot be ignored.

Now in reference to sonic harmonics in tuning the engine, i believe you are a bit confused. The harmonic in the exhaust does not impact resonance tuning of the intake track. theres a little something in the way called valves.

Intake tuning by resonance was first experimented with by the "ram chargers" who worked for mopar back in the sixties. They found that the length of the intake runner would cause a supercharger like effect at a certain rpm, this is caused by airflow moving down the intake runner, to the cylender, when the intake valve closed, air would "stack up" and you would get a pocket of air right against the valve, that was denser than athmospheric pressure, this pocket would "bounce" off the intake valve, and move back up the intake track at the speed of sound, and when it hit the plenum, it would "bounce" back towards the valve and the resultant vacuum it left behind. By tuning the intake, you could time this pulse so that the dense pocket of air was just about to hit the intake valve when it opened, the resulting dense air charge being shot into the engine would cause a signifigant boost in volumetric efficiency, but only within a very small window of rpm operation.

Exhaust tuning, is a seperate animal, you arrange the exhaust pipes, so that they meet up at points where the previous exhaust pulse (which would be dense, compressed gas, would be passing just in front of the next one, in essence the previous gas pulse "pulls" the next one along due to its momentum. You do this to avoid all the gas pulses arriving at the same time at the same point in the exhaust and creating a "choke point" that would limit exhaust FLOW. yup, that critical point.

So your understanding of the idea of "ram charging" was correct, however you were a bit confused on to the components of the engine that effect it. It is impossible for the exhaust pulse to effect the intake, because the exhaust valve closes while the exhaust is still exiting the cylinder, and the intake valve opens after the exaust valve closes (except in very lumpy race cames that have to deal with overlap due to extreme high rpm operation). If neither valve is open at the same time, you are looking at what is in effect a plug in the system, that would not allow exhaust to travel back up the intake track. this is why we have EGR systems.

I really dont know what to tell you regarding the shortie headers operating better at high rpms, vs the long tubes, because it goes against everything i have ever seen in engine building. my uncle drag races, builds race engines, his friend builds racing boat engines, ive been spinning wrenches since i was 8, and am also a mechanical engineering major. with a minor in aerospace.

the speed (edit - frequency) at which the sound pulse goes back and forth within the pipe really has no effect on anything, except how long the pipe will be if you want the pulse to arrive at the valve at a certain rpm.

Now, in regards to my car, im afraid i may have confused you with my use of the term "complete exhaust system". i do not have an X-pipe, or true duals, i drive a third gen, which limits me to a single pipe. I have TES headers, into a high flow 3in cat, and a 3in american thunder exhaust system with a single pipe to a single muffler and dual outlets, just like the factory put on. I can trust my seat of the pants measurement, because im not trying to determine the exact trap speed or E.T. of the car, im saying i drove it before with stock manifolds for a period of time, i did the swap, and after driving it, could feel a very noticeable difference. The car was faster after the swap to a degree that i could very well feel. Your argument implys that if i were to drop an 8-71 blown 468 big block between my frame rails, i would have to take it to the track to "prove" it was faster, because my butt might lie to me. Probly the only way that setup would be slower is due to a lack of traction. Now, if i wanted to say how MUCH faster it was, i would need to go to the track and have before and after runs.

To that end, i will retract my statement that it felt like a 30hp increase, as i will admit, despite having alot of experience driving cars before and after modifications, and driving cars of different power levels, my butt is not a dyno, and i really have no basis for that numerical figure. But i can tell you the car was conciderably faster with the headers installed.

As far as your comparison of the dodge to the pontiac and how much faster the dodge felt than the pontiac, but the fact that you still won, has more to do with power curve, and the way the engine makes power. you could make the same comparison of a hemi cuda vs a z28 camaro with a DZ302. off the line the hemi would feel like it would eat that "tiny" V8 alive no questions asked. in fact the 302 was often described as being anemic off the line, however, once that 302 rev'd up to 8000rpm it pulled hard on its own right, and the two were actually quite well matched at the track. with the hemi being slightly faster if i remember correctly.

but i digress, this is a different discussion for a different thread.

my point here, is to agree that seat of the pants measurements are hardley scientific, but i have seen a man with enough experience that he used an impact gun to set the torque on a pinion nut, and when i checked it with a torque wrench he was spot on, so there is something to be said for experience. And i also have driven enough cars to be able to feel a signifigant difference in power from adding something like headers and exhaust.

also, just because my first post wasnt a thesis regarding the subject at hand, dosnt mean im not concidering all the factors at work, it means i didnt feel the need to launch into a complete explenation of them all. And i am very well versed in the design and construction of high performance engines.

