When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The driveline geometry obtained by the Hooker mounting components is the same for all transmissions. I obtained 2 degree U-joint operating angles on the 65 Lemans I had in the shop that was lowered 1" all around...I used a 1350 yoke on a 3" diameter shaft to do the mock-up and the shaft/yoke were probably 5/8" from the tunnel.
Todd and this was using what frame stands 350 ,bbc , 307 ???
thanks JT looks like the pics on 126 was clam shell mounts
thought i read somewhere where it would work on any ,but cant find my notes
todd what numbers would you recommend
67 with tko 600 , no air, with 302-2 ......
I assume you're asking about the Hooker engine brackets. Knowing that you're not running A/C helps with making a recommendation to you, but It would also help to know what bellhousing, engine mounts, driveshaft and rearend you are using currently to give you a comprehensive answer.
621 Bell ,12 bolt different,, stock 3 inch drive shaft,,,,, going to buy engine mounts from you guys, a long with frame mounts and anything else that makes it easier,,,,,,, I have the brp mounts in mine now ,,,,,,,,on team chevelle ,you been on my post on 67 here we go ..
621 Bell ,12 bolt different,, stock 3 inch drive shaft,,,,, going to buy engine mounts from you guys, a long with frame mounts and anything else that makes it easier,,,,,,, I have the brp mounts in mine now ,,,,,,,,on team chevelle ,you been on my post on 67 here we go ..
Yes, I recognize your username from team Chevelle. I asked about the components you were using to determine if it was possible for you to retain the use of your existing driveshaft in order for you to save on the cost of the switch over. Since the fore/aft engine position of the BRP mounts is not published, I can't correlate it to the position provided by either set of the Hooker engine brackets to know if the driveshaft length will need to be changed at all. I think you'll just have to count on the driveshaft length needing to be modified more than likely. Your use of the 621 bellhousing means you won't be subjected to the same firewall interference as someone attempting the install of a late model trans, which means the remaining parameter to consider, based on your thread on team Chevelle, is the supercharger I think I remember reading that you are using. Providing for clearance of that component with your firewall is going to dictate which Hooker brackets you have use and I have no idea what you need in that regard to make a judgement. How much room do you have between the rear of your passenger side cylinder head and your firewall?
Yes, I recognize your username from team Chevelle. I asked about the components you were using to determine if it was possible for you to retain the use of your existing driveshaft in order for you to save on the cost of the switch over. Since the fore/aft engine position of the BRP mounts is not published, I can't correlate it to the position provided by either set of the Hooker engine brackets to know if the driveshaft length will need to be changed at all. I think you'll just have to count on the driveshaft length needing to be modified more than likely. Your use of the 621 bellhousing means you won't be subjected to the same firewall interference as someone attempting the install of a late model trans, which means the remaining parameter to consider, based on your thread on team Chevelle, is the supercharger I think I remember reading that you are using. Providing for clearance of that component with your firewall is going to dictate which Hooker brackets you have use and I have no idea what you need in that regard to make a judgement. How much room do you have between the rear of your passenger side cylinder head and your firewall?
Actually just added SC and everything is up top is changed ,,, i have right at 2.5 maybe 2.750 from back of head ,,,,,
I told you i was going to buy from you all when u get these out ,, i cant thank you enough for going to all these forums ,and chatting with us ,it would be easy enough to just do your job and shut up about it ,but we can tell you a true car guy ,,, thanks ,,,, i chasing the famous vibration that comes in around 75 and gos away at 82 ,, plus i am **** and i know the pan sits to high ,,,
You are just about at the same fore-aft position that is provided by the Hooker forward-bias engine brackets, which create an approximate gap of 2.75" between the passenger side cylinder head and the firewall. If you like the clearances you have now around the back of your engine/supercharger and your firewall, use the Hooker forward-bias engine brackets. If you would like to move the engine and trans back 1" closer to the firewall, and have the room behind your SC to do it, use the Hooker rear-bias engine brackets. The Hooker headers and exhaust systems are compatible with either set of engine brackets, so if you plan to use them you won't have any issues either way. I think you'll be pleased with the improved functional geometry of your car and am pleased to have you coming to the Hooker group of users. Thank you for appreciating my efforts to help others here...I enjoy seeing things come together in a good way for others and the enjoyment that brings with it.
