Has Anyone Used the Holley/Hooker Exhaust Manifolds?

[toddoky]

Originally Posted by OBeer-WAN-Kenobi

Thanks!

It looks really close to mine. At first I couldn't figure it out in relation to that spark plug until I realized you didn't have one in the hole.
It would "appear" that the hookers would fit mine. Last I checked though, you didn't offer stainless steel for the LS swap application. Why is that?

On the other hand, I've got to do something about my subframe now that I found it's pretty crappy. Don't have an extra one laying about do you? LOL

You have to be careful making that assumption of fitment as the new Hooker bracket kit retrofits 1973-up clamshell mounts into the car and are quite different from any swap plate/frame stand set-up. The biggest difference would be the clearance that allows splitting the tubes around the steering box, and the engine height position that is obtained with the mounts. If the height of your mounts is greater than you will not be able to acheive the 3 degree engine/transmission inclination angle we desined into the componenents without having interference issues between the collectors and the floor. That would result in you having to tilt your transmission down at the tail end lower the collectors at the expense of worsening your U-joint working angles. Although the may or may not bolt-in with your mounts, they were in no way designed to do so and provide optimized fitment/operational geometry in your finished package.

As a final comment, Hooker does offer all our LS swap applications in stainless along with all the premium components you'd like to see with the upgrade in material...here's a shot of the stainless version of the same header, notice the investment cast flanges and formed merge collectors that differentiate these headers from their mild steel siblings.

[OBeer-WAN-Kenobi]

Originally Posted by toddoky

You have to be careful making that assumption of fitment as the new Hooker bracket kit retrofits 1973-up clamshell mounts into the car and are quite different from any swap plate/frame stand set-up. The biggest difference would be the clearance that allows splitting the tubes around the steering box, and the engine height position that is obtained with the mounts. If the height of your mounts is greater than you will not be able to acheive the 3 degree engine/transmission inclination angle we desined into the componenents without having interference issues between the collectors and the floor. That would result in you having to tilt your transmission down at the tail end lower the collectors at the expense of worsening your U-joint working angles. Although the may or may not bolt-in with your mounts, they were in no way designed to do so and provide optimized fitment/operational geometry in your finished package.

I bet I'm pretty close. Jegs sells your headers in a kit with the mounts that I have. I have around a half inch of clearance from your 302-2 pan to my crossmember when sitting at close to the right angle. I did have to swap out the engine mounts that came in the kit with Anchor 2283's which raised it about 3/8-7/16 but I have the lower 302/350 frame stands and the mounts that came in the kit were meant for the 327 stands. With the mounts in the kit, I was pretty much sitting on the crossmember with the oil pan.

P.S. Could you write the part of your oil pan instructions in BOLD where it says that some engines need a dip stick plug removed before the new oil pan is installed? You know, so dipsticks like me don't install the whole thing and then notice there is no place to put the dipstick. LOL

[toddoky]

Originally Posted by OBeer-WAN-Kenobi

I bet I'm pretty close. Jegs sells your headers in a kit with the mounts that I have. I have around a half inch of clearance from your 302-2 pan to my crossmember when sitting at close to the right angle. I did have to swap out the engine mounts that came in the kit with Anchor 2283's which raised it about 3/8-7/16 but I have the lower 302/350 frame stands and the mounts that came in the kit were meant for the 327 stands. With the mounts in the kit, I was pretty much sitting on the crossmember with the oil pan.

P.S. Could you write the part of your oil pan instructions in BOLD where it says that some engines need a dip stick plug removed before the new oil pan is installed? You know, so dipsticks like me don't install the whole thing and then notice there is no place to put the dipstick. LOL

As a point of reference, the clearance between the crossmember and the new 302-2 Holley pan is 3/8" exactly with the engine installed on the new Hooker engine brackets and the Anchor 2292 mounts intended to be used with them. That may be helpful in your measurments. I'll pass along a note on the instruction edit recommendation.

Todd

[OBeer-WAN-Kenobi]

Originally Posted by toddoky

As a point of reference, the clearance between the crossmember and the new 302-2 Holley pan is 3/8" exactly with the engine installed on the new Hooker engine brackets and the Anchor 2292 mounts intended to be used with them. That may be helpful in your measurments. I'll pass along a note on the instruction edit recommendation.

Todd

Thanks,

Hey, I just saw your ninja edit above. What is the part number on the stainless headers? When I called Holley the other day the sales person said they weren't available in stainless.

[toddoky]

Originally Posted by OBeer-WAN-Kenobi

Thanks,

Hey, I just saw your ninja edit above. What is the part number on the stainless headers? When I called Holley the other day the sales person said they weren't available in stainless.

I believe he was referrring to the fact that they are not available yet. Since you asked, none of the new 1st-gen LS swap headers are available yet. If you PM me I will give you availability and part number information as I got scolded here the last time I posted sales related info...it's strictly tech and fitment related stuff coming from me until I can get Hooker/Holley signed on as a sponsor, which I'm working on.

[im4u2nvss]

I really like the clearance of these headers. Will there also be a t56 crossmember designed to work with these mounts/headers?

[toddoky]

Originally Posted by im4u2nvss

I really like the clearance of these headers. Will there also be a t56 crossmember designed to work with these mounts/headers?

Absolutely, T56 and 4L60 crossmembers to be exact (you can also install a TH400 or 2004R on the T56 crossmember.

[samckitt]

Originally Posted by toddoky

You have to be careful making that assumption of fitment as the new Hooker bracket kit retrofits 1973-up clamshell mounts into the car and are quite different from any swap plate/frame stand set-up. The biggest difference would be the clearance that allows splitting the tubes around the steering box, and the engine height position that is obtained with the mounts. If the height of your mounts is greater than you will not be able to acheive the 3 degree engine/transmission inclination angle we desined into the componenents without having interference issues between the collectors and the floor. That would result in you having to tilt your transmission down at the tail end lower the collectors at the expense of worsening your U-joint working angles. Although the may or may not bolt-in with your mounts, they were in no way designed to do so and provide optimized fitment/operational geometry in your finished package.

As a final comment, Hooker does offer all our LS swap applications in stainless along with all the premium components you'd like to see with the upgrade in material...here's a shot of the stainless version of the same header, notice the investment cast flanges and formed merge collectors that differentiate these headers from their mild steel siblings.

What headers are these that are pictured?

[toddoky]

Originally Posted by samckitt

What headers are these that are pictured?

They are the new Hooker LS swap headers coming out for 1st-gen F-bodies/3rd-gen Novas.

[jlwdvm]

I thought Hooker/Holley had a kit with everything needed to get an LS motor into a 1st gen F-body. Does anybody know the part number or have experience with it?