in this case a thing or 3

Richard knows a thing or two because he's seen a thing or two.

@@krazykraka777 Westech Performance, bum ba bum bum bum ba bum

😂

A thing or two a day keeps a thing or two at bay

Would love to see heat proof coating on stock manifold or wrapped headers with heat proof coated combustion chambers could do for efficiency.

That’s 50 hp dude if you want to be totally stock appearing the 50 hp loss from the stock cast manifolds vs the headers is not bad at all

Good to know. Makes it worth it. I have a LQ4 block, with a cam. Doing speed engineering long tubes.

Long tube headers also sound awesome.

i agree, never will i prefer stock over longtubes, never..

The Chrysler max wedge exhaust manifolds are really close to a header. Nicks Garage did a dyno test with them versus regular manifolds and I think they were 30hp better and less than 10hp off the long tube headers.

@@bcbloc02 I saw that test too. And you can tell by looking at them they are good units. Pontiac had some Super Duty manifolds in the early 1960's that looked like cast long tube headers and they were made from aluminum to boot. I bet they were pretty good too but I've never seen a test on them.

I agree!! It's not worth the wasted money, time and headaches buying/using fancy headers to gain a couple of horsepower!!

I have a 2002 Avalanche, stock 5.3, and I added a Whipple SC that makes 6 psi boost. I put long tube headers on it and they were nothing but trouble. First, the headers for the truck do not have tubes that lay neat and tidy like his dyno headers. They have tubes that loop upward and make contact with the LS ign wires, forcing you to solve that problem. Then they make access the spark plugs more difficult. And they have a clearance issue with the 4x4 front pinion. And they crowd the starter, making it more prone to heat failure and more difficult to change out when it fails. They were not worth it. I now have a little more cam in it, very mild, stock idle with .050" more lift than stock. The 706 heads have been CNC ported and the chambers polished & cc'd, still the same Whipple SC. I now have the stock exhaust manifolds back on and I will install a good performance exhaust system behind the stock manifolds. I am looking forward to fewer under-hood problems and I don't mind if there is a small HP penalty. The engine runs well, BUT unfortunately I can't drive it right now because the engine has to come back apart ... apparently Comp Cams has sold me a bad set of lifters and they clack like mad after the engine warms up. Quiet on cold start but excessive lash noise gradually comes in as it warms past 180 degrees.

Very true! malaise era cars had the worst exhaust systems ever just a plain dual exhaust system begins at 20 or more even a better air filter would add a few hopefully you would be lucky enough to have a four barrel.

@@bigboreracing356 I'm 63, retired, and I put ~ $30K into a frame-off restoration on the truck since 3 years ago. No regrets, it's been fun but the next time the engine comes apart it's getting stock GM lifters instead of Comp Cams. When you grow up you might rethink stamping emojis all over what you write.

@@bigboreracing356 I never would have guessed.

My bad

On the 5.0 mustang the long tube would help alot. The intake ports were poor and the scavenging would help fill the cylinder on the overlap.

LONG TUBES ARE BETTER EVERYWHERE

@@richardholdener1727 They'll definitely fit in the Jeep. There may be clearance issues on the Bel Air lol

Yeah, and imagine the headaches they would save on a lot of swap installs!!

IS THE CHANGE IN POWER FROM THE TIMING?

@@richardholdener1727 Not really. I ran E85 on a stock engine with cast manifolds mainly to test the knock limits of E85 and found MBT was 23, 24ishº virtually as stock, stock is 22º The headers changed the point of MBT. Oh and as for the E85 I saw no knock even to 40º. With ULP it would knock only about 2º past the factory settings with cast manifolds. So the factory cast manifolds were knock limited and MBT pretty much. With headers the MBT moved up and the knock limit moved up even more which gave much more safety margin, therefore no longer knock limited allowing MBT to be well enough below the knock limit. It would seem with these combos they behave very differently.

