Headers VS Manifolds

-
early a slant and v-8 k frames are the same as I believe, centerlink is diffrent. may be an issue because the trans in your car is lowered in the frame of the car, and those are definately 340 manifolds you have there, yes will take a confident exhaust guy to build the pipes but as was said had em on my 64 dart years ago with 2 1/2 inch pipe. with power steering the drivers side hits the power steering line
66cuda said:
Waggin, does your car have a /6 K frame and uses schumaker mounts? I have manual steering and the drivers side hits and binds the coupler..... the pass side dumps right over the torsion bar and it would take a welding magician to snake a pipe in there..... I understand your doubt ( sort of ) but WHY would I provide inaccurate info? I am seeking assistance and opinions
Click to expand...
 
Johnny....the ports at the head are exactly the same size as the HIPO 340 manifolds....the restriction comes at the dump end and it is only 1/2 in difference....you may have seen them....but you can bet there were MUCHO modifications to get them in.... and it is likely the car they were in did not have a /6 K frame...the motor sits a lil different with the /6 K & schumakers

Waggin....the /6 K & the V8k are different.... the RHS base mount is in a totally different location...hence the need for the schumaker mounts and THEY are also different from the mounts used for v8 to v8 K.... the center link was a wild card, some /6's had the big dipper others did not....but those 340 manifolds NO way are fitting with a v8 & /6 k...they actually keep the motor off the mount by resting on the steering coupler...and where that coupler is on Manual steering is the same spot as the top end of the power steering chuck...... so NO way is it fitting with PS and the /6k....I had PS.... that was my first attempt, I sold the newly rebuilt PS unit because of that..went to manual to try & get them to work.......I am forced to believe its the K that makes the difference.

The trans is pretty much in the same position as the 904 would be, maybe 1/2 inch lower at the outside( and a whole lot tighter fit)....but not enough to hose the geometry of the shaft. in order to get that height, I had to modify the stock 727 tranny mount....it is now a solid mount but the motor will be "buckled" torq side so I am not real worried about it.

ANYBODY try those stainless truck headers on a early A?
 
They say a picture is worth a thousand word's, heres my 64 dart convertable with slant six k frame and v-8 from 64 barracuda donor car, as was stated I was curious and installed the manifolds in a matter of minutes....have no idea why I took pic's but here they are......of course I need to install the manual steering box now. and I am using stock v-8 mounts so they must fit onto the slant six k frame??? seriously...why would I say they fit if they dont fit?or that the k frames are the same??? maybe you have the mounts on the engine in the wrong location? front of the engine mounting bosses instead of on the rear? but as the pic's show They Do Fit.....Magically :cheers:

wow they still fit.JPG


wow they still fit2.JPG


wow they still fit3.JPG
 
There is no difference in the 273 & 273 Commando exhaust manifolds.The 273 Commando got a 4bbl,higher compression pistons,and a higher lift cam.Thats the only difference.

The 273 and 318 share the same "small" intake/exhaust ports.

The 340 and 360 share the same "larger" intake/exhaust ports.

Bottom line: Put a set of "smaller" port 273 exhaust manifolds on your "larger" port 340 heads and you will choke your engine.
 
I know one thing, I'm definitely going to headers when I rebuild my 318 with 10.5:1 comp and RHS heads. If you do go manifolds try to use the biggest ones that will fit; if not factory 340 ones then 360 'logs', but I daresay use 318 or 273 ones because they are SMALL... You might say "only 1/2" difference in outlet size" but that is a HUGE difference in a 2-2.5" hole!!!! But it is your car, so I just recommend getting the best you can afford.
 
66cuda said:
Dave....you are using the stainless header on a NEON?...all good but how does that relate to using them on a 66 with a v8? I missed something in your reply??? do you know someone that used them on a 66 barracuda, Valiant or Dart with a v8 340, 318, or 273 engine and a 727 trans that was never designed to be in this narrow wonder?
Click to expand...

I posted the link for the shorty headers because they are a replacement for the stock magnum truck manifolds.
My thought on that was that if the truck manifolds would fit in your app, maybe these headers would also work. I believe that they are a bolt-in on a later A-body.
I mentioned that I had spoken to a few manifold buyers that were happy with theirs and that I have purchased a stainless header for the Neon from ebay but have not installed it yet because I wanted you to know what info I had gathered about them. The header I got for the Neon is of the same construction and is possibly/probably made by the same people so a quality check is nice. I was just letting you know that the header I have appears to be well made so maybe not everything from ebay is crap! LOL.

As far as I can tell, the 5.2/5.9 equipped trucks and durangos all used the same manifolds.
 
