70_Fastback
Hell Bent for Speed
"daveSanborn" said:
He's got a 65.
-
Hello there guest and Welcome to The #1 Classic Mustang forum!
To gain full access you must Register. Registration is free and it takes only a few moments to complete.
Already a member? Login here then!
Test fit of Messr Sanborn's CCM's - update - Rethinking my options
- Thread starter cmayna
- Start date
He's got a 65.
daveSanborn
Active Member
Okay...... if it'll fit within a 65, a '68 should be comparable.
Fast68back
Guest
"70_Fastback" said:
He has both....
daveSanborn
Active Member
Yes, one of them is running a stroked 351C-4V though. Curious what headers he's using is all.
He's using that unusual header combination that has a cross-over tube that goes under the engine, IIRC.
Dave,
You do make some good points and at this point I have not made up my mind for I don't want to ignore the possibility that for this particular application, stock might be better afterall, even if my cost would be near the same.
The primary's that FPA uses are 1-3/4" in diameter. The collector is 3". The somewhat rectangular holes in both the stock heads and exhaust manifolds are 2" tall by 1-3/4" wide. Which is a good size bigger than the primary tube. Thus applying a 1-3/4" a primary tube opening to a bigger rectangular hole is going to result in some blockage or resistance as the exhaust goes from the head into the header.
I do know that with FPA headers in this application, I would need to use a power steering drop bracket on the frame rail.
Here's a pic of a template I made over the weekend showing the shape of the opening of the exhaust ports on the heads. As mentioned above, the exhaust manifold have a matching shape hole as well.
Yes, I could have photographed the manifolds but they're at home:
You do make some good points and at this point I have not made up my mind for I don't want to ignore the possibility that for this particular application, stock might be better afterall, even if my cost would be near the same.
The primary's that FPA uses are 1-3/4" in diameter. The collector is 3". The somewhat rectangular holes in both the stock heads and exhaust manifolds are 2" tall by 1-3/4" wide. Which is a good size bigger than the primary tube. Thus applying a 1-3/4" a primary tube opening to a bigger rectangular hole is going to result in some blockage or resistance as the exhaust goes from the head into the header.
I do know that with FPA headers in this application, I would need to use a power steering drop bracket on the frame rail.
Here's a pic of a template I made over the weekend showing the shape of the opening of the exhaust ports on the heads. As mentioned above, the exhaust manifold have a matching shape hole as well.
Yes, I could have photographed the manifolds but they're at home:
Last edited by a moderator:
I conversed with Stan of FPA via email mentioning my concerns and he came back with the following comments
"Not to worry We custom fit and form the round tube to the square port. No blockage in flow is allowed here!
Stan F.P.A."
"We actually offer 4 different 351 C port shapes for what "is" and "has" been in the market for cylinder head configurations on the 351 C heads. In the photos below, the oval shape is a gasket for the 351C 2V head or Aussie quench 2V head or aluminum Aussie/ Edelbrock head. The photo is relative to show converting a 1 3/4" round tube to a basic oval or a continuation to square the corners is not a big deal. The Aussie 3VC is a combo with the 4V exhaust port and the 2V intake port. Strictly F.Y.I.
Stan F.P.A. "
Following two photo's showing 4V header on 1 3/4" tube.
Well the Jury is still out for I'm not 100% sold in either direction. I do have a couple more questions for Stan which depending on his answers might swing the vote then again, I do like the idea of seeing how happy I would be with these stock logs, machined, etc. Nothing is set into concrete and if I went stock and hated it, I could consider swapping out later for some headers.
Dave,
Actually I'm not at all into having headers cluttering up the engine bay. It's not that important to me. If I could be happy with them stockers for this application, why not give them a try?
Machining would cost me only $70 for the pair.
"Not to worry We custom fit and form the round tube to the square port. No blockage in flow is allowed here!
Stan F.P.A."
"We actually offer 4 different 351 C port shapes for what "is" and "has" been in the market for cylinder head configurations on the 351 C heads. In the photos below, the oval shape is a gasket for the 351C 2V head or Aussie quench 2V head or aluminum Aussie/ Edelbrock head. The photo is relative to show converting a 1 3/4" round tube to a basic oval or a continuation to square the corners is not a big deal. The Aussie 3VC is a combo with the 4V exhaust port and the 2V intake port. Strictly F.Y.I.
Stan F.P.A. "
Following two photo's showing 4V header on 1 3/4" tube.
Well the Jury is still out for I'm not 100% sold in either direction. I do have a couple more questions for Stan which depending on his answers might swing the vote then again, I do like the idea of seeing how happy I would be with these stock logs, machined, etc. Nothing is set into concrete and if I went stock and hated it, I could consider swapping out later for some headers.
Dave,
Actually I'm not at all into having headers cluttering up the engine bay. It's not that important to me. If I could be happy with them stockers for this application, why not give them a try?
Machining would cost me only $70 for the pair.