Dyno test 440 exhaust manifolds.

Nick's Garage just dyno tested a 440 using factory HP exhaust manifolds, max wedge manifolds and headers.
Results:
HP manifolds---- 375 horsepower------ torque- 389
Max Wedge------ 410 HP ----------------- torque-446
Headers ---------- 419 HP ----------------- torque-463
The headers (1 7/8" tubes) increased 44 horsepower. Back in the day everybody claimed they only gave you 15 more horses.

And I still hear guys today saying the HP manifolds are just as good as headers, lol. Of course they are always the car show type...scared to have to prove anything.

Boy, those Max Wedge manifolds sure do a nice job. I was not expecting that big of a difference between HP and Max Wedge.

Thanks for posting that.

All depends on the combination. Those dyno tests can be "rigged" by changing the camshaft. The results also will change a lot depending on the muffler and tailpipes that are used.

I always invite car show guys to the dragstrip and they never show...

Car show types wouldn't like the Pure Stock Drags. Most of the cars there are show worthy, and will kick their ash on the strip to boot.

He didn't change anything on the engine except the manifolds. Go to Youtube and type in Nick's Garage, he's a Mopar guy too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk9gN_-0R6g




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ez9yfr-0KXA

I have sure replaced a lot of manifolds with headers over the years and the headers always helped. But 44hp and 74lbs more torque sounds like an awful lot. The advertising departments sure missed their chance on that one. Frankly, it's been a long time now since I swapped manifolds for headers, but I don't remember that spectacular of a difference. At least not normally on a stockish combo.

Watch the video - the aerial portion above the carbs.

Notice the fuel atomization differences between the three setups.

more airflow = higher atomization!

I saw that too, interesting. Glad someone posted the numbers, I couldn’t understand a thing he said lol. I’m guessing the difference between the Max and headers is the collector and length-size of tubes. But just bolt on stuff was cool.

Andy's comment is valid... when you have a cam with a bunch of overlap, the power difference between manifolds and headers will be magnified - headers support scavenging and manifolds don't. As soon as I saw the vacuum gauge reading around 11 in-hg with a pretty lumpy idle, I knew you'd see a big difference. It was impressive to see the max wedge manifolds hang with the headers. When running a factory-type stock cam, I've seen engines only pick up 10-15 hp with headers on back-to-back dyno pulls.

Given what the power output will be w/ a factory stock cam...10-15 hp w/ headers is still a big gain.

Look again. Notice the pulsing.

Back in the day I recall 30-40 HP being tossed around by advertisers & bench-racers, but dynos & ET/MPH slips tell the truth.
Obviously, as the saying goes, "it's in the combination"; witness the F.A.S.T. guys for one example.
I recall a SoCal engine builder telling me (mid-90s) that his dyno headers were about 40 HP better than the headers that allowed a C/SA 440 to fit a '69 Cuda.
Some work ($$$) was needed to get some of that back.
The Maxie stuff in that test scored well, but those things are big, and heavy.

<---> this is where it is...... the correct cam and combo will help overcome the lack in exhaust efficiency . an effective cam would pick up the power on manifolds and there would be little if any from the addition of headers.......

If you have ever lifted them you may be surprised. Max exhaust are heavy, but not nearly as heavy as they look.

you’re both missing the point, it wasn’t an all out dyno session of many combination of parts, just three different exhaust types and how they worked on THAT engine. Heck he could’ve put Indy heads, roller cams, you name it, the purpose wasn’t for extracting every bit of HP, just what if. Take what he did and go have a coffee break. Sheesh

We're not missing the point, we know what the point is since we've done it ourselves many times. I can do a dyno test just like that and have very little difference between HP manifolds and headers. I can also run a dyno test where there is a big difference between manifolds and headers. The test itself is kind of meaningless since it can easily be rigged to provide a wide range of answers. I can do the same thing with rocker arm ratios. I can "prove" that rocker arm ratio doesn't matter or I can "prove" that it matters a lot. All I have to do is use a different camshaft. And if I don't tell anyone what cam is in the motor then most guys won't know the difference. They'll just accept what the magazine article says as fact.

Some interesting comparisons BUTTTT .....

How about some popular mods on those exh mans LIKE ....