@@3800S1 I'd wager a big bet it's going to vary based on the engine - particularly the header design. Stock LS headers flow & scavenge very well, while I've seen many other engines that had headers that were huge restrictions. I certainly wouldn't think an original 1954 SBC would come close to 10lb-ft of a modern race header. Turbo guys consistently have made >1000hp (750kW) to the wheels with stock LS truck headers - and have track times that indicate it's not just a bunch of high-reading dynos.

THNX

Or a test with the new Hooker cast iron manifolds for the SBC.

done that many times-same type of gains

It's similar. They've done that comparison often. 0

flow is not what makes power on the headers vs manifolds-that would be scavenging

@Richard Holdener - what you meant to say is "[bench] flow is not [necessarily] what makes power...". Had you said that, you'd be correct. As stated, however, it's quite wrong. Flow is literally what makes power. The power of any internal combustion engine is most closely related to its flow rate. Better scavenging IS LITERALLY better flow. It is an increase in volumetric efficiency, caused by the low pressure left behind by exhaust pulses. True, you you can have a header that "flows well" on the bench, but is crap for your engine... but that's because the bench doesn't "flow" like your engine, and your engine isn't "flowing" as well with those particular headers. All other parameters kept relatively the same (fuel, compression, timing, bore, stroke, etc...), scavenging increases horsepower because you are decreasing resistance through the exhaust stroke, and increasing volumetric efficiency as the piston slows to TDC and transitions into the intake phase.

there are cam videos up on 5.7L Hemis

Yep, been watching, just not sure of what I'm hearing, lol

i have an 09 P71 that i'm about to put Maximizer/OBX headers on, gonna be sweet.. Oh, n cams n other bolt ons..

@@P71ScrewHead I've been down that road with the 4.6 in other crown vics and I was always disappointed. I hope you have a converter and gears on order too. I'm very excited to finally make real power with the 6.2 LS swap.

@@ianm432 Oh yeah, i know what you mean, modding the 2v is more for the love of the 2v than for huge power gains..lol If anyone really wants great amounts of power, everyone'd build big blocks, that'll be my next build, a 632ci BBC/BBF over 800hp n/a.. With power adder looking at over 2k hp.. Edit: forgot to mention that yeah, getting 3.73s n might hold off on a converter for future mod..

@@P71ScrewHead absolutely do not skip the converter. It was the best mod I ever did on my 2011. Better than the 5spd swap on my 2003

@@ianm432 what stall did you go with?? i have looked into a 2800 stall tho..

Funny, for me every set of headers I've put on were worth it. I even fabricated headers for my camaro one bend at a time because of the unusual motor swap.

what do you have, a 4cy motor?? lol.. Longtube headers always win..

Really? Headers were definitely my favorite mod that I've done to my truck. Huge difference!

@@P71ScrewHead hahah and even on a 4cyl gains are abundant, especially in the midrange

@@randyschmidt19 for sure man, never seen an engine not benefit from longtubes..

Yeah the editing is quite good already but the numbers that flash on the screen could just be placed somewhere on the screen for a short while as they are discussed, like the cam specs listed, and also especially in the dyno charts I would like to see the gains/losses posted as a number somewhere on the screen, so we don't have to go count bars and guess. Engine Masters (motortrend) on KZfaq did some really nice editing on their dyno videos, a full screen break down with the gains posted and each runs maximum numbers.

Go 2 inch

@@FXIIBeaver go 3 inch

@@1flynlow they make 3 inch headers? Does that even fit anything not custom fabbed for it.

@@1flynlow Go 12 inch!

@@Anarchy-Is-Liberty anything over 7 inches is overkill.

Didn't motortend do just that?

@@krisjones1286 I just read that article. Search for Everthing you need to know about hooker small block chevy manifolds. They say if your over 550 hp use headers if your after every last hp.

try Percys next time, never had one leak in years on multiple vehicles

31 lb ft of torque difference is enuf for me to put up with headers...

I agree, also burning up starters isnt worth the trouble. Sure you can wrap it but not worth it for me on the street anyway.

@@coupe50h never had the starter issue... Maybe depends on the application

@@rustinpenner5661 yes indeed, also Coated headers are the way to go, and in most applications, wrap all nearby wiring, even if it's several inches from the tubes. Another thing is plug wires sure do catch alot of abuse, of course there is remedies for that too.

