[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jason King:
The longer runners in the 2.5 are better at producing torque, the shorter runners in the 3.0 are better for hp. Hone extrude a 3.0 
[/QB]
"The longer runners in the 2.5 are better at producing torque..."Better at what? Relative to what?
"...the shorter runners in the 3.0 are better for hp."These two statements imply that there is no relationship to horsepower and torque...AMONG other things. :rolleyes:
I hope you are trying to say that the longer runners in the 2.5 help maximize torque at lower rpm while the shorter runners help maximize torque at higher rpm.
Why would anyone want to give up the low rpm torque benefit of the 2.5 manifold by going with the 3.0 manifold which doesn't have short/long runners? The 2.5 SVT is already large enough except maybe right at the exit ports of the upper. I measured the ID of the uppers on the 2.5L and they are the SAME diameter for primary and secondary as the ports on the 3L upper. The SVT lower had larger secondaries than the 3L lower secondaries, and the svt lower primaries were the same size as the 3L lower primaries.
End result, no benefit in going with the 3L upper or lower if you already have svt manifolds. Smarter to just widen and smooth out all the passages that you can on the SVT stuff, and then retain all the benefits of the short/long runners.
Just my opinion after all.
warmonger
