Team Camaro Tech banner

21 - 40 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
The BPE HP8103 heads are their CNC ported heads and I would have thought that they would have had a raised exhaust port, up to 3/8" like the similar AFR head. But, their website claims they have a standard exhaust port location which surprised me. The standard H8002K heads, which I have, have a raised exhaust port which I confirm with an email to BPE.
I talked to them today and they are raised port heads by three hundred thousandths. Because myself, like so many others are not machinists, this seems like a head scratcher but I just keep simple for me - they are raised just under 5/16th of an inch.
I am going to go with the dynatechs and if I have to return them then so be it. But for now I am going to throw a bit more $ at this to get this car one step closer to being on road before summer 2020 is gone.

I'll let you all know how the new headers fit when I get them.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
Yes I have the '69 style tall mounts. As for the Magnum, I tried using the minimal cut approach, but subsequently after driving it for awhile I decided to cut the tunnel the full length of the trans to get my driveline angles where I wanted them. I use 5th gear a lot which helps with my low torque 302 around town (close ratio trans, 0.83 ratio 5th). The magnum is a great trans. Overdrive trans is hands down the best mod for these cars.
Thank you very much for ALL the info you have provided it has helped me make a few decisions.
For the magnum I have a fun story that makes me love all aspects of the the car community, from the helpful people on this forum to even the funny stories between aftermarket companies where they seem to get their ire up.
As a quick story: I emailed two companies that sell T56 Magnums for a quote with the specific question "To the best of your knowledge with this set-up (I provided the solid body mount info and all the mount info listed above) will I have to cut my tunnel to fit the Magnum".
One replied 100% for sure you will.
The other replied "No you will not". So I quoted the company that said 100% would have to cut the tunnel and sent it to the other asking for verification on what was different between the kits. The company who said "No you will not" replied with "Thank you for contacting us. XYZ cant install one without cutting. We have countless installs with NO Cutting… " but didn't elaborate on the kit differences.
I removed the company and put in XYZ.

I still don't know which company I will buy from as their quotes are pretty close.

Thank you again!
Mike
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,902 Posts
Thank you very much for ALL the info you have provided it has helped me make a few decisions.
For the magnum I have a fun story that makes me love all aspects of the the car community, from the helpful people on this forum to even the funny stories between aftermarket companies where they seem to get their ire up.
As a quick story: I emailed two companies that sell T56 Magnums for a quote with the specific question "To the best of your knowledge with this set-up (I provided the solid body mount info and all the mount info listed above) will I have to cut my tunnel to fit the Magnum".
One replied 100% for sure you will.
The other replied "No you will not". So I quoted the company that said 100% would have to cut the tunnel and sent it to the other asking for verification on what was different between the kits. The company who said "No you will not" replied with "Thank you for contacting us. XYZ cant install one without cutting. We have countless installs with NO Cutting… " but didn't elaborate on the kit differences.
I removed the company and put in XYZ.

I still don't know which company I will buy from as their quotes are pretty close.

Thank you again!
Mike
My TKO 600 has absolutely no more room above it, no way in hell would the magnum fit with a workable drive line angle unless my car was real high 70s style in the back with air shocks pumped up..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
When you get ready to purchase and install a T56 request input from everyone here as many have installed OD trans in their cars and can provide a lot of good feedback and tips that can make the job easier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cuesplus

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
I was quoted from Silversport Transmissions I would not have to cut my trans tunnel to fit the T56 Magnum. They were absolutely correct in my case. 1969 camaro 396 with stock frame mount bushings and motor mounts. The trans does not touch the tunnel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
I was quoted from Silversport Transmissions I would not have to cut my trans tunnel to fit the T56 Magnum. They were absolutely correct in my case. 1969 camaro 396 with stock frame mount bushings and motor mounts. The trans does not touch the tunnel.
Very interesting. May I ask a clarification question back?
When you say "stock frame mount bushings and motor mounts" do you know the numbers? Here is the chart that made me buy and use the motor and frame mounts I used for my small block: http://www.pozziracing.com/Media/camaro_motor_mt_numbers.jpg (Where it say brackets it is equal to the frame mounts and "mounts" equals the motor mounts.)
BUT then there is this chart that for your 396 BB it has different part #s...

It makes my head hurt.
But if you know the numbers you have then maybe I could research those part #s and see where it might sit the transmission in the tunnel.
I DO plan on doing this swap but $$ is going to take a bit to get together so any info between then and now I'll gather up and maybe have an easier time with the magnum than I am with the headers!