This concept that Richard pushes of being "flow restricted" is flawed. I understand why he does it, it's simplifies things for the average person but it masks the true physics of what's going on here. The engine is a pump, any type of inlet or outlet appendage is going to reduce air flow through the pump as it's a restriction. Might not be a major issue but it's still a factor. Pumping losses from the exhaust system don't go away under any circumstances.

And hooker cast iron manifolds VS stock VS headers

@@venturahwy76 yes!! Good call

go to the junkyard-that is where I get all of mine

Dead giveaway as to the easy big power LS engines make compared to traditional SBC is the lack of 1-5/8" header size!! They don't do anything for the LS motors, except-MAYBE-the 4.8L....

@@milojanis4901 Agreed. I at one time had found a comparison... but damn if I can't find it now. Results being I have 1 7/8 long tubes on my 6.2 Denali.

1 7/8 for my 6.0 2500hd seems to work very well. Only ls i would put 1 3/4 on is a 5.3. And even then 1 7/8 might be better.

@@milojanis4901 yeah, I think the 4.8 would be the only ls to utilize the 1 5/8 headers but I think the exhaust port is bigger that 1 5/8 anyways so it probably wouldn't be any better than stock.

@@HioSSilver1999 I have a 5.3l with a BTR torque cam and I went with the 1 3/4 on it but it is my daily driver too. I think if I went with a stage 3 cam or wilder then the 1 7/8 would probably be better.

also test in 3rd gear

@@richardholdener1727 I wish the tuner did, was declined because I had 2:73s and he was scared the driveshaft would fly out 😞

8-1 collector too. Sounds amazing

Yes I'd like to see this. I don't know the size limitations in the dyno room. I would atleast like richard to make a comment on this.

Engine Masters did a H and X pipe test I think

Please revisit it!!! Love to see you do it

plateau

Do you remember the results?

@@ME-pl4gx it was on one of the engine masters episodes.

one trick most miss with the carbed 300's were the carb was two piece and would still run pretty well if the two large phillips screws that join the parts together were a bit loose.used to use an offset screwdriver to tighten mine regularly , made a difference.

I had lots of trouble with those carbs. I’d rather have a 2 barrel or small 4 barrel or else EFI.

You are so right. That is why I watch these engine experts like Richard. They actually teach you what's going on and why it's good or bad, not just hyperbole from something that someone said 50 years ago and it's been repeated as truth ever since.

but would it be better with an x pipe here rather than the divorced headers?

@@1967davethewave I don't even understand that statement Scavenging is a natural occurrence is going to happen and what you want is to promote better Scavenging I don't know anything about this fifty-year-old whatever nonsense you're talking about building power has always been about math before computers came out you have to be able to literally write down the equation for horsepower

@@1flynlow to be honest with you bro you're you're talking about a full on exhaust system we're even the size of the collector makes a difference

@@rogerowens5669 What? I agree with you and you call my statement nonsense? Are you off your meds today?

Yeah, which boils down to not much at all!!

so no dyno test?

@@richardholdener1727 nope, dont have anyone around to test it.

*4 into 1 *2 into 1

tbss intake manifold?

The breadbox intake which is on Gen 4 LS and Trailblazer are the same and perform better than the Gen 3 Intake. So Gen 3-4-aftermarket MSD Air Force/FAST LSX/R/T

No exhaust manifolds. They were a tight inexpensive option to fit my 4wd s10

@@richardholdener1727 I did however recently get a tbss I take for the lq9 I'm swapping into the truck. Just working on choosing a cam

What is a b16 head? I googled it and Honda motors are showing up in the search.

B15 is the GM Perf crate motor

@@stephenhodge6441 Typo... fat fingers and bad eyes. B15... where "B" is for boost and 15 means 15 lbs. I did some surfing yesterday and found that GMPP makes a few 6 bolt performance heads. You can buy em as cast or CNC machined, but they're expensive. Prices are much higher than aftermarket items from Texas Speed etc.

