Finally got things going in the right direction by making my own mounts and denting $800 headers...

Denting TTI'S? Told them about that 4-5 years ago when I got one of the first sets.

-Daty

Very disappointing that TTI couldn't take care of this properly.

I installed a 5.7 in a 70 GTX on an Alterktion. I used an engine from a car not a truck. The engineer at TTI flat told me he could NOT make a set of headers for that application. Could not get around the starter. I really do not understand whay everyone "has to have headers" on these gen3 hemis. The exhaust manifold is so short to the collector ,how much can you really gain for the money and hassle.
Can it flow much better than this once you pass the heads?

Darius,

What are the exhaust manifolds off of that you are using?

What I don't get is people leaving 25 or more HP at peak and even 5 ft# of torque across the rev range on the table. That's not efficiency. Just because you don't want to deal with headers. Many headers now days fit, most don't leak when properly installed and some fit without modification. BUT WHEN EVERYTHTING IS CUSTOM, ALL ABSOLUTS OR LIKELYIES ARE OFF!!!!
If manufacturers could justify long tube header price, pass NVH issues, install complications, guarantee they would last past the EPA mandate of 100,000 miles and would be trouble free' "no warranty issues". THEY WOULD USE THEM. The power and mileage would be up, EFFICIENCY would be up!! That's why we hot rodders use them!!! They make POWER!! Mileage "efficiency" is a bonus..

I was not suggesting anyone change the entire front suspension or even change their approach. All I was asking is how much more can you gain by going to a custom header of some kind vs what you get from the stock exhaust manifold (my car has stock 5.7 exhaust manifolds). I posted the photo to show just how direct the flow will be with out using headers.
I am not a racer so 25 hp won't mean as much to me as some others,therefore the cost and hassle of the header application wouldn't be worth it to me. I will post dyno results when I get to that point with this car...maybe March sometime.

On multiple cylinder engines, a dedicated exhausttube like in a header will scavenge a cylinder better than a combined log-type manifold will.
You still think in terms of flow, while you should be thinking in terms of 4 (hopefully) equal tubes ending all together in a plane in a formed collector where each tube is 'helping' the other tubes to scavenge/pull out the exhaust away from the cylinders.

Besides all this, my believe was that only A-body Mopars have space issues when it comes to 3gen Hemi exhausts.
I also have 5.7Hemi Dart in the works and I'm currently still convinced I will be making my own headers for this setup.

This engine won't be just another Gen III btw. 420" , 247/255 cam and cnc 6.1 heads that typically flow in the 360's at .600 lift with stock valves. I wish 2" primaries would've cleared. The reason for me acting like a big baby over my header clearance is the pictures of TTI's display are so misleading.

And here is reality, see attachment above.

I feel your pain. Don't you just despise the term "bolt on" ? I bought a serpentine pully kit billed as "bolt on". They conveniently forgot to mention the fact you need to eliminate the EGR valve to let the AC compressor fit. No big doing without it but they could have at least supplied the block off plates in the kit or maybe "mention" that would be the case!

It's hard not to get down right angry. I'm just going to stick with the stock front car acc. drive.

Did I mention the very front header bolt holes on BOTH sides will need ovaled out to? Yeah....

TTI's seem to be a necessary evil. Nobody can believe that I'm spending $750 for mild steel headers.

Hooker has a 5.7 header but not a 6.1...Pretty disappointing.

Oil cooler plumbing with thermostat. It will be protected by license plate on the street.

Heck mine is even easier to get to than that one.