What do you guys recommend for the best fitting headers that do not require modifications?
Quote from: Horsman on November 20, 2019, 04:27:18 PM
What do you guys recommend for the best fitting headers that do not require modifications?
I doubt that there is any such thing. They all are going to need some kind of mod to get them right.
I like the JBA 6611. They fit will little trauma.
I have a set of reproduction Tri-Y headers on my GT-350. I have an auto and power steering, but not sure if it makes much of a difference. The headers fit with no problems or modifications, I just had an H-pipe made at the muffler shop.
Greek
I have Hooker competition headers on my 67 4speed 350, still have power steering. No modification to headers at all, just had to install lowering bracket for power steering slave cylinder.
Quote from: Sixx7shelby on November 20, 2019, 08:13:35 PM
I have Hooker competition headers on my 67 4speed 350, still have power steering. No modification to headers at all, just had to install lowering bracket for power steering slave cylinder.
Keep a eye on the lowering bracket. The longer bracket gives extra leverage to cause flex to the base. The flex will often cause the captive nuts in the frame to loosen. If the bracket moves when turning at all then it is happening. Welding to the frame rail is the best alternative however even that will some break loose. It is more of a problem on the heavier BB but happens to some SB also. If it is not moving feel lucky and keep watch.
I have used both hooker headers and the Tri-Y's. Both needed some adjustments. I like the sound of the Hookers but the heat generated by them was a major problem. The Tri-Y's fit easier but didn't have the sound over the stock manifolds but prefer the Tri-Y's. Ground clearance definitely improved and the floor temperature for longer trips was greatly reduced.
Dave
I've got the huge -- humongous tube -- JBA headers on the Boss. What a pain in the butt. I do so hate those things. I'm tired of them regrading my driveway because they hang so low. Ok, the car is lowered too...
Next time the engine is out it goes back to stock.
Although I've never tried these specific headers the thought of shorty 5.0 Fox style headers have always been at the back of my mind. And:
https://www.cjponyparts.com/scott-drake-shorty-header-1-5-8-black-painted-pair-289-302-1965-1970/p/EXHD78/
Just the ability to retain your standard power steering bracket (if I read this right) is worth the few horses you lose with a shorty vs the full length.
Now if you think they fit without messing about:
"1967-1970 Mustangs with a manual transmission will need to have the clutch equalizer bar modified."
I like the idea and would probably just contract this out with someone who builds headers and can route the tubes around the equalizer bar correctly. We have Stan's Headers nearby to do that.
I laughed a bit when people complained about the paint flaking off. Ya think?
Quote from: Bossbill on November 20, 2019, 09:35:49 PM
I've got the huge -- humongous tube -- JBA headers on the Boss. What a pain in the butt. I do so hate those things. I'm tired of them regrading my driveway because they hang so low. Ok, the car is lowered too...
Next time the engine is out it goes back to stock.
Although I've never tried these specific headers the thought of shorty 5.0 Fox style headers have always been at the back of my mind. And:
https://www.cjponyparts.com/scott-drake-shorty-header-1-5-8-black-painted-pair-289-302-1965-1970/p/EXHD78/
Just the ability to retain your standard power steering bracket (if I read this right) is worth the few horses you lose with a shorty vs the full length.
Now if you think they fit without messing about:
"1967-1970 Mustangs with a manual transmission will need to have the clutch equalizer bar modified."
I like the idea and would probably just contract this out with someone who builds headers and can route the tubes around the equalizer bar correctly. We have Stan's Headers nearby to do that.
I laughed a bit when people complained about the paint flaking off. Ya think?
Keep in mind that the 67/68 hipo equalizer bar may have to have the bar modified or not fit well with headers however a stock 289 Mustang Z bar may not. ;) . For instance a stock non hipo Z bar fits much better on 65/66 GT350 and tri Y headers then the hipo Z bar. That is probably why so many of them got changed over the years.
Quote from: Bob Gaines on November 20, 2019, 08:24:22 PM
Quote from: Sixx7shelby on November 20, 2019, 08:13:35 PM
I have Hooker competition headers on my 67 4speed 350, still have power steering. No modification to headers at all, just had to install lowering bracket for power steering slave cylinder.
Keep a eye on the lowering bracket. The longer bracket gives extra leverage to cause flex to the base. The flex will often cause the captive nuts in the frame to loosen. If the bracket moves when turning at all then it is happening. Welding to the frame rail is the best alternative however even that will some break loose. It is more of a problem on the heavier BB but happens to some SB also. If it is not moving feel lucky and keep watch.
+1
Already had it happen years ago Bob, thanks for posting as I did not include that in my post.
Great information guys, thank you!
My car did have headers installed when I pulled the engine, I guess that explains why my Zbar looked slightly modified. The header brand was unknown and they looked horrible since the car had been sitting for 40 plus years; the headers went in the trash. My engine builder said the HiPo manifolds will choke my engines performance so I was considering getting some headers. Still on the fence, I guess I can run the manifolds first and see how it performs. I agree, headers are usually a pain.