Thank you,
Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
I don’t have the numbers but the stock frame mount bushings are made of rubber. The thicker the bushing is,would raise the body from the frame giving more clearance above the trans. Make sure you have the correct motor mount brackets for your engine. I added Dougs 328 1 7/8” headers to my car last year. They cleared the steering box easily but I had to ding the headers underneath the car in two places and relocate the stock medal fuel line on the passenger sub frame. This is a common issue on installing headers unless your willing to pay big bucks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
I don’t have the numbers but the stock frame mount bushings are made of rubber. The thicker the bushing is,would raise the body from the frame giving more clearance above the trans. Make sure you have the correct motor mount brackets for your engine. I added Dougs 328 1 7/8” headers to my car last year. They cleared the steering box easily but I had to ding the headers underneath the car in two places and relocate the stock medal fuel line on the passenger sub frame. This is a coming issue on installing headers unless your willing to pay big bucks.
Ah! I am sorry, I misread.
When you wrote "frame mount bushings" I thought you were referring to the frame mounts that mate up to the motor mounts. Understand now.
Those mount bushings I have are the solid mounts from global west (GLS-800). They are full height (global west also sells a set that I think have a 1/2" drop).

I tried the dougs model # D368s but they hit the floor pan on the passenger side so back they went. I now know with my raised port heads it might be making the header search a bit harder. I have one more reply I am waiting on to see if the dynatechs will fit with my raised port heads.

Mike
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,902 Posts
I was quoted from Silversport Transmissions I would not have to cut my trans tunnel to fit the T56 Magnum. They were absolutely correct in my case. 1969 camaro 396 with stock frame mount bushings and motor mounts. The trans does not touch the tunnel.
My buddy bought a 68 Firebird 400 with a T56 and a stock tunnel. It has the jacked up in the back look, it works, but no way for him to get it close to level Or even a very slight rake.
but like you and my buddy, I’ve heard people make it work.
 

·
Premium Member
1968 Z28 Camaro
Joined
·
70 Posts
I have Dynatech, no clearance problems with PS or anywhere else, but I use a shorty plug for #5. Dynatech has ball and socket style connectors at the collector and I wouldn't have anything else; never a leak.
Which dynatech headers do you have?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,128 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #33 (Edited)
Ok folks here I am back again after getting my Dynatech 740-11610 headers.
I will say they, so far, are the best fitting of the headers I have tried so far. The spark plug clearance is fantastic for full length spark plugs.
Now of course if they worked 100% I would have simply wrote "Whooo FN hoooo! they work!!!!" but now I am stumped. Other headers had them hitting the passenger side floorboard as the issue, the Dynatech headers fit pretty well for the passenger side where the issue is the collector hitting the transmission cross-member a bit but nothing a little heat and a slight bend wouldn't take care of. The drivers side collector has the same issue BUT the bigger issue is the header sitting within card-stock width of hitting the power steering box. This is with the header installed without the gasket. Therefore unless the gasket changes the angle slightly the headers will sit right on the power steering box once I install the gasket.

I guess that means I need to add in the power steering box info for a more complete picture... it is from a Jeep grand Cherokee 92 – 98 (model # 27-7525).

A complete list in this post:
3945507 Drivers side frame mount | 3945508 Passenger side frame mount
3.1117 Motor mount equivalent (3990918) from Energy suspension Motor Mount - Chevrolet Chevelle - 3.1117
31108G Transmission mount from Energy suspension
Model # 27-7525 power steering box

As I wrote I am stumped.
I think I have listed everything that could change the sitting of the engine, what part might interfere and why I chose what I chose.

The frame mounts are for a HO 350, the motor mounts are the stock equivalent from energy suspension, the transmission cross-member is for a small block, the transmission mount is the match for the motor mounts from also from energy suspension. The frame and motor mounts were chosen to clear the 8" balancer and with this combination it does AND the oil pan has about 1/4" clearance above the frame.

I am quite afraid that if I try different frame and motor mounts to lower the engine I will have an issue with the oil pan or the harmonic balancer but if I chose the parts that are listed here: http://www.pozziracing.com/Media/camaro_motor_mt_numbers.jpg for the 1969 camaro with a 350 doesn't it seem right that the headers would clear the power steering box?Also why is my engine seeming to sit so high (high enough to cause header fitment issues) when I also have solid full-height body bushings?
I suspect the raised port heads contribute to this too.

Oy Vey!!!!