I bought the Hooker cast iron manifolds even though they say they won't fit a 05 gto engine, with a little grinding on the oversized flange they do. I will be putting on a heat shield around the starter. The flange is the only place that comes real close to the solenoid so I'm hoping there is enough air gap with a heat shield
I bought the Hooker cast iron manifolds even though they say they won't fit a 05 gto engine, with a little grinding on the oversized flange they do. I will be putting on a heat shield around the starter. The flange is the only place that comes real close to the solenoid so I'm hoping there is enough air gap with a heat shield
You discovered first-hand why they are stated not to fit with the GTO engine/starter; the solenoid on those starters is clocked outward more than any of the other LS starters and we weren't confortable with requiring a user to have to grind on the manifold in order to get it to clear. As long as you're comfortable with the end result, I say good for you.
Todd - any word on when the adapters will come out for the mid-length headers? With my suspension (air-bags), I'm not sure I can get away with the long-tubes. When I had long tubes on my SBC, they hit the ground before the front crossmember did when I aired the bags all the way out. Or, if you could tell me whether the long-tubes will be tucked enough above the crossmember.
Todd - any word on when the adapters will come out for the mid-length headers? With my suspension (air-bags), I'm not sure I can get away with the long-tubes. When I had long tubes on my SBC, they hit the ground before the front crossmember did when I aired the bags all the way out. Or, if you could tell me whether the long-tubes will be tucked enough above the crossmember.
Thanks,
Jim
Jim there are some photos in the early part of this thread that show how well the long tube headers hug the floor of the car.
Jim there are some photos in the early part of this thread that show how well the long tube headers hug the floor of the car.
Thanks. I've been following this thread from the beginning, but I haven't seen a picture that shows the bottom of the front crossmember in relation to the long-tube headers. And I'd like to hear it from the guy who actually did the mockup, or someone that has them. I'd also like to hear when the extension pieces will be available.
Todd - any word on when the adapters will come out for the mid-length headers? With my suspension (air-bags), I'm not sure I can get away with the long-tubes. When I had long tubes on my SBC, they hit the ground before the front crossmember did when I aired the bags all the way out. Or, if you could tell me whether the long-tubes will be tucked enough above the crossmember.
Thanks,
Jim
Hello Jim. My job duties end at getting the parts released into the system and having all build tooling production-ready before I throw my projects over the wall to the group in charge of production. Once they leave my hands, I have no visibility of on-the-shelf status for any particular part number unless I go poking around. As for the ground clearance of the long-tube headers, they are tucked nicely as the photos in this thread depict, but they will not permit laying the bottom of the engine crossmember on the ground without experiencing interference with the ground. If that is what you are going for, I would recommend the mid-lengths all day long.
Hello Jim. My job duties end at getting the parts released into the system and having all build tooling production-ready before I throw my projects over the wall to the group in charge of production. Once they leave my hands, I have no visibility of on-the-shelf status for any particular part number unless I go poking around. As for the ground clearance of the long-tube headers, they are tucked nicely as the photos in this thread depict, but they will not permit laying the bottom of the engine crossmember on the ground without experiencing interference with the ground. If that is what you are going for, I would recommend the mid-lengths all day long.
These are 1-7/8 full length headers on my LS2/4L60 forward bias mounts on 65 442 .They don't come down lower than the cross member they are a perfect fit.
Wow. Thanks Earl. Those are the Holley (Hooker) full length headers? Part #70101336-RHKR?
Thanks,
Jim
Originally Posted by earl442
These are 1-7/8 full length headers on my LS2/4L60 forward bias mounts on 65 442 .They don't come down lower than the cross member they are a perfect fit.
After seeing the images posted by earl442, I went back through my photo file of the 64-67 A-body project and can confirm that the header collectors do indeed reside above the bottom surface of the engine crossmember...it's the frame rails that they drop below somewhat. Here's the photos I came across to confirm...
01-28-2017, 08:54 PM