As I mentioned, I am running the JBA 6611 headers on my 68GT350. I had the Hookers on there and the ground clearance was too low.
The collectors on the Hookers point down and start at a lower reference point then the JBA's do to begin with.
The Hookers are 1-1/2 primary tubes and the JBA's are 1-3/4. The JBA's will fit without the ps extension but the rubber accordion boot will be up against the #5 tube.
With manual steering there is no issue with steering components at all with either the Hooker or the JBA headers.
The difference in the size of the tube diameter is worth 1/10 in the quarter mile which rough translates to 75-80hp gain over the Hookers.
The location of the collectors and the angle of them on the JBA's is MUCH better then the Hookers. They are tucked up into the chassis and will not have any ground contact issues themselves whereas the Hookers will.
My car has a lowered suspension and with the Hookers, you could not make a fist and slide it under the collectors.
It's irrelevant what will fit on a 65-66, or a 69-70. They are SIMILAR chassis but vary enough to not be an exact comparison of details, as well as how a Boss 302's or a FE fits from the same manufacturer. What matters is what fits with a 289-302 in a 67-8 chassis. Both will fit. The Jba's fit much better, even with the bigger tube.
IF you are running stock displacement, heads, cam and induction, the bigger tubes won't do anything for you.
I have run hp iron manifolds also. In fact I even tried iron 351w 4v manifolds which are larger in diameter then the 289hp manifolds and have the same configuration. They are a waste of time. They are giving away at least 30hp and make the engine feel small and rinky-dink.
Tri-y's are not what you want to run on these cars. They were a compromise on the 65-6's and were put on there for easier installation as much as anything back in the day. They are not much better then the iron manifolds are and give away almost as much potential and power.
That's pretty much what I know about the subject. *subject to revision. ;D
My build is a 331, bigger roller flat tappet cam, and bigger valves, pump gas friendly compression. I do not plan on racing the car, just having fun on the street.
Quote from: Horsman on November 21, 2019, 11:26:39 AM
My build is a 331, bigger roller flat tappet cam, and bigger valves, pump gas friendly compression. I do not plan on racing the car, just having fun on the street.
Mine is a 347 with AFR 185 heads and 2x4 Holley's on a Ford T/A intake. 550 lift solid cam. Just under 10:1 cr. The bigger tubes work better for me.
You don't need to race the car to understand 1/10 better in the 1/4. It is a basis for comparison like head flow is.
I was unaware of the equalizer bar and lowering bracket issues. Learn something new every day!
Quote from: shelbydoug on November 21, 2019, 11:32:34 AM
Quote from: Horsman on November 21, 2019, 11:26:39 AM
My build is a 331, bigger roller flat tappet cam, and bigger valves, pump gas friendly compression. I do not plan on racing the car, just having fun on the street.
Mine is a 347 with AFR 185 heads and 2x4 Holley's. The bigger tubes work better for me.
You don't need to race the car to understand 1/10 better in the 1/4. It is a basis for comparison like head flow is.
The headers are a consideration, especially since it will be much easier to install a set since the engine is out of the car.
Quote from: greekz on November 21, 2019, 11:42:53 AM
I was unaware of the equalizer bar and lowering bracket issues. Learn something new every day!
Stock equalizer bars on these cars with anything more then the original 2,600 pound clutch are problematic. The clutches were never serviced new from Ford. What you got from Ford was a Ford Certified Rebuild at 2,800 pounds. Aftermarket clutches started at 3,200 pounds.
That immediately turned the equalizer into silly putty. You need to do SOMETHING with the stock equalizer under ANY conditions.
JBA actually offers one theoretically to use with their headers. I wind up inventing so many new swear words using someone else's along with scraped and cut knuckles and finger tips that I think very little of just making my own.
ANY owner of any vintage Mustang with a manual transmission HAS to deal with the equalizer bar situation. There are more then a few solutions including going to a hydraulic clutch.
"You" have to "learn" somewhere. It might as well start with the equalizer? ;D
BOTH the JBA and Hookers are pretty easy to install. They drop right in and you shouldn't compare the installation stories of headers on a GT500 as anything like a small block. A SB is a piece of cake.
I have a headers from Ford Powertrain Applications on my 69 GT 350 with the stock clutch linkage they fit great I didn't have to beat on them for clearance also they tuck up nicely under the car. And didn't have to modify the clutch mechanism Well worth the price. If you don't see what you looking for on the website give them a call.
Dan
http://www.fordpowertrain.com
Quote from: Dan353 on November 21, 2019, 03:04:18 PM
I have a headers from Ford Powertrain Applications on my 69 GT 350 with the stock clutch linkage they fit great I didn't have to beat on them for clearance also they tuck up nicely under the car. And didn't have to modify the clutch mechanism Well worth the price. If you don't see what you looking for on the website give them a call.
