davidb5303

Does Hooker have a "complete" exhaust package to go from your headers all the way to the back.? Or is it designed to use someone else's? Getting ready to do a 79 Camaro LS swap and it looks like Holley might have a lot of the answers

Toddoky

Yes, there are 2.5" and 3" systems for 2nd-gen F-bodies that are in line for their first production runs down in our Mississippi facility right now. They both connect directly to the new Hooker 2nd-gen LS swap headers and are bolt-in compatible with the Ridetech 4-link rear suspension if you need that feature. It's going to take a couple more weeks to get them wrapped up and on the shelf, but they are coming. They are stainless steel and provide the highest ground clearance that can be found from what I've seen.

davidb5303

Another question, what is the performance difference between the hooker "stock" manifolds and mid length and long tube headers. My build will probably just center around a stock 5.3 so roughly the 300 HP range and the 4L60E trans

Toddoky

Although the Hooker LS manifolds provide good flow relevant to cast iron manifolds, they can be expected to provide slightly less performance potential (5-8HP) compared to the Hooker mid-length headers and considerable less than the Hooker long-tubes. What they do offer however is maintenance free service, high exhaust ground clearance potential and an "OE" appearance for folks who are into that visual esthetic.

Todd

davidb5303

So have you do HP numbers to compare stock, vs LS manifolds, long headers? Just curious cause I believe a stock 5.3 is advertised at 295 HP and headers would be a cheap and easy horsepower adder without even removing a valve cover

Toddoky

Your are correct about your easy bolt-on HP assumption. Stock take-out 5.3 engines have HP ratings in the range of 285-295HP and another 20-25HP can be coaxed out of them with nothing more than a good set of long-tube headers and a decent exhaust system. You will also typically see gains in peak torque with good long tubes in the range of 10-12 lb. ft. and measureable torque increases across the board. The mid-lengths combined with the same decent exhaust system will usually net you a power increase of around a 6-8HP with negligible increases in peak torque. The mid-lengths are really good at providing maximum ground clearance with a measurable increase in power, but they are no match for the power to be found in a properly sized set of long tubes. If you do not plan on breaking into the engine or adding a power adder of some type, go with a set of 1-3/4" long-tubes and a good 2.5" exhaust system like the one from Hooker and you will be happy I assure you.

davidb5303

Does the long tube headers have an O2 sensor bung welded in? And also does the Holley oil pan fit the 79 F Body without any modifications for the steering? Thanks

M6 Swap

iTrader: (1)

does the 12613hkr mount set the motor in the stock location or move it back at all?

Toddoky

Yes, there is an O2 bung in the collector of each header assembly and the Holley oil pan fits without any modifications in 2nd-gen cars.

Toddoky

The 12612HKR engine mounting brackets for 1970-74 F-bodies and the 12613HKR engine mounting brackets for 1975-81 F-bodies both split the fore/aft positioning of the engine between the typical stock (1" back) and the 1" forward swap plates, so what you end up with is a position that requires a stock transmission to be pulled forward about 1/2" to 3/4" to mate up to the engine.

M6 Swap

iTrader: (1)

Sweet thank you. Also is there a sponsor who sells em?

Ernie W

iTrader: (1)

On the Holley oil pans, I seen a new one at the LS Fest and it was an improved clearance pan part# 302-2. I seen it in the smaller catalog I picked up there also but haven't seen it or a price on it yet.

So will both of the pans (302-1 and 302-2) fit on a late 2nd gen with the Holley/hooker 75-81 mounts?

Toddoky

The new pan was designed to address fitment issues specific to the 1st-gen F-body cars Ernie. Although both pans will install on a 2nd-gen, the existing 302-1 Holley pan would be more desireable to have in a 2nd-gen in my opinion due to the ability to run a stroker crank and a full-length windage tray, which you cannot do with the new pan (it requires the use of a 3/4 length windage tray like the stock GM 4th-gen F-body pan does). For those that want the full windage tray and stroker crank capabilities of the existing Holley pan in a 1st-gen AND a desireable 3 degree engine inclination angle, you will have to notch the engine crossmember to provide the needed clearance. Others have used the pan without notching the crossmember by placing shims or washers under the mounts, but that methods has adverse affects on the installed engine inclination angle and the resultant U-joint working angles.

Ernie W

iTrader: (1)

Thanks, I guess I'll be buying some parts here soon.... I'm glad you guys stepped in and make a nice trio of parts that fit nice and neat on the second gens.

Toddoky

Thanks for noticing our efforts. We felt that the market was maturing and the timing was right to start approaching these LS swaps from a fully-engineered position to elevate the experience from the parts-bin proposition it's been to this point. Mixing and matching parts from various manufacturers that were never designed specifically to work together works sufficiently for some, but we wanted to ensure a better outcome and be able to controll the critical variables of the swap, which isn't possible with different parts from various manufacturers.

Turtle Bite

iTrader: (3)

God damn those cast exhaust flanges and collector parts are an awesome idea. As an engineer with some metalcasting background I love the cast in ribs and steps built into the flanges. I have always hated choosing between the performance of headers and the their leak potential. Sure thick flanges help, but the warpage from welding is always a problem. That design should elimante or greatly reduced warpage. Awesome job.

Toddoky

Thanks for the enthusiastic comments Turtle Bite, I take that as a complenent coming from a fellow engineer. The development of those components took quite some effort to see through to the end, but we are very happy with the results and enjoy passing their value and performance onto the customer with each set of new stainless steel long-tube headers we use them on, which is currently our LS swap applications for the Nissan 240sx and the 1st and 2nd-gen F-bodies. All of the components can now also be purchased separately by those who wish to use them in custom header builds. Thanks again.

Gasman303

I'm a serious buyer when these headers come out... I own a 1971 camaro with a soon to be installed LS3, tremec tko600. I wanted the ground clearance and mechanical clutch friendly header and these seem to be the ticket?!!

Is it best to use Hooker LS swap engine mounts?

Thanks

Camaro_73

My X-mas bonus is just waiting to be spent...any word on the 70-74 components?

Toddoky

Sorry gasman303, it looks like I missed this post earlier. These headers and mounts have now all been released, so if you can tell me more details about what your looking for in terms of mid-length or long-tube headers, 1-3/4" or 1-7/8" primaries and whether you want mild steel or stainless steel headers, I can provide you with specific part numbers. You will absolutely need to use the Hooker engine mounts to achieve the intended fitment of the headers with the vehicle body and components. Although there is not a TKO specific crossmember available from Hooker, a competent fabricator would be able to modify the Hooker 2nd-gen 4L60 automatic transmission crossmember to provide the correct intended angular fitment of your transmission.