-erik

I won't step in (and don't really care to) on such an involved discussion, but I will say that it is proven fact that shorties generally produce better peak power numbers in the lower rpm range and higher torque numbers. Long tubes produce better power in the high rpm range and produce higher horsepower (not torque). Lastly, shorties are more than marketing ploy... they offer very significant performance gains over stock cast iron manifolds.

I won't spend much time on this, but if you would like me to provide independent test results (dyno) and also manufacturer results, I can. It's proven fact. (obviously different engine combos react differently, but this is most often the case.)

Also, no one knows everything, but having been around here for many years, I can attest to 89IROC's knowledge. There are several of us who are aware of the deep technical aspects of performance and go well beyond the typical shadytree mechanic.

Also (contributing to the original question), I have Headman shorties on my third gen. I did the V6-V8 swap, so I dont know if you O2 sensor location is any different, but the O2 comes well after the header so it wasn't a big deal to reuse it.

It was a simple cut of both sides, weld-in the collectors, and connect the collectors to the new headers. Since the O2 came later in the piping it was not affected.

As with any tpyical header install, its a pain to tighten the last header bolt on the passenger side (much easier with the engine out). My headers are designed for angled spark plugs, and its no big deal. 1 or 2 are a little more difficult to get out, but nothing really significant. Being smart and using the right tools makes it simple.

oh almost forgot about the spark plug issue, there is a tool you can buy on ebay, or at least you used to be able to, or you can make one yourself, makes life a helluva lot easier.

get a 5/8in socket with a 3/8 inch square hole for a ratchet, but with a hex head on the outside, im not sure of a part number off the top of my head. you cut half the length of the socket off, and drill the center out to a larger size, i dont know off the top of my head, the bigger hole lets the spark plug stick through the center, and you can put a wrench on the hex head to break the spark plug loose, i think mine is a 3/4 size hex on the outside of the socket.

worth its weight in gold after the header install.

oh and instantkevin, appriciate the ego stroking ;) feel free anytime ;)

I'm not confused. The valves ARE open at the same time in EVERY automotive engine. It's the "overlap" period you speak of. Older design high performance cams had more overlap than current thinking. But current thinking still includes it. The scavenging effect relies COMPLETELY on the overlap period. If there was none, there would be none... In a supercharged application (or turbo or any other "positive pressure" method), overlap is kept to an absolute minimum to prevent pumping raw mixture out the exhaust. But even they have SOME overlap.

This was not intended to start an "I know more than you do" debate. I don't care what you know. I care what is propegated to the general public, and how confusing many people see issues like this. I know what I know, and am very secure in it. It has served my customers well for many, many years (more than 30). I'm not a shadetree or a hobbyist. I do it for a living.

Lastly, there are many more engine families out there than small block Chevy. What works for one, may or may not work for another. Having been to many races, pro and ammetuer, I have yet to see a real hot race car with shortie headers on it. All the small block guys I support run full-length, and some WILL spend the money to have true "equal length" primaries made to fit their car.

Bantering about this is counterproductive. Suffice it to say, when you have a full exhaust system, headers won't do what they're supposed to do, nearly as well as they do when "open". So we're just sitting here beating a dead horse.

PAX

Jim

i will respect a truce.

if we go all the way back to the beginning, my whole objection to the post you made, was that shortie headers were ineffective, and long tubes were the best way to make power.

in your last post, you say that all "real" race cars youve seen run long tubes, well that makes sense, because as ive stated, long tubes make power at high rpms, where race cars run. My argument against them is that he is driving a street car, which will probly NEVER see those rpms, and the shortie headers would produce a powerband much better suited to his application. Which is why i supported the install of the shorties.

and as for peak power with or without a full exhaust, there actually have been dyno runs, where the lack of an exhaust reduced backpressure too much, and when the full exhaust was installed, they picked up a few ponies. not all engines mind you, but in street applications there have been engine setups that responded well to a bit of backpressure.

so aside from a few points of disagreement, were actually saying the same thing, its just that youre writing from a race car perspective, and im writing from a street car perspective, or at least thats how it looks to me.

nothin wrong with some spirited debate :popcorn:

Truce accepted.

I must say our perspectives aren't exactly as you say, though. While I AM talking about race cars, true, I am also talking about street cars. I suppose the biggest difference is I'm not trying to maintain the entire catalyst system and work within the confines of stock replacement. Sometimes we stray from the beaten path...

Jim