# Just got the JBA shorties!



## greaser32002 (Mar 6, 2006)

Hey, I just put them in and went around the block a couple of times. They seem to breethe better, but does anyone else have them? What are your thoughts on them? How did your goat react?


----------



## VernLaw (Aug 3, 2007)

I am still learning about these cars, but from what I hear you do not see much change until you go to a long tube header and get a tune.. Most of the time the advertised short tube headers do not mention any power gains. 

There may be some advantage in heat transfer if they are better materials than stock. I noticed my engine bay seems WAY hotter than any of the 'stangs I had in the past.


----------



## GM4life (Mar 18, 2007)

greaser32002 said:


> Hey, I just put them in and went around the block a couple of times. They seem to breethe better, but does anyone else have them? What are your thoughts on them? How did your goat react?


I just installed mine about three weeks ago. I got the Ti ceramic ones, big differance in engine bay temps. THe car cools off alot quicker than the iron ones did, my car seems to pop more on decel more than usuall, and it seems to rev more easly than before too.


----------



## greaser32002 (Mar 6, 2006)

gm4life said:


> I just installed mine about three weeks ago. I got the Ti ceramic ones, big differance in engine bay temps. THe car cools off alot quicker than the iron ones did, my car seems to pop more on decel more than usuall, and it seems to rev more easly than before too.


Yah, I've noticed that. 
I just ordered a pair of high flow cats I'll have to weld in place. Hopefully then I'll have a unrestricted exhaust system. Has anyone else done this already? What did you think about the performance gains?


----------



## GM4life (Mar 18, 2007)

greaser32002 said:


> Yah, I've noticed that.
> I just ordered a pair of high flow cats I'll have to weld in place. Hopefully then I'll have a unrestricted exhaust system. Has anyone else done this already? What did you think about the performance gains?


It's hard to tell, even if I gained 10-15 hp a V8 like ours you can't tell all that much. I'll get a better gain with midpipes too because I only have like 2-2 1/4 inch mids, I think yours is alittle larger. Your highflow cats should help out some too.


----------



## 1gto (Dec 3, 2006)

*Shorties*

U should just buy high flow cats mid pipe from JBA they bolt right up no welding. I installed the complete set up. With no tune my #s were 348 after tune & install 381.


----------



## socal gto (Mar 10, 2006)

Hey George I have the jba shorties, but with catless mids and a exhaust with magnaflow parts. When I had it on the dyno the tuner showed me stock runs on other cars since I dynoed modified and with that stuff I was 40hp over stock.


----------



## kaos2be (Apr 28, 2006)

*jba catted mids*

if interested I have catted JBA mids NIB.


----------



## LOWET (Oct 21, 2007)

*shorties*



greaser32002 said:


> Hey, I just put them in and went around the block a couple of times. They seem to breethe better, but does anyone else have them? What are your thoughts on them? How did your goat react?



I had JBA Shorties on my car along with a magnaflow cat back. The system worked very well and I had no issues or problems. You will hardly feel the seat of the pants difference in power between the short on long tube on the street. But recently I installed a big cam in my car and the speed shop told me the shorties were a little too restrictive to take full advantage of the cam so I switched to long tubes. But in your case, if your engine has no internal mod changes the short headers are fine


----------



## greaser32002 (Mar 6, 2006)

socal gto said:


> Hey George I have the jba shorties, but with catless mids and a exhaust with magnaflow parts. When I had it on the dyno the tuner showed me stock runs on other cars since I dynoed modified and with that stuff I was 40hp over stock.


Hey Daniel, heres what my car did last Friday:










Not as good as I hoped, but not too bad either. I should've dynoed the car when I 1st got it.:shutme


----------



## LOWET (Oct 21, 2007)

*Jba*

Remember you ran your car on a Dyno Jet.. Dyno Jets are known to give higher readings then other Dynos because they use a free wheeling system with no restriction and not much allowance for power train parasatic losses. With a Dyno Jet you will usually get about a 10 percent higher RWHP reading compaired to a Mustang dyno which allows for full rolling weight, power train HP lose and Aero drag lose and a host of other items.


----------



## bondosGTO (Sep 5, 2007)

LOWET said:


> Remember you ran your car on a Dyno Jet.. Dyno Jets are known to give higher readings then other Dynos because they use a free wheeling system with no restriction and not much allowance for power train parasatic losses. With a Dyno Jet you will usually get about a 10 percent higher RWHP reading compaired to a Mustang dyno which allows for full rolling weight, power train HP lose and Aero drag lose and a host of other items.


no offense when you dyno all you want is rwhp and rwtq. who gives a crap about rolling weight, aero drag loss? UNLESS you are trying to simulate the 1/4 mile. and yes, a dyno takes into consideration "power train loss". look, it has to deal with a full exhaust restrictions (aka friction loss), tranny loss, drive line loss, IRS loss, and unsprung weight power loss, it takes a lot of tq, to get those heavy rims, tires, brake rotors moving. and also every one who dyno's a car does it slightly differently. the only way we will be able to all get close to numbers is if, every state goes and calibrates the dyno's to the "deparment of weights and measure's specs". and i think legally for a dyno shop to "sell" their services they might need a sticker simular to what fuel pumps have to certify that it has been "calibrated". also, every motor is a little different, i remember the LT5's, some motors dynoed between 380-420hp from the factory, their is so many variables. just my $0.02 worth.


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

LOWET said:


> Remember you ran your car on a Dyno Jet.. Dyno Jets are known to give higher readings then other Dynos because they use a free wheeling system with no restriction and not much allowance for power train parasatic losses. With a Dyno Jet you will usually get about a 10 percent higher RWHP reading compaired to a Mustang dyno which allows for full rolling weight, power train HP lose and Aero drag lose and a host of other items.


How does it account for areo drag loss?



bondosGTO said:


> no offense when you dyno all you want is rwhp and rwtq. who gives a crap about rolling weight, aero drag loss? UNLESS you are trying to simulate the 1/4 mile. and yes, a dyno takes into consideration "power train loss". look, it has to deal with a full exhaust restrictions (aka friction loss), tranny loss, drive line loss, IRS loss, and unsprung weight power loss, it takes a lot of tq, to get those heavy rims, tires, brake rotors moving. and also every one who dyno's a car does it slightly differently. the only way we will be able to all get close to numbers is if, every state goes and calibrates the dyno's to the "deparment of weights and measure's specs". and i think legally for a dyno shop to "sell" their services they might need a sticker simular to what fuel pumps have to certify that it has been "calibrated". also, every motor is a little different, i remember the LT5's, some motors dynoed between 380-420hp from the factory, their is so many variables. just my $0.02 worth.


:agree


----------