A quickie port job with a tootsie roll .....

Maybe adding a carbide burr ......

THEN a typical extrude hone ......

T H E N an extrude job like the FAST guys get ?

And those headers ? Are those 99$ ones or 6 hun ?

I've seen a lot of misinformation in more than one magazine article

Given the type of street driving that most of us do, you aren't going to see a big difference between manifolds and headers. For those who are chasing the speed demon, headers are a no-brainer. I'm not 19 anymore and running stoplight to stoplight with my right foot into the water pump. Manifolds are fine for me.

I’m 62, headers are fine for me. Oh, and probably about a 30 pound weight savings too!

62 ? ... damn... I should respect my elders ...

Ur a seasoned citizen... gEeZeR

Wow! Now I see why people don't want to put anything on Moparts anymore. There are just some people that want to over analyze everything they can and claim it's possibly fraudulent. Sorry I shared this with Moparts, I thought it was a good learning point. From now on I'll just keep things to myself and the righteous ones on here can go back to Facebook and play with the liberal weenies there.

Not fraudulent, incomplete. And my manifolds identify as headers so all good here.

Too bad you didn't take advantage of learning from the commentary here. Like most articles the info you posted isn't the complete story.

Cripes, has the World gone NUTS!

Everyone knows that Gods County is Kent, England UK so someone is making fraudulent claims lol...

All I know is ''if you can't trust Nick'' then the world has become a VERY, VERY SAD place...

He did the same test with 'HEMI' Headers and CAST manifolds..

He also did 'HEMI' IRON heads against ALUMINUM...

Some of you folks need to get out more and smell the daffodils...

Every time you take a 'brick outta the wall of life' it gets more and more SHAKY and will one day 'FALL-DOWN'...

I'M NOT FEELING YOUR 'MOPAR LOVE' ANYMORE...

Was a good video...motor belonged to a customer that Nick was prepping for running in his car...he didn’t build it and had no idea of the internals...I wasn’t totally shocked on the weight difference between the HP and Maxie manifolds...but they sure did work...wish he’d of weighed the headers too, but of course they’d be the lightest. Did not think there would be such a huge gap on the HP and MW though...

I don't understand the perceived negativity. The video shows a lot of data, and there are a quite a few good learning points in the comments here. Nobody is attacking Nick personally, he made it clear in the video that he knew nothing about the engine internals. There will be people telling everybody to "trash the manifolds, headers are a +44 hp mod, just watch the video!"

As always, reality is a bit more complex... if you are building a new engine that you want to optimize, you have to make a decision whether it's going to be a manifold or header engine, then build accordingly.

Thanks for posting Godscountry340. I got something out of it. I sure am glad I didn't start this post.

Oh, I'm learning a lot from the commentary here. Your post just affirms my last post.

Why are you offended by the responses?

Would you have preferred to have the original post just sit there with no responses? The test results are controversial. And details matter. Both were discussed and really sorted out rather well. Something that the original post did not do. Some of the responses could have been more nuanced and more diplomatic, but this is a forum populated by car guys. Not politicians.

IMHO, overall an interesting topic with interesting responses.

I guess the comment that the test can be "rigged" to get result left the impression of calling the video a fraud.

So the learning point is headers may give large improvement depending on the combination, but also just a marginal improvement with different combo. The whole point of say I can make a dyno test do what ever I want, while true is not relevant to this post unless your accusing the video of doing just that.
I imagine most folks know that if your testing you need to keep all the variables you can constant. They probably also know just because one combo works really better with headers, that a whole different combo may not work as well with headers.

Yes you most certainly did miss it all. He tested three different manifolds on the same engine, he WASN'T TESTING THE ENGINE! You’re calling him a liar and a cheat, he ‘rigged’ the test. Very childish. Why don’t you do the identical test, exactly the same, but first you’ll have to find out all about that engine, do a video then get back to us. Until you PROVE him wrong, you’re wrong.

Yes the results were shocking on many levels indeed.

I am gonna run a 71 high-comp six pack 440, in my 71 GTX with stock hipo manifolds.
If it’s gonna kill 40 horses and 50 lbs of torque, it’s a complete nonsense.
Looking to make around 450+ hp at the flywheel/ convertor.
If it gets knocked back to factory 375 horses, that sucks...