REMINDER- because some folks do not grab the thread from the start and miss some of the detail.
The application is 1966 Barracuda ( EARLY A Body)( first generation)
The K Frame is a /6 using schumaker motor mounts
the trans is a 727
Modifications: the trans mount was cut down to get the shaft geometry close to spec
 
Johnny - I hear what you are saying.....so When the 273 manifolds come back from the coater I will get my micrometer out and measure the head side port opening on both sets of manifolds. From a strictly visual inspection they appear to be the same size as the 340 manifolds when placed side by side. my point being if they are visually that close, whatever "choking" would be very minimal. Again this is not a race car, this car will never see a dragstrip. Maybe a lil street action but not significant enough to warrant spending an additional $1200 for parts and modifications. Someone will always have a faster car....I am not terribly worried about that.
 
Waggin.... there is a definite difference between the manifolds on your car and the ones I have. Mine do not have a "spine ridge" or "tab" on the drivers side. they are smooth all the way around the "tubing." Apparently they made different sets? CURIOUS
 
Just the drivers side but the only diffrence is that spine ridge, it is a 73 manifold, the passenger side is a 68. The set you have are awesome. I'm thinkin the drop on the transmission is what is causing the issue you are having. one thing you can try is loosening the bolts that hold the steering column to the floorpan and move the column over a lil' bit. I havent moved the column on mine. I'd be lookin to rework the trans tunnel and get a rubber mount for the trans (a solid mount there is askin for trouble). as was stated the engine mounts should be bolted to the engine tabs in the rearmost position(actually moves the engine forward in the chassis) that will also give the steering coupler more clearance. and after rechecking this morning no diffrence in slanty and v-8 k-frames on early a bodies. as far as the 273 manifolds being visually the same (choke*cough*gasp*) they are way diffrent visually,where they meet up to the head they are diffrent and the exit size is way way way diffrent, in fact there was an article published by mullin and co. showing that the 340 manifolds flow 5% less than race headers so I think the 340 manifolds are a good choice. Not posting this to discredit you just sharin the fact's. been playin with early a bodies for 29 years now and have done everything but big block in them ( that is in the work's for waggin II)
 
Dan Dvorak had a 62 dart wagon that he was puttin a NHRA Stock legal 413 in....I wonder if he ever got that project goin!
 
66cuda said:
REMINDER- because some folks do not grab the thread from the start and miss some of the detail.
The application is 1966 Barracuda ( EARLY A Body)( first generation)
The K Frame is a /6 using schumaker motor mounts
the trans is a 727
Modifications: the trans mount was cut down to get the shaft geometry close to spec
Click to expand...

How about installing a proper trans mount and shimming the rear to get pinion angle back to spec? Seems easier this way than any other option.

Or is this not possible due to the size of the 727?
 
pinion angle should be correct before lowering the trans mount to accomodate the 727, use tool of your choise to rework the trans tunnel and everything will line up. you want an equal amount of angle at the trans as you do with the pinion angle of the rearend. just my opinion though
 
Here is another possible problem to overcome. With the trans mount cut in 1/2 the engine is also tilted back further than normal. You may find the motor experiences more fouling in the rear cylinders.

The stock float setting on whatever carb may not apply either,lol.
 
RESTO:
The engine is sitting 1/16 bubble off level front to back....not a huge tilt. The 727 hump section behind the bell is what is hitting using the stock trans mount. the stock mount is about 4.5 inches tall....to get the angle right and not have the hump hit the tunnel that mount is now about 2.25 inches tall....the tail is just under 3/8's away from perfect
( perfect being where the 904 sits) ( the geometry of the top of the trans is where the issue is....the bottom plane is pretty close to where it is supposed to be.
the car has been rotisserie'd and is painted flawless on all sides...a wee bit late in the game to start hackin the tunnel......in order to get the stock mount to fit I would have to cut out the section that covers the hump of the 727 (hump is where the drums are)...the bell fits fine. The rest of the clearences appear to be OK...but like the book says there is only about 1/8 clearence across the top of the bell.....if the motor is buckled to the frame a solid mount is not much of a worry.
Waggin:
Well I do not have them here for pictures I am operating from memory (right now) so there may be a slight difference port side...but as memory serves me, the port side looked to be the same size and shape when they were sitting side by side.... .again there is a definite difference dump side, I believe that is where the restriction may come in. When they get back I will take pictures...( worth a 1000 words)
 
ALSO...the stock 340 manifold and the T/A manifolds in the picture are different according to chrysler parts at a local dealer...not just psrt number difference they are for a different vehicle.....still 340 but I think mine are for an E body
 
