Hooker 1964-67 A-body LS swap system preview thread
 

I'll be starting the development of this next Hooker LS swap application tomorrow and will spend the rest of the week preparing the initial development car (body mounts and a fuel tank) that will provide the needed fitment envelope/geometry. This 67' Chevelle has been sitting in the back lot untouched for 6 years, so it's good to give the ol' gal a little attention. It will take a solid two months to design all the components that will be part of this system, so please don't ask about availability or part numbers at this time as I'll have no answers to give out.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/ls1tech...fc2ca2a4b4.jpg

I was afraid of this, I figured your next project would be the 64-67 "A body" platform. I did my swap about 9 years ago on my 66 GTO, I used BRP mounts and the LH8 "muscle oil pan" as that was about all that was available besides custom mounts or notched fbody pans back then 9 years ago. I never was satisfied with the fitment of the BRP mounts or the low hanging muscle oil pan. I recently upgraded my Ricks tank to the 5th gen fuel module and now I will probably be upgrading to the Hooker system when it becomes available. If it is like the 68-72 "A" body system which seems to be well engineered, you know us car guys can never leave well enough alone. One quick question will the transmission crossmember address the boxed frames for convertibles and Pontiac's that have the rubber cushion mounted transmission crossmember?

I think most of the CAD drawings you have for the 68-72 will work on the 64-67 platform with maybe a little tweaking. That should speed things up quite a bit by not having to start from scratch.

The swap market has been comprised of universal-fit parts, or systems designed around non-optimized components for years and it's very satisfying to be working from a position of turning the current scenario on its head. Without the existence of Holley 302-2 oil pan, most of the common issues I'm able to resolve wouldn't be possible, so I'm thankful to have that component at my disposal. The initial crossmember offering will not be compatible with boxed frames but will install on the Pontiac frames by eliminating the frame bushings under the crossmember. If you decide to upgrade to the Hooker/Holley components, we'll be glad to have you on board.

I'll know soon enough and have no problem starting from scratch.

Money in hand...

Myself as well. That should be right inline for when I am ready to put the LS in... Anxiously awaiting!

I glad to have you both tuning in and interested in the Hooker system of parts that will come out of my efforts on this project. Following along here will give you comprehensive knowledge about what the finished installed results will be from using these components before making a purchase.

Toddoky, when you get a chance can you measure between the frame rails of the 67 Chevelle for fitment of the Holley transmission support bracket. I am curious to see if it will fit as is. I have not been able to measure my 1965 Skylark.

I can confirm that the hole pattern in the frame of this car is approximately 3/8" wider than the pattern in all 5 of the 68-72 cars that came through here. I cannot say if that's by design, or because of frame damage at this point.

Todd
 

You sir are my new best friend. I have been putting off doing this swap hoping this would be your next project.
Seriously, I pull my motor the day you say i can place an order.

Glad to see you show up to the party oldstv...I feel we're all going to have a good time with this process and learn a lot from each other along the way.

Glad to see another option. Will they be compatable with the 4l80 ? The reason I ask is when I ordered my shorty's a while ago they were made to fit with the 4l80. thanks, JOHN

Yes, at this point in the game the 4L80 is a must-have in terms of compatibility.

IIRC on my BRP crossmember it also eliminates the rubber isolated mounting pads on the ends of the crossmember and just bolts solidly to the crossmember tabs that are welded to the frames on the Pontiac's, and the difference from the convertible and regular "A" body transmission crossmember was that it was a few inches shorter in width to accommodate the convertible boxed frame being the only difference.

Also I remember when I did this swap almost 10 years ago there was some bumps on the frame where the engine frame stands sat that needed to be pounded flat so that the frame stands would sit flush, I also had to drill new holes for the small block Chevrolet frame stands. When I talked to Phil at BRP this was all news to him and he did tell me that they never tried their kit on a 64-67 Pontiac but that their testing had been done only on Chevrolets, and they were not aware of the frame differences on a Pontiac "A" body, remember this was close to 10 years ago though, just some food for thought.

I think a lot of people are looking forward to this kit, I always wondered why it wasn't up higher on your project list, judging by the initial response to this thread I think it will be well received.

Who decides what car/platform you build the ls swap components for? Is there a vote at holley or a poll to see where the demand is? Just curious. I'm glad you already finished the g body stuff!

Now that is interesting. I would not have thought that. Maybe there is a frame problem with that car. Whatever, it surely requires further investigation.

The guys in management will tell me at a latter date if we'll be developing a crossmember for the convertible/El Camino models with the boxed frames, until then they will just be treated as an exclusion from the application listing of the 2-door crossmember.

Yeah, it will be a requirement of the process to bring a Pontiac through here so that any frame differences can be validated and documented.

The biggest reason for delaying the development of a swap kit for any of the A-body applications was the fact that no oil pan existed at the time that would allow us to correct the outstanding issues needing to be addressed, which was being able to achieve optimized U-joint working angles AND proper oil pan-to-tie rod clearance simultaneously. Once the Holley 302-2 pan became available, we we're able to plan for the development of A-body swap systems.

The decision to develop, or not develop a particular swap system application is made by product managers and those who work above them...it's well above my pay grade. The good news however is that I am the sole individual that performs the application research for each project, so I am fully aware of all of the outstanding issues that need to be validated/corrected before I even get started tearing into a car.

Toddoky, Where does all your research take place? I purchased a 1964 GTO hardtop for my next project. If you would like to do some checks on a pontiac feel free to pm me.