Author Topic: Cam Choices  (Read 25433 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3859
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #60 on: January 04, 2016, 09:19:21 AM »
n/m
« Last Edit: January 04, 2016, 09:21:24 AM by machoneman »
Bob Maag

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3859
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #61 on: January 04, 2016, 09:20:57 AM »
Unlike a Windsor or Cleveland in any older Mustang, I can't think of ANY FE header that fits that well and/or requires some level of custom tube bending, denting, etc. to fit. That and the wide variance in engine bay sheet metal that has sagged, twisted, and bent itself in over during the years of road pounding and maybe even accident repair.   

Once good measure of the bay's dimensions is to try and attempt to install a quality supplier's Monte Carlo cross brace (shock tower-to-tower) in any original through 1970 Mustang. Often one has to pry the towers apart just to get the bar to slide in enough to bolt it in! One other measure is to check the condition of the horizontal inner well sheetmetal where the fenders bolt on.  Here, heavy rust and/or bondo repairs mean not only is this area rusty but it has likely sagged badly as well.

http://www.fly-ford.com/MM0105-How_To_Install_an_Export_Brace_and_a_Monte_Carlo_Bar.html
Moral? No wonder the headers don't fit right.   
« Last Edit: January 04, 2016, 11:40:12 AM by machoneman »
Bob Maag

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4210
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #62 on: January 04, 2016, 09:44:53 AM »
I have never had to even dimple a Hooker 6114 on a Mustang, over 3 sets in different cars, all 4 speeds, although I have never used any of the race headers.  FPAs, the only thing I had to do on a 428 Montego is put a bar inside the collector and pull it slightly to center, on a 460 big body Mustang they slid in, although a 67 F100 we had to take about 1/4 out of the upper edge of the frame rail.

What kind of car is it? I think I missed it

---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

ChiefDanGeorge

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #63 on: January 04, 2016, 10:54:24 AM »
'63 Mercury Colony Park.

I have never had to even dimple a Hooker 6114 on a Mustang, over 3 sets in different cars, all 4 speeds, although I have never used any of the race headers.  FPAs, the only thing I had to do on a 428 Montego is put a bar inside the collector and pull it slightly to center, on a 460 big body Mustang they slid in, although a 67 F100 we had to take about 1/4 out of the upper edge of the frame rail.

What kind of car is it? I think I missed it

machoneman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3859
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #64 on: January 04, 2016, 11:42:42 AM »
I have never had to even dimple a Hooker 6114 on a Mustang.

Yes, that is an exception I missed. Hooker race headers do require some light 'massaging'!
Bob Maag

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4210
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #65 on: January 04, 2016, 12:55:27 PM »
With a full size, I am afraid I have no idea which header fits best, but I have to assume it's not a big deal for FPA, just make sure he knows you need the early/CJ flange

The other cool thing on that car is you could go with cast iron headers for the stock look, and they do pretty well power wise and pretty much bolt on and go.  I think the repop ones would be comparable in price to ceramic FPSs too.

Galaxie guys, any opinions?
---------------------------------
Ross
Bullock's Power Service, LLC
- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

ChiefDanGeorge

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #66 on: January 04, 2016, 01:13:06 PM »
Getting cast iron headers is an issue of scarcity. ALthough I haven't combed ebay too much looking for them.

With a full size, I am afraid I have no idea which header fits best, but I have to assume it's not a big deal for FPA, just make sure he knows you need the early/CJ flange

The other cool thing on that car is you could go with cast iron headers for the stock look, and they do pretty well power wise and pretty much bolt on and go.  I think the repop ones would be comparable in price to ceramic FPSs too.

Galaxie guys, any opinions?

cattleFEeder

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #67 on: January 04, 2016, 01:39:22 PM »
On my 63.5 galaxie it has sanderson shorty headers with a toploader behind a 428.
Remember, RPM is your friend

RJP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
Re: Cam Choices
« Reply #68 on: January 04, 2016, 02:23:05 PM »
With a full size, I am afraid I have no idea which header fits best, but I have to assume it's not a big deal for FPA, just make sure he knows you need the early/CJ flange

The other cool thing on that car is you could go with cast iron headers for the stock look, and they do pretty well power wise and pretty much bolt on and go.  I think the repop ones would be comparable in price to ceramic FPSs too.

Galaxie guys, any opinions?
As a Galaxie guy I would opt for a set of shorty HP manifolds or the long branch 406-427 manifolds for a street only full size car. Any header or manifold that fits the Galaxie chassis from 1960 thru 64 should fit the Merc. I have the long branch 427 manifolds on my 61 Starliner/427, they work good and I don't have to deal with warped flanges, leaky gaskets, ground clearance issues and other maladies associated with tube headers. And yes I do run tube headers on 2 applications, one car and one boat.