Dan
http://www.fordpowertrain.com
There is nothing different on a 69/70 GT350 z bar compared to a 69/70 regular Mustang version. 65/66 used a special hipo Z bar and 67/68 used a special hipo Z bar (even though 68 didn't need it?)
Quote from: Bob Gaines on November 21, 2019, 07:11:17 PM
Quote from: Dan353 on November 21, 2019, 03:04:18 PM
I have a headers from Ford Powertrain Applications on my 69 GT 350 with the stock clutch linkage they fit great I didn't have to beat on them for clearance also they tuck up nicely under the car. And didn't have to modify the clutch mechanism Well worth the price. If you don't see what you looking for on the website give them a call.
Dan
http://www.fordpowertrain.com
There is nothing different on a 69/70 GT350 z bar compared to a 69/70 regular Mustang version. 65/66 used a special hipo Z bar and 67/68 used a special hipo Z bar (even though 68 didn't need it?)
The hipo z bar is simply to clear the hipo exhaust manifold. It isn't any better or sturdier then the standard version.
Quote from: shelbydoug on November 21, 2019, 08:15:27 PM
Quote from: Bob Gaines on November 21, 2019, 07:11:17 PM
Quote from: Dan353 on November 21, 2019, 03:04:18 PM
I have a headers from Ford Powertrain Applications on my 69 GT 350 with the stock clutch linkage they fit great I didn't have to beat on them for clearance also they tuck up nicely under the car. And didn't have to modify the clutch mechanism Well worth the price. If you don't see what you looking for on the website give them a call.
Dan
http://www.fordpowertrain.com
There is nothing different on a 69/70 GT350 z bar compared to a 69/70 regular Mustang version. 65/66 used a special hipo Z bar and 67/68 used a special hipo Z bar (even though 68 didn't need it?)
The hipo z bar is simply to clear the hipo exhaust manifold. It isn't any better or sturdier then the standard version.
You misunderstand my point. It does not have anything to do with how sturdy it is but the SHAPE. The hipo Z bars are shaped different to clear the cast iron hipo exhaust manifolds compared to a non hipo Z bar . That difference in shape of the Hipo Z bar has a adverse effect with header clearances compared to the non hipo variety as it pertains to Tri Y or regular headers.Of course the 65/66 and 67/68 hipo Z bars are different from each other and do not interchange between years.
Quote from: Bob Gaines on November 21, 2019, 11:16:38 PM
Quote from: shelbydoug on November 21, 2019, 08:15:27 PM
Quote from: Bob Gaines on November 21, 2019, 07:11:17 PM
Quote from: Dan353 on November 21, 2019, 03:04:18 PM
I have a headers from Ford Powertrain Applications on my 69 GT 350 with the stock clutch linkage they fit great I didn't have to beat on them for clearance also they tuck up nicely under the car. And didn't have to modify the clutch mechanism Well worth the price. If you don't see what you looking for on the website give them a call.
Dan
http://www.fordpowertrain.com
There is nothing different on a 69/70 GT350 z bar compared to a 69/70 regular Mustang version. 65/66 used a special hipo Z bar and 67/68 used a special hipo Z bar (even though 68 didn't need it?)
The hipo z bar is simply to clear the hipo exhaust manifold. It isn't any better or sturdier then the standard version.
You misunderstand my point. It does not have anything to do with how sturdy it is but the SHAPE. The hipo Z bars are shaped different to clear the cast iron hipo exhaust manifolds compared to a non hipo Z bar . That difference in shape of the Hipo Z bar has a adverse effect with header clearances compared to the non hipo variety as it pertains to Tri Y or regular headers.Of course the 65/66 and 67/68 hipo Z bars are different from each other and do not interchange between years.
I understood. I was just attempting to emphasize the differences as I understand them. I don't remember specifically if I tried the HP z bar with either the Hooker or the JBA's. It was just easier for me to make my own.
As far as I know, Stans headers for this application are tri-y's. Any tri-y's are for ease of fitment, not for performance. You are installing headers for performance aren't you?
I've had Tri-y headers on my 67 GT350 manual since the mid eighties. I think they are Hedman. I had to use the ram lowering bracket, which initially split the pinch weld along the outside edge of the chassis rail, but I've had that welded and it's been no trouble since.
There are no clearance issues either the Z-bar, but I had to make a small dent to clear the corner of the bell-housing near the starter. The great advantage of Tri-Ys is that they can be installed and removed from above the engine.
I run a stock clutch and my Z-bar has broken twice, but this is not related to the headers.
David
This is one of the best places to get headers. Check out their different applications that they carry.
http://www.fordpowertrain.com/FPAindex/headers2.htm
Roy
This is what you need.
(https://i.imgur.com/6mIrKmyh.jpg)