Now Nick did say it was low cylinder pressure engine, so probably later low comp pistons?
So the headers as every one knows are lighter and MOST efficient.

Don’t think a set of 62/64 max wedge manifolds will look good in a 71 GTX Superstock lol.

Ps. Methinks using certain words in a thread, that may suggest a fiddle has occurred can ‘agitate’ certain Nick followers...
Pps I’m sure that any misunderstandings with good Mopar folks said in JEST can be overlooked...

I just hope Nick doesn’t read his fan mail on Moparts...

This thread has all the Hallmarks of a Sherlock Holmes mystery?

What’s was Nick’s intention in rigging the header results?

We have to go back to basics, motive- means- method...

If he did ‘rig the rig’ how did he do it?
Was the video continuous for the full 45 minutes?

If not, what did he do to the engine during header changes?
How did he remove 45 hp and 50 lbs of torque?

Simplest way would be to have two different engines, one Hipo, one Lopo...
The headers and max wedge pulls were done with the hipo engine, then
Swap engines and do the stock hp manifolds on the Lopo...

But here’s where it all falls down!
MOTIVE, why would he want to destroy the reputation of HP MANIFOLDS...

Is it a long held grudge going back to his childhood days of match- racing...
He said he could out run his friends 440 car ( hp manifolds) with his 318 Poly car ( with headers)
Unfortunately, Nick lost badly and wanted his revenge after 40 years...


Or has Nick secured a contract with Hooker and the makers of MAX WEDGE MANIFOLDS...

i put aside comments and try to learn [or remember what i have forgotten ] from all posts, regardless of the controversy.
to the OP, don't pay attention to the naysayers. the only way to get an answer to a question is to ask it.
i'm not a super-genius, so i ask away. especially when i can't remember..............[now where are my glasses........]

I've seen results of using headers with a 2.5 inch exhaust system with a set of the old Thrush Corvair turbo muffs making three runs back to back and then with no other changes removing the exhaust system from the headers back, about five feet long with side exit pipes in front of the rear tires and around 15 lbs. weight per side.
With exhaust and new 10x285x15 slicks inflated to 12.0 lbs. it ran 12.31 at 109.?? MPH (this test was done back in 1993 in November on a Friday night at LACR with a D.A of around 3300 FT) at 5:30 PM, 2nd run was with 11.0 lbs. and it ran 12.27 ET at 109.?? MPH at 7:30 PM with almost the same D.A. a little colder and more humidity 3rd run was at 9:30 PM with 10.0 lbs.in the slicks and it ran 12:23 at 109.?? MPH. LACR had a 10:00 PM curfew so the next runs where done the next morning starting at 10:30 AM with almost exactly the same D.A. with less humidity and a little more air temps. with similar barometer readings. I remove the pipes and muffs and it ran 11.39 at 117.6? MPH with 10.0 lbs. pressure The next run was in the left lane as I was going to run it in the bracket race that day, (I had made all three runs Friday night in the right lane to test the tire pressures) I couldn't really believe that the car had ran the much faster and quicker when I got the time slip, I didn't feel it being that much quicker and faster during that run Same tire pressure with no changes other than running in the left lane, LACR had right at .003 quicker n the right lane compared to the left lane back then, it was 11:30 AM and maybe 80 ft. higher D.A. and it ran 11:42 at 117.6? MPH I made one more TT and it ran 11.39 again in the right lane a t 117.6? MPH before starting racing. I made it to round 3 before breaking out in the left lane by running 11:42 on a 11:45 dial on the brakes at 3:30 PM
I decide to put on a set of race bullet muffs that were 14x3.5 around twenty inches long hooked up directly to the 3.5 Hooker header collectors and it ran 11:52 at 116.?? MPH 40 minutes later, I thought it would run quicker and faster with them acting like collector extensions, it didn't
Theory is one thing and actual results are the truth
I had a complete 3.0 inch exhaust system on my old pump gas Duster exiting at the rear bumper with a set of the older crimp style Magna flows 14x7x3.0 side inlet and with center outlet with a 3.0 inch perforated pipe connecting both ends mounted behind the rear end with the same Hooker fender well 1 7/8 with 3.5 inch collectors headers as was on my old 440 1969 Dart, I tested that system at the local 1/8 mile track at Madras several years back and saw only .030 ET with .2 MPH differences. 7.01 ET with 95.25 MPH with the system on and it ran 6.98 ET at 95.45 MPH, not worth removing it
I'm sure the weight loss (around 45 Lbs. total) was the real reason it ran that much different

The video by Nick was very enjoyable

This thread is not...