I don't need pic's, I have the 340 manifolds the 318 for 1968 and the manifold for early a bodies to look at the outlet is way smaller on the non 340 manifolds and the inlets are smaller also. but being the motor mounts are at the front of the engine when you lower the trans it causes the manifold to hit the coupler. so I guess you will have to get some headers because your kinda stuck since the car is this far along or switch to a 904 transmission.
66cuda said:
RESTO:
The engine is sitting 1/16 bubble off level front to back....not a huge tilt. The 727 hump section behind the bell is what is hitting using the stock trans mount. the stock mount is about 4.5 inches tall....to get the angle right and not have the hump hit the tunnel that mount is now about 2.25 inches tall....the tail is just under 3/8's away from perfect
( perfect being where the 904 sits) ( the geometry of the top of the trans is where the issue is....the bottom plane is pretty close to where it is supposed to be.
the car has been rotisserie'd and is painted flawless on all sides...a wee bit late in the game to start hackin the tunnel......in order to get the stock mount to fit I would have to cut out the section that covers the hump of the 727 (hump is where the drums are)...the bell fits fine. The rest of the clearences appear to be OK...but like the book says there is only about 1/8 clearence across the top of the bell.....if the motor is buckled to the frame a solid mount is not much of a worry.
Waggin:
Well I do not have them here for pictures I am operating from memory (right now) so there may be a slight difference port side...but as memory serves me, the port side looked to be the same size and shape when they were sitting side by side.... .again there is a definite difference dump side, I believe that is where the restriction may come in. When they get back I will take pictures...( worth a 1000 words)
Click to expand...
 
If you can post the part #s for them we can check reference for you and see what's goin on there.
66cuda said:
ALSO...the stock 340 manifold and the T/A manifolds in the picture are different according to chrysler parts at a local dealer...not just psrt number difference they are for a different vehicle.....still 340 but I think mine are for an E body
Click to expand...
 
Waggin....OK you are correct the 273 ,manifolds are significantly smaller altho the shape is almost identical.....a non-studying glance they look the same but they are not. ANOTHER dead end. Called Laysons today since they seem to have copies of the spitfire and modified spitfire copies that are specific for /6 k conversions....they are out of stock and on backorder! Lovely!
 
Can you snap some pics? What config is needed? Rear dump on pass and center on the driver side?
 
how do you tell the difference btween a V8K and a 6K visually. My Dart was a 6cyl car so if I ever find some under chassis headers how will I know if they will fit?
 
Well I am peakin in the frustration zone.... Looks like I am getting locked into headers no matter what.. I really did not want to go there with this one.

Needsaresto yep thats about it...but it also has to curve around the steering shaft and then swivel back toward the rear of the car
 
waggin.
""but being the motor mounts are at the front of the engine when you lower the trans it causes the manifold to hit the coupler. so I guess you will have to get some headers because your kinda stuck since the car is this far along or switch to a 904 transmission.""

I just rebuilt the 727, 4 gear planetary s 4 clutch drums shift kit and a 2800/3000 stall......wanted something kinda bullet proof
had 904's in the past, burned everyone of them to the ground....have not had good luck with 904's 5 to be specific ( this is not a thread about the benefits of 904's please just leave it at that)

The motor mounts are at the rear most position ( behind the tabs to the rear)
the 340 manifolds do not hit the TOP of the coupler. the dump flange hits the side/bottom of the coupler from the bottom up....if i raised the back of the trans it would hit deadon....... I am also finding out( today) that I have the incorrect oil pan. Apparently mine was "switched" at the rebuilders "by accident." I now have a later model front sump pan that is beveled on only ONE side and my drag link hits it squarly where the bevel should be on the drivers side and stops the steering....ever just have one of those days?...... how do you loose an oil pan by accident?......they must have been building several 340's at the same time, pink ones to boot( dont ask)....RIGHT!! and my min pin kicks 500 yard field goals....I am NOT having a good day with this one.

OK so now my choices are
TTI - expensive beyond reasonable
Hedman - if you can find em and they will fit?? expensive
Hooker - cut my wheel wells all to hell expensive
Spitfires - I would have an easier time finding Usama Bin Laden
Laysons spitfires / 6 mod - BACKORDERED no delivery date since the company who made them is out of business
CUSTOM MADE - My exhaust guy is still frowning from me just thinkin about it

DAMN I LOVE DOING THIS .... I must be a glutton for punishment LOLOLOL
 
The "mini starter" can be had at any parts shack...just ask for one for a magnum v-6 or v-8 powered anything...LOL

Can ya get your hands on a pair of magnum engine truck manifolds? Find some and see how they fit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top