Mike
 

·
Registered
Mike
Joined
·
458 Posts
IIRC, the Energy Suspension 3.1108G transmission mount is taller then a stock transmission mount.
You might try switching to the Energy Suspension 3.1158G transmission mount. The 3.1158G trans mount (black) is shorter then the 3.1108G trans mount (red) currently installed in your Camaro. The pre-load plate adds about another 1/8" of height.
265351

Or... you could install a Prothane transmission mount. It is 1.75" in height and does not use a pre-load plate. I think this is the same height as the stock GM transmission mount.
The goal would be to lower the tail shaft of your transmission... which in turn would drop the engine angle slightly from front to rear. By doing this, you would be lowering the header collectors from the body/trans mount without lowering the front of the engine. Be sure to check your driveline angle before attempting.

I am not sure how this trans mount change would effect the clearance between the header tube and the power steering box... but nothing a hammer and a piece of round pipe couldn't resolve.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
RifRaf may have your solution with the shorter trans mount. When I originally installed my Dynatechs I had the OEM trans crossmember and an OEM trans mounting pad which is shorter than some of the poly mounts and I had no clearance issues. Also if using OEM style rubber engine mounts I'd stick with an OEM style rubber trans mount. The Dynatechs do fit tight to the floor, but better than having them hang down too low and hit every speed bump or high spot in the road.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
The goal would be to lower the tail shaft of your transmission... which in turn would drop the engine angle slightly from front to rear. By doing this, you would be lowering the header collectors from the body/trans mount without lowering the front of the engine. Be sure to check your driveline angle before attempting.

I am not sure how this trans mount change would effect the clearance between the header tube and the power steering box... but nothing a hammer and a piece of round pipe couldn't resolve.
I just might try a lower height transmission mount but that is, at most 3/8 of an inch of clearance needed for clearance and easy clamping of the exhaust. A welded exhaust I could get by with an extra 1/8 of an inch. That piece isn't too much of a concern as the heating and bending of the collector seems pretty simple.

The hammer of the tube might be an idea BUT it might be a longish dent and what is the minimum I should shoot for to be away from the power steering box? Just enough for rubbing clearance or more for heat too?
Also the headers are stepped headers and it just might be VERY close to a weld where I may need to dent the header in.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Mike
Joined
·
458 Posts
Also the headers are stepped headers and it just might be VERY close to a weld where I may need to dent the header in.
Ohhh... that could be a problem. You might want to contact Dynatech to inquire about this issue.
I'm surprised you are having the steering box clearance issue, as I though Dynatech headers were supposed to address this.

Another option. When I installed my quick ratio steering box, I noticed that the newer steering box had a couple of wider "ribs" on the header side of the steering box. I just used a grinder and file to remove some of the material from the rib that was closest to my header tube to gain some additional clearance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
Ohhh... that could be a problem. You might want to contact Dynatech to inquire about this issue.
I'm surprised you are having the steering box clearance issue, as I though Dynatech headers were supposed to address this.

Another option. When I installed my quick ratio steering box, I noticed that the newer steering box had a couple of wider "ribs" on the header side of the steering box. I just used a grinder and file to remove some of the material from the rib that was closest to my header tube to gain some additional clearance.
I have emailed them last night to and I hope they can give me an idea.
Yes I also thought they addressed this too but here is how close it is, and that is without the gasket btwn the head and header. I have seen pictures of Dynatech headers and camaros posted here with finger width gaps between the power steering box and the headers.
265377


(please ignore the tyvek tape as I wanted to protect them when I installed / removed the headers)

BUT that is also why I posted the frame and motor mount info. I seriously wonder if I had the wrong mounts but I just don't see how that is possible unless the jpg I linked in the posts above is wrong.
Now with that being said, I do not know of any of the small block chevy mounts that shift the engine to one side or the other, just the big block mounts. So for this issue it shouldn't be a frame and motor mount issue????

Mike
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
Looks like you have about the same amount of clearance as I do with my Dynatechs. Probably the photos with a finger width of clearance have manual steering boxes. Mine are close to the PS box but don't hit it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,902 Posts
Thats crazy your'e having such an issue getting a set of headers. those heads are either real fat or like you mentioned a engine mount issue.
I don't recall.., are the engine mounts marked with the p/n# ? I can look at mine with the inspection camera tonight if they are,to check my p/n#s
I have very acceptable clearance around my dynatech headers. as my picture on post #18 shows
 
21 - 40 of 61 Posts
Top