Nicks testing is honest and not endorsing a product. The OPPOSITE of sunday morning TVs Powernation or that stupid Hagerty Insurance YouTube channel. Nicks heavy accent is a Greek accent. Lots of nice cars in his shop of all makes.

He had an engine on dyno and exhaut manifold to play with, with customer approuval, that's it.
He said that he had to adjust A/F with the header.

Maybe header help that combo more than others. 6-pack may have more breathing capacity and perhaps magnum manifold was limiting breathing capacity of the 6-pack.
Perhaps the header help to generate more HP with Low CR and unknown cam.

At least, he show his dyno screen, does not hide A/F ratio and other data, like many other.

I like Nick and appreciate his stuff. fun to watch and entertaining.
The quality of filming/audio/editing from his media partner is well put.
I doubt they have the production budget of engine master/powernation or other. And yet Nick is as much informative in his own way.

I’m going to need neck surgery from shaking my head so much. This thread should come with a warning.

No one is implying that Nick cheated. They are saying that the dyno test only shows one variable. It’s like reading one page from a novel and claiming to know the whole plot. Oh wait, it’s 2021 where whatever we feel is reality, and you all must bow to MY reality!!! #BlackHeadersMatter #Justice4Nick #WOMANifolds #MyMotorMyChoice

Nice reply MountClaire!

ALL MANIFOLDS MATTER and thats that!

What you guys are saying is 'NOTHING IS REAL'...Especially if its on YOUTUBE!!!

You read a book, watch a film, go to the football game and take what you want from it!

KEEP IT TO YOURSELF, we don't want to hear about 'reds under the beds' again...

I agree. This is more like a "I wonder what would happen if I.....jetted my carb richer, jetted it leaner, increased total timing, reduced total timing.....?" It wasn't meant to be a doctoral thesis.

You could substitute the word “headers” with a variety of other components and that would still hold true.

You have to look at tests like this through the lens of “how does this compare to what I’m doing with my own package?”

On a 250hp 7.7:1 400-2bbl the difference between headers and manifolds will be pretty minimal.
On a 1000hp 572 with B1 heads it’s probably going to cost 150-200hp by putting manifolds on it......... maybe more.

The results of any test like that only shows you one thing......... how that exact particular combo responded to those exact particular changes.
Which is just as likely as not, going to have any relevance to what you’re doing with your own car.

One thing remains the same...headers make more power than manifolds.

Yes.
I''ve never heard of anyone that removed headers and put manifolds on to GAIN power.

There was a thread here from maybe 2-3 years ago where the build was some sort of 500” stroker with TF240 heads and a 6-bbl intake with a hyd roller cam designed to supposedly be ex manifold friendly......... and as I recall the power difference between the headers and manifolds was in the neighborhood of 90hp.

I really enjoy his videos and his production/editing/voiceovers are great - it’s done by his cameraman - can’t recall his name😀

A 44 HP gain by going to headers from stock HP manifolds? That is a LOT!

BUT, I will say this - I don't think Nick would doctor this & pull some funny stuff behind the scenes. If he's just swapping from the stock, to the Max Wedge, to headers, & doing dyno pulls, then I think we are seeing actual true results. I'm just really surprised there is that much of a difference. In this test, the stock HP manifolds are the baseline so he's doing the comparison right.

Did any of you watch the denting-the-headers test that Freiburger did on Engine Masters? They almost CLOSED several of the primaries before they started registering any HP losses on the dyno. That was quite an eye opener. Toward the end, I can guarantee you by the time they were 3/4 of the way through the experiment, those headers were not flowing well.

i dont think anyone meant harm in posting here. its easy to take things written wrong.. they saw improvement on that engine that way. i think thats very true. the point was ,,, can i get the same increase by changing the cam/port exhaust velocity ..... or other items ? its all air flow .this shows a weakness in the engines ability to get air out of the exhaust side.. i dont care how you get it done. the wrong set of headers will hurt it. this is more about -tuning- than actually making power .. simply put, just adding headers to an engine does not mean it will make more power. if the engine needs help with exhaust ,it will help and the better matched to what the engine needs the more help it will be.

