LT Headers: The Truth Behind the Claims?
Racer
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
From: Houston Texas
Originally Posted by EB20003
I agree with most of what you are saying Geneus.
But I was attempting to offer CNB an explanation regarding why people get so upset in the header flap.
If you believe that the LGs might possibly give you 10 extra horses then all well and good. There are people here who believe that having arrows on their radar detector is worth the extra $100.00. And that ram air works. It is their money.
I have been here a long time and I can say that I have never seen any conclusive irrefutable evidence of this. If I am missing something then as a favor to a fellow forum member, please point me in the direction of proof of this.
If the folks at Valentine are going to compare their product against the competition, it is usually not going to be in a public, free of charge, internet forum. It will typically be on their web site or in their own marketing literature.
All I am saying is that it crosses the line when the vendor himself steps into the discussion, or even initiates the discussion, or issues "challenges", or comments on the results a member obtained using another brand of headers in an effort to tout his products at the expense of others. Referring to other products as "Brand K" and such. Implying that another product requires cutting when it does not..... People generally don't like that and this could be part of the reason why the header discussions decline so quickly.
One such "challenge" I recall, would not allow the "testing" to be done in New Jersey, as it was felt that the headers would not get a "fair shake" in Jersey.
If the product is all that then people will buy it on its own merit.
Go to a public internet watch forum and you won't see the folks over there from Rolex, Omega or Patek constantly entering into the discussion telling you why their product is "better" than the competition's. You won't hear them condescendingly referring to someone else's product as "brand x" or other such approaches.
I personally won't do business with a company which wouldl take such an approach. Not even for 10 RWHP and 10 RWTQ.
Consider this. Ever notice how you rarely see a "header war" unless a certain brand of header is discussed. You'll never see a "header war" involving say KOOKS vs Dynatechs, or Dynatechs vsGHLs, or GHLs vs QTP, or FLP vs Dynatech. Its not untill the discussion moves to one specific brand of header that the discussion usually deteriorates.
But I was attempting to offer CNB an explanation regarding why people get so upset in the header flap.
If you believe that the LGs might possibly give you 10 extra horses then all well and good. There are people here who believe that having arrows on their radar detector is worth the extra $100.00. And that ram air works. It is their money.
I have been here a long time and I can say that I have never seen any conclusive irrefutable evidence of this. If I am missing something then as a favor to a fellow forum member, please point me in the direction of proof of this.
If the folks at Valentine are going to compare their product against the competition, it is usually not going to be in a public, free of charge, internet forum. It will typically be on their web site or in their own marketing literature.
All I am saying is that it crosses the line when the vendor himself steps into the discussion, or even initiates the discussion, or issues "challenges", or comments on the results a member obtained using another brand of headers in an effort to tout his products at the expense of others. Referring to other products as "Brand K" and such. Implying that another product requires cutting when it does not..... People generally don't like that and this could be part of the reason why the header discussions decline so quickly.
One such "challenge" I recall, would not allow the "testing" to be done in New Jersey, as it was felt that the headers would not get a "fair shake" in Jersey.
If the product is all that then people will buy it on its own merit.
Go to a public internet watch forum and you won't see the folks over there from Rolex, Omega or Patek constantly entering into the discussion telling you why their product is "better" than the competition's. You won't hear them condescendingly referring to someone else's product as "brand x" or other such approaches.
I personally won't do business with a company which wouldl take such an approach. Not even for 10 RWHP and 10 RWTQ.
Consider this. Ever notice how you rarely see a "header war" unless a certain brand of header is discussed. You'll never see a "header war" involving say KOOKS vs Dynatechs, or Dynatechs vsGHLs, or GHLs vs QTP, or FLP vs Dynatech. Its not untill the discussion moves to one specific brand of header that the discussion usually deteriorates.
Pro
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 514
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by EB20003
I'm not touching that one Something definitely does not sound right about that. I am at 323.8hp/339.6tq with the stock heads, the mods in my signature, and no tune after the KOOKS headers. Thats only 9rwhp/ 5rwtq lower than your car with Patriot 5.3 heads.
And I'm running 3.42s and a 2600 stall to your 3.15s and stock converter.
I'd really like to have my engine tuned again by someone who specializes in these cars, just to see for myself the difference in tunes. The only problem is that I'd have to lay down another $500.00 for the tune and software/VIN license.
Anyway, I have decided not to get worked up about the dyno numbers because it will drive me crazy if I let it. I have a huge SOTP difference, and bottom line is I am happy. When the cam goes in, I'll revisit the whole tuning thing again.
Safety Car
Joined: May 1999
Posts: 4,693
Likes: 10
From: Carefree, Arizona
2017 C7 of Year Finalist
Originally Posted by jers98vet
Those look like average peak gains to me, however what are your torque curves in the low/midrange rpm? That is where lt's usually outshine the stock manifolds. Anyway you now have a great exhaust system to support a bigger cam. 
Header give you torque, not horsepower! 
Also I assume that every vendor measures gains on a bone stock car, so if you already had some mods, your gains would be significantly less than they promise in their shiny brochures. 
Just my 0.02...
Pro
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
From: Santa Clarita Ca
Originally Posted by Sandra Bigwoode
My Z06 pulled 472 rwhp on a Dynojet x 1.15 = 542.8 fwhp which is 134 hp more than stock, but I was not totally happy with the 2nd & last dyno pull.
I think there may have been 10-15 more rwhp available but being a dyno day and lots of cars queued up waiting for their turn, I will have to wait for another dyno day...
