|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 24, 2013 12:59:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by spanks79 on Nov 25, 2013 7:48:12 GMT -5
I realized I never commented on these headers. I think these look awesome! It is a header but constructed like a manifold. Constructing the header out of thick, iron pipe would negate most if all of the negative aspects of headers. Arthur, I like your summary. Also the Headman 78070 looks like a suitable option as well. Flow has to be equal to or better than HP manifolds, but the shorty design helps eliminate fitment issues associated with long tubes. Plus the price tag is easy to digest. I honestly think the Hooker 5113 would be the best option if the damn things didn't cost $500+ most people, including my self are not afraid to spend the money for a quality product. However I don't want to spend $500 and be faced with fitment problems. At $300-$350 it would be an easier pill to swallow. As I sit here and type this I am thinking it would be nice if we could just try a set of these. My car would be the perfect specimen, right now I have no dog house on the car, my suspension is all new and fresh (meaning it could be disassembled easily as necessary) so they could be mocked up and trouble areas could be easilly spotted and documented. I'll have to think about that further.
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 25, 2013 12:43:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 25, 2013 17:02:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 26, 2013 5:22:30 GMT -5
The 74-77 c-body details area is for info on how 74-77 c-body cars came originally, and the dodge monaco stuff / 74-77 c-body details /exhaust manifolds discussion expanded into several different performance ugprade areas.
I move many of the recent posts from that details thread into three threads in the "performance and engineering modifications" area: store bought headers custom headers maximum flow stock exhaust manifolds
And I add this post to the bottom of each thread (so that each shows up under "new threads").
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 26, 2013 12:06:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 26, 2013 16:59:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by spanks79 on Nov 26, 2013 22:57:57 GMT -5
These are really cool. I have never seen or heard of schedule 40 exhaust headers.
These are super cool, almost look like HP manifolds
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 27, 2013 13:40:00 GMT -5
These are super cool, almost look like HP manifolds I was thinking of something like that for my blumo. Around town, I'll be traction limited. At the TX mile, I'll be speed-rating-of-tire limited. If performance is rarely going to be limited by horsepower, it makes little sense to optimize headers for horesepower (at the expense of things like ease of spark plug access). Some schedule 40 log-style manifolds that give me ease of access to spark plugs, oil pump, starter may be just fine. But then I got to thinking. I don't want to snake long tube headers down by the motor (which would complicate motor maintenance). But that doesn't mean that I need a log-style manifold. I could use a "ram's horn" style manifold. Not something like this: from www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4924594&postcount=9but something like this: from realstreetperformance.com/store/blackworks-b-series-ram-horn-turbo-header-t3-44mm-vband-wg-3437.html?zenid=a344443354bb2b1d4fff032717688ba7from www.go-autoworks-store.com/gorama.htmlfrom www.synapseturbo.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=&Product_Code=syn-syn-man-01&Category_Code=featuresI'll have tons of room above the exhaust ports to snake around the tubes (since we know the tunnel ram intake / EFI lid must fit). And then I got to thinking that the collector to the exhaust pipe would be best located near the rear of the motor, and recalled the stock max-wedge exhaust manifolds: from www.carcraft.com/projectbuild/ccrp_0711_1964_mopar/photo_20.html> No Tube header clearance issues, no header noise, no burned gaskets, sign me up. board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=QuestionAnswer&Number=5686641&Searchpage=1&Main=5671440&Words=+unclemike&topic=&Search=trueI think ramshorn, with collector to the rear, would be a better choice than these max wedge manifolds, but an interesting design for consideration.