....and, if I remember correctly, the cam choice, although believed to be a good choice, really was not that great of a choice.

The debate rages on. The two side will never come together. Budget matters, and what you start with in parts will matter. Headers will make more power. In the end build what you want.

If you want to build a 475 hp exhaust manifold std stroke 440 with iron heads and pump gas, no big deal. If you want 525 hp, you should probably use headers.

If you want to build a 550 hp exhaust manifold stroker with aluminum heads, no big deal. If you want 625 hp, you should probably use headers.

No BS from BSb ...

Now WHERES some of those extrude honed mans ?

LIKE done on that FAST hemi Road Toad ?

It's real easy. An optimized combo with headers will outperform an optimised combo with manifolds. The milder the combo producing lower output, the closer the gap. The lower the output, the closer the gap between lousy manifolds and really good ones. With headers being lighter, along with the power output increase, you cant loose. Now if power isn't the main concern, rules, or ease of installation. Then manifolds may be the right choice.
Doug

Engines are so complicated no human has yet fully understood them.
Dynos are only slightly less complicated than engines.
No test is perfect.
Most moparts members do not have evil intent.
Life has been more stressful for months.

Lightin up motorheads.

Well said 360viewer!

If Nick's dyno was the only one in the World then we have a problem.
But I'm sure Westech has got one and I know Tom Nelson has one, been there 'seen and heard' it...
Bet there's a few more in the Mopar world too, lol...

The point being, THAT COMBO HATED HP MANIFOLDS...

Is there a better combo for an iron headed sixpack engine???
The whole point of the dyno is to show us in real time, what's what!

Nick said it was a lower comp engine and the cam was lumpy.
Probably a bad combo and the HP manifolds made it a whole lot worse...
Back somewhere in the 4bbl range of boringness...

Give it a rest.

I think when they bolted the manifolds on and the motor lost 90hp........ that’s when it became pretty apparent the overall combo may not have been fully “optimized” for exhaust manifold use.

I think the slow hydraulic roller ramps and pretty big seat timing hurt that motor's manifold potential. It had like 83° overlap at the seat. I target 55° or less depending on the motor. Bracket guys successfully live and die buy a cam's 0.050" numbers. Manifold motors seem to care about actual seat timing.


And certainly you cannot argue with the header advantage in that example. I just don't think you're going to get 680 HP out of any manifold motor with any cam and a bunch of Summit Racing parts slapped together like you could do with a header motor.

Hanlon's Razor. The subject video was for fun, not to be an exhaustive peer-reviewed study on the subject.

Was hoping this thread would have disappeared after the new server came up.

A hundred years ago my street car was a 63 Plymouth with a low mileage 67 R/T 440.

It had a Max Wedge exhaust system. I loved it even though I had to replace the gaskets in the factory exhaust cutouts from time to time.

Two problems with the Max Wedge exhaust however.

Weight, I bet it cost a tenth on the track over tube headers.

Under hood heat, there was a lot of it.

Would I build the same car again?

Absolutely!

So, if you had replaced the cam(and nothing else) with another hyd roller that would have brought the power numbers between the headers and manifolds closer together........ would it make more power with manifolds....... or just make less with the headers?

From my perspective, if they were in the 580hp range on pump gas, with a hyd roller cam, 6bbl induction, thru ex manifolds......... they really weren’t doing too bad at all.
Imagine your old 505 with a 6bbl and hyd roller cam, compared to the configuration it was in during your dyno test.
580 would have been a pretty good number.....no?

i pulled out an old september 1970 popular hot rodding mag where they did a chassis dyno/drag strip test on a '70 4spd 6pak dodge. car made 244hp@4250rpm at the tires stock. car ran 13.95@100.78 with 4.10 gears. they dyno tuned the car and got 272hp@4250rpm and ran 13.74@105.63mph. then they took the car to a header shop and put on some 2 inchers. car made 318hp@4750rpm an ran 12.92@108.42mph. 74hp gain in total; pretty cute. i think the car could've 110+ if it hadn't been over geared.

