View Full Version : Question: JBA Shorties vs. Longtubes

Ken 01-Cobra
05-31-2003, 11:56 AM
Ok, I know the longtubes are probably better all around, but they are also a PITA when it comes to doing any work on your car after the install.

Does anyone have, or know of, any actual numbers for JBA Shorties vs. longtubes on a normally aspirated 2001 Cobra with basic bolt-on mods? (Bassani X w/cats, Flowmaster Delta Flow catback, Steeda U/D pulleys, C&L MAF, Diablo Chip) I mean, how much are you really giving up, and what is the downside to the JBA's vs. the longtubes other than a few hp/torque numbers?

Any info would be appareciated. I am trying to understand this one...

05-31-2003, 12:27 PM

The only maintenance issue I've heard of is with the BBK and MAC making it hard/impossible to drop the transmission. The Hooker and Kooks l/t's don't have that problem. Of course, they're more expensive also.

While the JBA's have some good numbers, I'd still go with the Hooker or Kooks l/t's for the money spent. Labor is going to be the same either one you go with.

The only downside I can see is paying for O2 extentions, and a new H/X pipe for the l/t's. Whichever one you choose, be sure to check to be sure the slag is cleaned up, and run the car a bit after install with the EGR tube disconnected.

Ken 01-Cobra
05-31-2003, 12:48 PM
Do you need a new h/x pipe with the JBA Shorties or will they attach to the Bassani just fine? If a new pipe is not needed, there is quite a price difference there. And I would think I could install the JBA's myself, where I am NOT sure I could install the long tubes, though I know someone who is supposed to know how to install them pretty well. ;)

05-31-2003, 12:51 PM
Yep, the JBA's will hook up to the stock, or any aftermarket H/X pipe.

If you think you can tackle the JBA install, you'd be able to do the l/t's also. Cutting the labor cost out helps a ton!

05-31-2003, 05:58 PM
I saw a thread on the corral about Bob Cosby's cobra. His is a 99 cobra I think. He switched from JBA's to Long tubes and there was only a few pony difference. I believe about 3rwhp. But, the gains were completely across the board. Kinda surprising that they were that close. But he did get rid of his Dr Gas X-pipe on the install, so he probably lost a few there. For the Record, you'll have to remove the Kook's long tubes for any clutch/tranny work. But how often do you go through clutches and tranny's?? That's something to think about as well. It's not that bad with long tubes. Sell the Bassani X and put that money towards a set of long tubes and the matching H or X pipe of your choice. :) Let me know when you want to do the headers Ken;). Cheap Labor here!!

Ken 01-Cobra
05-31-2003, 10:10 PM
Thanks Josh...I figured I could count on you when it came time for the install. :D I am just not convinced (yet) that the l/t's are all that much more efficient for a normally aspirated car, which is why I wanted to see some hard data if anyone had any. Even the coated JBA's are less expensive overall than the l/t's. For 3 HP, the added cost and hassle would not be worth it to me.

06-01-2003, 04:48 PM
I don't have numbers on JBAs, but we recently did a dyno on a 2001 Cobra with 1 7/8 Griggs/Kook's LTs. The only mods to the car were: the headers, 3" x pipe with cats, Hooker Aero Chamber Mufflers with turn down, and a Meziere water pump. 313 hp, 302 ft lb. These headers are made to work with the Griggs K member, they will not fit on a stock K.


Ken 01-Cobra
06-01-2003, 05:59 PM
What was the baseline on the car before the header install?

And isn't 3" kind of overkill for a n/a 4.6L? I mean, I could understand 3" with a blower or turbo, but I always thought that 3" was to big to be efficient for n/a applications?

06-01-2003, 07:38 PM
I just read here once again that a 99 cobra picked up almost 20rwhp over the FMS shorty headers from 2500 to 4500rpms.


Here's Bob Cosby's Post:


Here's one that says, but I don't think SHOWS dyno results:


Ken 01-Cobra
06-01-2003, 11:25 PM
Thanks Josh. I've been talking with Bob about this, and his experience is that for his 99, the difference between the JBA's and LT's was 3 RWHP, though he did say he picked up quite a bit down low. However, down low is not where this car needs it, especially with the 4.30's! ;)

Since I have emissions here, that also makes a difference, as I am not sure you can make LT's emissions legal, can you?

I HAVE decided if I go shorties, they WILL be ceramic coated JBA's though, since they seem to offer the best gains for my engine.

06-05-2003, 10:00 AM

I just finished installing my JBA shorties and it was a BIG PITA!

The hardes and most dificult part was 2 top bolts in the pasenger side stock manifold and the number 4 bolt installation on the drivier side JBA. Other than that, it sucked.

I based my choice because I'm moving to Germany and they have very strict laws (emission) now. I wanted some LTs but the fact that you have to remove for clutch, and other maint work sucked.

I too read that Bob Cosby post a while back and if you are going to go with shorty headers the JBA are the way to go.

I got a decent deal on mine (purchesed from Bad Pony) and one of them was brand new and the other almost new condition.

I used stock gaskets from Ford and Stage 8 bolts.

You will be happy, I'll have some dyno numbers soon!


Ken 01-Cobra
06-05-2003, 10:32 AM
Hey Naz...

I guess any header install on these things is a bear then. I would have thought they would have been easier than LT's, but it sounds the same.

I am looking forward to what they did for you. I hear 10-15 RWHP for our motors. That's not to shoddy, but I'm hoping it will open the curve up top a little more.

colt .45
06-27-2003, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by sn8kbit

The only downside I can see is paying for O2 extentions, I made my own. They work fine. :thumbsup: