Hooker 1964-67 A-body LS swap system preview thread
#442
TECH Senior Member
Nice looking piece, with LOTS of tranny length flexibility built in!
#443
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
Thanks, it will accommodate quite a few of them with either the Hooker Blackheart forward-bias or rear bias engine mounting brackets...4th-gen F-body T56, T56 Magnum, 4L80/4L85, 4L60-4L70, TH400 or 2004R.
#444
Thanks Todd for posting those pictures. It shows what I need. How about a Powerglide and Turbo 350? It looks like the Hooker crossmember has mount pads at two different heights. How about it Todd?
For Andrew, thanks for your input. I am going to use the Hooker PS/Alt brackets that put the pump down and the alternator up top. I do not think I will have any pulley interference to worry about as Todd had posted excellent pictures on here of those brackets and pump clearing the steering box easily. I'm using the Hooker forward mounts and I feel that my tranny angle will be about what Todd designed. The car will pretty much be at stock height and I have a 9 inch rear.
Jarhead
For Andrew, thanks for your input. I am going to use the Hooker PS/Alt brackets that put the pump down and the alternator up top. I do not think I will have any pulley interference to worry about as Todd had posted excellent pictures on here of those brackets and pump clearing the steering box easily. I'm using the Hooker forward mounts and I feel that my tranny angle will be about what Todd designed. The car will pretty much be at stock height and I have a 9 inch rear.
Jarhead
#445
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
The rear mount position on the Hooker Blackheart transmission crossmember is used solely for 4L80/4L85 installations, the lower forward position is used for every other transmission covered by the crossmember. The crossmember cannot be used to install a Powerglide, TH350 or Muncie transmission as their common mount position it too far forward for the crossmember to accomodate (it's roughly 10" further forward than the 4L80/4L85 mount).
#446
On the Hooker stainless headers is there much difference on spark plug boot clearance between the 1 3/4 and 1 7/8? This is for my 65 Cutlass with 1 inch forward Hooker mounts. Since they are so close in price I am temped to buy the lager size but if the larger tubes are more trouble than they are worth as far as wire clearance or closeness to steering shaft etc. I will get the smaller size. The motor is a carbed LS3.
Thanks
Jarhead
Thanks
Jarhead
#448
I agree with you there Andrew, the smaller tube is plenty big for what I have. Possibly Todd or somebody will post pictures of both sizes for 64-67 A body to see the actual differences.
#449
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
I only have photos that depict the reference clearance of stock type spark plug wires on the 1-7/8" version of the headers. I would only use the 1-3/4" version of the Hooker Blackheart headers on an LS3 if you were going to use a large diameter aftermarket steering shaft in your project since the stock steering shaft does get close the the primary tubes of the 1-7/8" headers.
#450
Thank you Todd for the quick response and great pictures. I plan to use the stock steering shaft. Are those plug wires pictured the stock Chevy wires?
I believe there are aftermarket angled wires that might clear better, but these do not look too bad.
Jarhead
I believe there are aftermarket angled wires that might clear better, but these do not look too bad.
Jarhead
#451
#452
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
Yes, they are stock wires. I use them when prototyping all my headers since they represent a worst-case scenario in plug wire boot size and therefore provide the most clearance possible...if those boots clear the tubes, then any other plug wire boots will as well.
#453
Joejbal, here's a photo of the Hooker 64-67 A-body engine bracket assembled with the 4th-gen F-body engine mount it's designed for use with. A comparative measurement will be easy for anyone to take in or out of their vehicle to understand if their current engine bracket/mount set-up is making the job of achieving desirable U-joint working angle more difficult than it needs to be by placing the engine higher than it needs to be.
The summed height of the engine mount assemblies provides half of the geometry characteristics needed to achieve desirable U-joint working angles, the other half is the fore/aft positioning of the engine/trans mating plane they provide, which is critical depending on the particular transmission that is being used in the swap.
The summed height of the engine mount assemblies provides half of the geometry characteristics needed to achieve desirable U-joint working angles, the other half is the fore/aft positioning of the engine/trans mating plane they provide, which is critical depending on the particular transmission that is being used in the swap.
#454
1989GTA...the crossmember will come in at 25 lbs. and the rail adapter plates that attach to each frame rail are 6 lbs. each.
The rail adapters represent the same approximate weight, and extra frame stiffening, that would be associated with the OE boxed sections of the convertible and El Camino frames. In other words, their weight comes with a
performance benefit.
The crossmember will be able to be used to mount a T56, T56 Magnum, 4L80/4L85, 4L60-4L70, TH400 or 2004R transmission.
The rail adapters represent the same approximate weight, and extra frame stiffening, that would be associated with the OE boxed sections of the convertible and El Camino frames. In other words, their weight comes with a
performance benefit.
The crossmember will be able to be used to mount a T56, T56 Magnum, 4L80/4L85, 4L60-4L70, TH400 or 2004R transmission.
#459
Launching!
Todd - Do you have any insight into shipping and availability? I ordered mid-length headers (70701326-RHKR) 7/20/2021 and the shipping keeps getting pushed out. It's holding up my build now.
Thanks,
Jim
Thanks,
Jim
#460
Same here, ordered 07/28/21 pisses me off a little as They charged my card immediately...they're already paid for and the date keeps being pushed out. Can't be that hard to figure out.