i really don't have much of a dog in the manifold/header fight; i use both. but, this has been going on for decades. i remember hanging out at the chassis dyno shop in '68 and '69 and it was the same argument. seems like nothing is solved but if your a manifold lover then power isn't as straight forward as the common culture dictates. otherwise, you'll have to use your head rather than your gonads. this is also got me thinking back to the late '90's and chassis dynoing my r/t. it made 325hp between 3900rpm and 4300rpm and then fell off a cliff. what would a few hundred more usable rpm (like the '70 dodge) have netted me with a better exhaust? or, would the automatic transmission ate up all the gain?

Could be both. Although not exactly the same, but increasing the lash in mine (i.e. making the cam look smaller to the motor) made a bunch more power everywhere.

And yes, if it's 580 hp on the dyno I use.

That was with ex manifolds, correct?

The increased lash making more power if there were headers installed on the motor may or may not have played out the same.

Yes.

Correct, That is why I said that with a smaller cam in your example, the manifold motor's power might go up, and in the header application it might go down. But maybe not.

Some of the horsepower gain can come down to how well the HP exhaust manifold port is matched to the cylinder head port (and gasket). Guess how much hp you gain by just doing that on a stock '69 440 6BBL to a stock HP cast iron manifold and nothing else? Nick's a good......make that a great guy

First mod I did to my new '69 383 Road Runner back in the summer of '69 was put a set of Hooker Headers on it and they never came off even after "cooking" I don't know how many starters. Never dyno'd it but seat of the pants there was never any doubt there was a performance and HP gain and more than a few tenths better at the drag strip.

Thanks for posting Nick's video! Enjoyed it and all of the other videos he does, stand up guy IMO ..............................Nick should have done a special Moparts only version and LOST horsepower with the headers,

Mike

just to stir the pot.... who can supply an engine to go on this dyno that will not have much if any gain from headers ? i think i could......

And... I think my 413 MH engine wouldn't care a whole lot. With 233HP @ 4000 it only needs 390CFM, and max torque is ~2000.
Maybe a little better flow-tune with 4-2-1 and small tubes?

One oddity I recently found was that the VIN plate doesn't match other published figures; VIN says 233@4000
Mopar chart says:
Dodge 1971/72 V8- 413-1 4 BBL 4.188 X 3.75 7.5 to 1 265 @ 4000 445 fp @ 2400 Sodium Ex. Valves
Dodge 1971/72 V8- 413-3 4 BBL 4.188 X 3.75 7.5 to 1 238 @ 3600 407 fp @ 2000 Sodium Ex. Valves

It has the huge heads and MH manifolds, so it is a -3, but what is the definitive value for factory power?
Eric Bannerman on the FB Travco group I think has straightened me out, and I do have a 413-1 after all (I rechecked the frame # while matches the VIN and block stamping.)
"in my experience the number on the tag is only found in a couple places in factory literature as each engine has both a net and a gross HP and other publications often list the gross instead of the net that is listed on the tag. Even the stickers on the engines listing the HP are normally the gross number.
The factory 1971 salesman book lists the 413-1 HP as
Net 233 @ 4000
Gross 265 @4000
The same book lists the 413-3 as:
Net 215 @ 3600
Gross 238 @ 3600

the salesman book is just a source for both the factory net and gross HP ratings. Those are the books a Salesman used to look up options and such. The same information might be in the factory service manual. The 413-1 is listed as an option for the M375 and that's the only 1971 application it was used in as far as I know. The motor homes used or were available with the 413-1 through 1973 when the 440 replaced it.
All the truck 413 engines in 1971 used the truck style parts like the exhaust manifolds and such instead of the car version of those parts. So what you have is probably the original engine."

The important #s to me are 445 fp @ 2400 if I'm going to re-gear the drive train.

I'm still not certain what the -1-2-3 models are; if the -1 is in motorhomes and the -3 is in D500s and the like, is the -2 the car model?

Nick actually has a video that evaluates go fast goodies but in reverse. He started with a healthy street built 440 that had an RPM intake, headers and a holley carburetor. He dynoed it as such. Then he swapped headers for manifolds and tested it. Swapped RPM for iron OEM intake. Then a carter in place of the Holley. With stock parts the engine made noticeably less power but he said he would prefer the lower output with factory parts over higher output with aftermarket parts. I like him and his channel.

Hi Folks, the replies are getting more wacky by the day, but its still a good thread!

I only got interested because its the COMBO that I want to run!
1971 sixpack 'all-iron' engine with a sixpack, exhausting through them AWFUL HP manifolds...

So will someone out there PLEASE tell me the BEST COMBO???

Basically what I'm saying, who's got the best 'ALL-IRON' set-up, WITH HP manifolds and what's the CAMSHAFT choice...???

Obviously the 'supposed' SIXPACK naughty Nick was running, was a POO motor with low comp pistons, 516 heads (probably) and a lumpy 'OLD SCHOOL' cam...

Easy response - call the people that do it regularly, either Bob K (Mr. Six Pack racing) or Dwayne Porter. Buy their recommend camshaft and parts, take their advice, or have them build you an engine. They've done the development and make a few bucks for their effort. Bob K has helped us with a pure stock hemi and 440-6, and his advice has matched up with the results. If I remember correctly, you said earlier you wanted 450 HP, which won't be a problem with a six pack setup and stock manifolds. There have been similar builds on this forum with dyno results as well.

"best all iron set-up"? best would be race gas. pump gas being more practical for dual purpose. i think the most economical pump gas would have a good set of heads (i'd use KB184 pistons for open chamber), something like a summit 6401 cam, straight thru mufflers, and not over geared or over converter. race gas would open things up some power wise but would be a higher cost.

There are articles in the tech section that cover this. I did several articles 10 to 15 years ago on camshaft selection with HP manifolds as well as engine design for HP manifolds so this info has been out there for a long time.
http://www.moparts.org/Tech/Archive/bb/550hp.html

The thing I learned way back when was that the camshaft is the key. You need to be very careful picking a cam when running HP manifolds. If the cam is too small you lose top end power. If the cam is too big you lose power everywhere. The cam needs to be "just right" and then it works great with HP manifolds. Do not call the camshaft tech line to get a cam for manifolds. They have no idea. Do not ask for cam advice on the internet, you'll just get a bunch of nonsense replies. The only person I'd call for a manifold cam is Dwayne.

Dwayne is the go-to guy in this case. And most other cases for that matter. He has always came through for me.

Just like any other motor. Maximize cylinder pressure for the heads and gas you have available, good heads, good exhaust, the right type of cam.

Any number of part combinations can get you there. The difference between the 450 HP and 475 HP engine with the things I mentioned above is going to be in the tune and tweaking the details.

Assuming std stroke.
915, or 906, or 452 Head? It does not matter. Any of them can flow 270 cfm. Match it up with the right piston. I'm not a reverse dome piston fan. I use the 915, with a dish. So much cleaner. 915 availability and cost to make them right might be higher than the others.

Solid lifter, fast rate cam and decent rocker set up. Wide lsa, probably would not go over 240°@0.050 on the intake.

2 1/2" mandrel bent exhaust with a straight through muffler.

Full street trim should run 12.50s @ 112 mph in full weight B body. Add tires, gear, and converter, 12.00.

i've had this on the engine stand for some time. trying to talk myself back into the 6pak game.

While you're thinking about that, Why don't you swing by and put my 508 back in the Charger for me. I'll cover your room and board.

Ya, but... Would you run manifold or headers?

be glad to if you furnish the Geritol.

manifolds. not because i love manifolds but because it'll go in a car that already has a stock type exhaust. i would just be picking up were i left off 20yrs ago. and, as motivated as i am anymore it might end up in the estate sale.

And 20+ years ago, Lew was running 13.00 at 108 mph in his beautiful, 69 RT with manifolds, 3.23, on pump gas using some of those crappy old school, slow ramp junk Chevy type cams. Of course the car only weighed 4050 lb or so IIRC.

i've still got pictures hanging on the wall of your car and jim's car. never got any pictures of steve's cars. kinda miss those days but time and people move on.