Correction factor was Std Day, exhaust was Bassani x-pipe and B&B Bullet 2-tips, fuel was 100 octane mix [70% 93 octane gas + 30% 117 octane Xylene] AFR was 12.5:1 at WOT in 4th gear at 6400 rpm.
Vortech uses SAE correction and I can't remember their dyno type they tested on. But the 138 fwhp gain is their claim on a stock Z06 and my numbers come pretty close to theirs...
When I removed the B&B's due to cabin resonance and re-installed the Ti catbacks, the car seems to rev more freely but it may be placebo effect since I have not dynoed since then. The x-pipe is still on and makes the car much quieter than it was stock, good for street racing...
I think there may have been 10-15 more rwhp available but being a dyno day and lots of cars queued up waiting for their turn, I will have to wait for another dyno day...
Correction factor was Std Day, exhaust was Bassani x-pipe and B&B Bullet 2-tips, fuel was 100 octane mix [70% 93 octane gas + 30% 117 octane Xylene] AFR was 12.5:1 at WOT in 4th gear at 6400 rpm.
Vortech uses SAE correction and I can't remember their dyno type they tested on. But the 138 fwhp gain is their claim on a stock Z06 and my numbers come pretty close to theirs...
When I removed the B&B's due to cabin resonance and re-installed the Ti catbacks, the car seems to rev more freely but it may be placebo effect since I have not dynoed since then. The x-pipe is still on and makes the car much quieter than it was stock, good for street racing...
Tech Contributor
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 32,910
Likes: 2,402
From: Anthony TX
CI 6,7,8,9,11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '08
I had my car dyno tuned to day at J&M Corvettes Manchester CT today.
Here is what I have and how it turned out. I installed Stainless Works Lt 1 3/4 primaries,random tech high flow cat's, 3" X pipe, and Stainless works 3" mufflers on my stock 02 Z06 late last summer. Last Sunday I installed my VARARAM. The only other mods are a hand ported throttle body and throttle body by pass and a smooth coupler.
With just the headers installed on a bone stock 02 Z06, my guess was I gained about 25 HP. 405 stock HP + 25 = 430. The car had a good seat of the pants improvement but I took a DEEP hit in fuel ecomomy! I went from a solid 28-30 MPH highway down to 20-22!
The first pull showed why! The air/fuel ratio was very lean, computer was adding fuel everywhere, it had lots of knock retard and was pulling timing in the middle of the rpm band. It made 355 RWHP.
After a few adjustments and a couple of pulls it was making 368 corrected RWHP.
I stayed there most of the day (8 hours and a A$$ lod of dyno pulls) and he worked out some bugs and I ended up with 374.4 HP & 364.2 TQ.
Fuel milage on the way home (approx 60 miles) improved! Yea we were playing a little bit!
I can see by the graph that a set of heads and a cam will do WONDERS for the car!!
Here is the result on PAPER! Please let me know what you all think!
My guess is that I have about 442 crank HP. 374.4 X 1.18 (18% drive train losses) = 441.792 crank HP. Would you agree??
Thanks
Bill Curlee
Here is what I have and how it turned out. I installed Stainless Works Lt 1 3/4 primaries,random tech high flow cat's, 3" X pipe, and Stainless works 3" mufflers on my stock 02 Z06 late last summer. Last Sunday I installed my VARARAM. The only other mods are a hand ported throttle body and throttle body by pass and a smooth coupler.
With just the headers installed on a bone stock 02 Z06, my guess was I gained about 25 HP. 405 stock HP + 25 = 430. The car had a good seat of the pants improvement but I took a DEEP hit in fuel ecomomy! I went from a solid 28-30 MPH highway down to 20-22!
The first pull showed why! The air/fuel ratio was very lean, computer was adding fuel everywhere, it had lots of knock retard and was pulling timing in the middle of the rpm band. It made 355 RWHP.
After a few adjustments and a couple of pulls it was making 368 corrected RWHP.
I stayed there most of the day (8 hours and a A$$ lod of dyno pulls) and he worked out some bugs and I ended up with 374.4 HP & 364.2 TQ.
Fuel milage on the way home (approx 60 miles) improved! Yea we were playing a little bit!
I can see by the graph that a set of heads and a cam will do WONDERS for the car!!
Here is the result on PAPER! Please let me know what you all think!
My guess is that I have about 442 crank HP. 374.4 X 1.18 (18% drive train losses) = 441.792 crank HP. Would you agree??
Thanks
Bill Curlee
Last edited by Bill Curlee; Mar 31, 2005 at 11:29 PM.
Team Owner
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 22,025
Likes: 192
From: At the beach in little Rhody
I think the numbers look good and the AFR is at 12:1 at the upper RPM's. That is where my tuner left mine, with the explanation that the car will lean out on the street. What I can't figure out, and there were some posts started by YO-EL on the subject, is why some tuners run the AFR up to 13:1 or leaner on the dyno. I had several runs with more HP prior to the final tune, but he wanted to be conservative for a street driven car and I ended up with 12:1 and 25 HP final gain.
The guys in Manchester seem to do good work.
The guys in Manchester seem to do good work.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Tech Contributor
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 32,910
Likes: 2,402
From: Anthony TX
CI 6,7,8,9,11 Vet
St. Jude Donor '08
I'm happy! It seems to be running very good. The exhaust sure seems to smell less obnoxis and the rpm increase fron 2000-7000 at full throttle seems much smoother. And yes, the extra HP/TQ that the Mike squeezed out is noticible! 
The fuel efficiency is proof that the car is running much better!
Thanks for the reply!
Bill
The fuel efficiency is proof that the car is running much better!Thanks for the reply!
Bill