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 27, 2013 17:03:49 GMT -5
For performance, it seems that there's more discussion of intake port matching than exhaust port matching. But it still seems like a good idea to ensure that the exhaust port of the header is the same size (or at least larger) than the exhaust port of the head. The standard mopar head, max wedge head, and 440-1 head all have the same bolt pattern. But all have different exhaust port shapes/sizes. Max wedge: width: 1.88" height: 1.38" www.bigblockdart.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-5675.html440-1 width: 1.76" height: 1.54" board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=4982979&Main=4979232max wedge exhaust ports are wider than 440-1. 440-1 exhaust ports are taller than max wedge. pics from "Big Block Mopar Performance" by Chuck Senatore.
|
|
|
Post by 58hemifury on Nov 27, 2013 17:50:05 GMT -5
Just be careful when porting your own heads that you don't make the wall too thin between the exhaust port and the cooling jackets, it causes overheating problems (or you can grind thru and have a coolant leak in your exhaust, but you'd have to take a lot off to do that).
|
|
|
Post by spanks79 on Nov 27, 2013 20:39:47 GMT -5
Just be careful when porting your own heads that you don't make the wall too thin between the exhaust port and the cooling jackets, it causes overheating problems (or you can grind thru and have a coolant leak in your exhaust, but you'd have to take a lot off to do that). Interesting you mention that. I just spent every night this week porting my 452 heads. I started with a port match on the intake side then smoothed out the intake runners. I did very little work on the exhaust, simply smoothed out any roughness, casting lines or ridges. I did not attempt to gasket match or port match the exhaust. Everything I read online said to leave the exhaust alone, you have a better chance of screwing something up than making it better.
|
|
|
Post by 58hemifury on Nov 27, 2013 20:45:54 GMT -5
Interesting you mention that. I just spent every night this week porting my 452 heads. I started with a port match on the intake side then smoothed out the intake runners. I did very little work on the exhaust, simply smoothed out any roughness, casting lines or ridges. I did not attempt to gasket match or port match the exhaust. Everything I read online said to leave the exhaust alone, you have a better chance of screwing something up than making it better. That was kinda what I was getting at, clean 'em up and don't get crazy in there, more isn't always better.
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 28, 2013 5:00:49 GMT -5
I did very little work on the exhaust, simply smoothed out any roughness, casting lines or ridges. I did not attempt to gasket match or port match the exhaust. Everything I read online said to leave the exhaust alone, you have a better chance of screwing something up than making it better. I can imagine that on the exhaust side, reversion comes into play, where a rough lip on the exhaust may actually be beneficial: Read more: www.moparmusclemagazine.com/techarticles/5120_cylinder_heads_iii/#ixzz2lvohP4nBWhen I wrote: > But it still seems like a good idea to ensure that the exhaust port of the > header is the same size (or at least larger) than the exhaust port of the head. Read more: bluesmobiles.proboards.com/post/11991/quote/1724#ixzz2lvpDoRw3I wasn't thinking do port matching between: - standard mopar head / standard mopar exahust manifold - max-wedge mopar head / max-wedge exhaust manifold - 440-1 head / 440-1 header I was thinking out loud: - don't hose yourself and put a max-wedge exhaust manifold on a 440-1 head, as things will be terribly mismatched, with a head that has a hole that is tall and narrow, with an exhaust manifold that is short and wide. How about this summary: Get a head and exhaust manifold combo that has port windows that are: a) all the same shape and size (ex: both standard mopar, both max-wedge mopar, both 440-1) or b) "get bigger" as it flows away from the head (such as putting a max-wedge exhaust manifold on a stock mopar head) BUT NOT c) have the exhaust ram into a wall (such as putting a max-wedge exhaust manifold on a 440-1 head). It's probably not bad to have an exhaust manifold gasket that is larger than the exhaust manifold (such as stock mopar head, stock exhaust manifold, and max-wedge gasket). Because that means that the head and manifold are smaller than max-wedge size, so the head and manifold are lower HP, and won't be affected so much by the mismatch (and might be helped with a reversion situation). But it could be bad to have the opposite situation (max wedge head, max wedge manifold, with stock exhaust window gasket). That gasket restriction might help with reversion on some motors and HP levels, but those situations likely wouldn't apply with someone using a max-wedge setup.
|
|
|
Post by sigmfsk on Nov 28, 2013 7:21:26 GMT -5
|
|