Shorties always shorties.

I think he covered this in a video somewhere

@@evanc6110 I dont think he has because he said in a livestream recently that he wanted to test ut

In theory, a turbo should like equal length runners with runner lenght being a compromise between response and scavenging (so, most stock and street applications short or even no runners, racing medium to long) but I've never seen different primary tube lengths tested to confirm this.

@@177SCmaro yeah but one you build enough back pressure, it wont actually matter what the tubes are. At least thats what I think

that was almost included

He's got a video out somewhere using cast iron, shorty, and long tubes. I was very surprised to find out that the gains really aren't at all that much, like maybe 4-10hp on average! It's totally made me re-think my future street builds between 400-600hp and all the headaches that are sometimes associated with trying to fit a set of over priced, named brand, leaky junk headers on a vehicle!! Do I really want to spend $350+ dollars, endless headaches, and banging on header tubes to gain 3-6hp? Yeah, probably not!

@@Anarchy-Is-Liberty you have a point esp when your talking about under 400hp engines.

@@Anarchy-Is-Liberty depending on the motor there are often factory exhaust that arent awful.

I think Engine Masters did that

that video is up

STOCK MANIFOLDS TYPICALLY LOSE MORE POWER IN THE LOWER RPM RANGES, WHERE THEY LACK SCAVENGING, THE PORTED RAMS MIGHT FLOW WELL UP TOP

the gains from long tubes are not flow restrictions

Yeh what e said....

I HAVE RUN HEADER TESTS ON THE HEMI

What you gonna do now?

BBC headers can be worth a lot too

Definitely, most definitely

I'm quite sure it would make not much of a difference unless you're making way over 1000hp .

the Holley turbo system is somewhat restrictive (the merge point) after the cross over. A different design with more flow will add power and drop back pressure

Per piston the K24 would be flowing and revving much more.

Nobody makes cams, heads, intake aftermarket performance parts for them, maybe headers, but they aren't known for their toughness, it was designed for the 99 Jeep Grand Cherokee, as a lightweight, torque biased V8. Their internals are weak.

same kind of results

they are short-long tubes work much better

reflected waves (intake and exhaust) are still play on a supercharged motor, the short runners in a typical PD blower intake are not effective in this rpm range (they are tuned for 9000+). they do not work with the header scavenging

if you knew the change in airflow and AF for both sides of the equation and both were linear (might not be the case)

@@richardholdener1727 Thanks for the reply! There’s enough equipment over here for me to simulate what the change in airflow will be, so thanks for the heads up there! I’m gonna give it a shot! I have a 10% overdrive pulley for a 2.4L IHI twin screw supercharger on a 6.2L v8 engine. I’m assuming 11.4% bigger injectors is close enough to make up for it. My next question would be if the clutched pulley on the blower will give me trouble. I think it’s a niche situation at that point, so I’ll have to test it myself.

collector size, shape and length all change the power curve (there is no ideal-except possible for a given combination and designed operating range).

The only time i've seen a flat header collector used was for space limitations. But it would be interesting to compare them on a dyno.

@@richardholdener1727 ,, Thank you for the reply, But does what the material the header is made of matters? (stainless is smoother than carbon steel) ,,Then does the same headers with only the collector shape change only ( yes I know two pipes will be longer) effect the data.

long tubes make more than every other short-style header or cast manifold (even block hugger)

if you listen-there was dyno noise

@@richardholdener1727 again, you're providing great info so don't think I'm trolling. I'd just like to see some full dyno runs.

Not yet!

@@richardholdener1727 have you tested 1 7/8 shorties?

all of that-GM tests and certifies the power output of their stock motors differently-with all accs, full exhaust, fuel air intake, run at 200 degrees with the factory tune

that would be along way off and I can install a Kenne Bell Boost a Pump on an EV Too! PS-I've also sun hybrid vehicles at Bonneville

SCAVENGING STILL WORKS

scavenging still takes place-the big difference might be that the supercharged motor has a very short intake runner length (not in sync with headers)

that video is up