HEMI Tech- Intakes and exhaust manifolds

Hey man! Mine hit too. I took a bit off the corner until the cap slid on. Everything is groovy now. Almost everyone I talked to has been either REAL close or interfering like yours. The castings are pretty thick though, so you should be fine to go at it.

How much interference do you have on yours? Mine seemed like a lot more than it actually was, once I got it in place.

Also, I was thinking very seriously on running one of those Joe Hunts, but found the reviews to be less than pleasing and some negative stories to go with . I have a thread going somewhere on here about the issues.

 

That's what I wanted to hear...Thanks! It doesn"t need to move much...

 

I think I only needed to take off 3/32" or maybe an 1/8"? Something like that.

 

I bought a blower intake top half from Dyers...it has an open rectangular bottom. I had a 3/4" aluminum plate cut to JUST slip inside of it. Once the plate is set on my DeSoto intakeand the manifold is slipped over it, it will be adjusted up/down/front/back, till its where it needs to be. The intake holes and stock carb mount holes will then be drilled in the correct spot, and the top welded to the plate. The 6-71 bolts to it, and I had a top carburetor mounting plate machined for it so that I could use an Edelbrock 2x4 air cleaner on the 2 Carter Competition Series 500 cfm carbs. That's what I did for MY intake...

 

This was posted on another thread. It NEEDS to be here!

First EFI and on a Chrysler, of course! Make sure to check out all the pages after the opening image on that page.

http://www.chrysler300country.com/bendix_published/imagepages/image12.html

 

Thanks again! Right before roundup Bob decided to dress up Whiteys hemi with some neato shit and the 8x2 was drafted. We had to hit it a couple times with the belt sander but it eventually slid on... Yeah, Bob has 8 97's with OG SP tops

 

You know I love it Paulie! Glad it fits alright. Sort of freaked me out the first time I tried to drop my dizzy in. Thought it was going to require a lot more to make it work.

 

Here is my Edelbrock X3 cross-ram. I picked this up last year - looks like it has never been mounted. Guess I have a bit of a 'sickness' for certain parts, just couldn't pass it up! This is one of my favorite manifolds for an early Hemi.

 

Edmunds 2x2

 

More Edmunds 2x2 pics, found the second one on here somewhere.

 

<TABLE class=tborder id=post3847240 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #e5e5e5 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #e5e5e5 0px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #e5e5e5 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #e5e5e5 0px solid" width=175>

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,196


</TD><TD class=alt1 id=td_post_3847240 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #e5e5e5 1px solid"><!-- icon and title --> Re: HEMI Tech- Intakes and exhaust manifolds
<HR style="COLOR: #e5e5e5; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #e5e5e5" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->Here is my Edelbrock X3 cross-ram. I picked this up last year - looks like it has never been mounted. Guess I have a bit of a 'sickness' for certain parts, just couldn't pass it up! This is one of my favorite manifolds for an early Hemi.

In the mid 60's, I ran an X3 on a 354+ .060 with 6 Rochesters on my boat. I had 11 1/2 -1 Forged Trues and Thompson aluminum rods. Ported and polished. Isky RR2
roller cam. it would run 6500 rpm, and idle at about 700. power really came on at 2800 rpms, the boat would practically leap out of the water if you nailed it at that rpm.
it was a great setup. water skied all the time.with it. and ran about 95 mph.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

Linky for info on repro 4 bolt ex mans.

 

WOW! Didn't know that was being done! Didn't know the demand was even that high. Cool!

 

Thanks for the update George, WAY COOL !!
Suitable competition for 'those' block hugger jobs...



Sua Sponte

 

Yes, both the popular "truck-style" 4-bolt exhaust manifolds are being reproduced by John Forney jwforney@msn.com and the '57-58 Chrysler flat-sided 4-bolts needed for the 392 in the Chrysler 300 stock chassis is also being reproduced with John's help and sold by me (send PM to me if interested).

The original truck manifolds have been popular with hot rodders and have been going up in price but many were very abused from their years on trucks and typically have broken mounting ears or have cracks and repairs from extreme heating in high load conditions and many are warped. So John Forney reproduced them. Super high quality castings and he is the machinist that finishes them. He also sells the head pipe stubs to start your downpipe. Besides the trucks, this is the exhaust manifold that Carl Kiekhaefer legally used on the '55-56 Chrysler 300 race cars in NASCAR because it is a factory part and it clears everything in the car chassis.

The '57-58 manifold repro I offer had to be created by the factory as a response to the new-for-57 torsion bar chassis. The old truck 4-bolts would not clear the right upper control arm and the steering box. By slightly flattening the casting of one ram's horn the clearance was gained. This was accomplished by the mid-57 production year and became an offering on the '58 option list included in "the 2.5" exhaust system" option for all 300s and was standard on the cars equipped with electronic fuel injection.

Summary: If you want 4-bolt ram's horn types for your 331-354-392 Hemi in your hot rod, John's manifolds are perfect. If you are building a '57-59 factory chassis Mopar with one of those engines in it, you will need my flat-sided 4-bolt manifolds for clearance.

 

I would bet that the beautiful iron units make more power than the Block Hugger manifolds (no way should they be called headers). Much smoother flow into the downpipe than the huggies, much less likely to leak and they look super cool.

 

I have done this fuel inection manifolds



/Stefan

 

Just cam accross this 241/270 Hemi dual carb intake and carbs while searching for flathead 6 dual carb intakes.



This is from the vintagespeed.com site. Not cheap but everything is new and ready to go.

 

OK so I've been reading all the Hemi Tech for weeks and now I've got 'a question of my own. I've got a '52 331 that i'm building for max street performance and trying my best to keep the cost reasonable (go ahead and laugh). So I'm gonna stick with a single 4bbl for cost and simplicity sake and because I've got a few sitting around. Also going with '54 heads for cost reasons. So my question is what, if anything, can be done to a stock 4bbl manifold to make it perform well. Or will the HH intake outperform the stocker no matter what I do it. The reason I'm asking is I've located a cheap '54 manifold and this would also solve the thermostat issues. Also can they be adapted to run a Holley. I'd like to run the stocker for multiple reasons but if the HH intake is going to blow it out of the water performance wise then thats the way I'll end up going. Seems like I read in a thread somewhere about a few guys hogging out stockers, cutting the divider out, and that they ran pretty darn good, but I can't for the life of me figure out where I found it to go back a read it again. Opinions? Thanks.

 

From comments it seems the HH intake isn't much, if any, better, just lighter. You then would have to deal with the plumbing problem. I'd open up the bore holes & leave the divider alone. An Edelbrock has the small mount pattern w/o having to mess with an adaptor.

 

Help..Who know where I can locate a PAW.. HEM-5762..it's the intake that you can interchange the tops..I need just the intake bottom, I have a top..
Thanks
Duane..
ps...PAW doesn't make them any longer..

 

I agree with George on this ...unless you have a bunch of money for alum eye candy and remote t-stats then the stock 4-bbl is pretty good. The manifolds we have bored out are the later, non-t stat units, and they are a damned good two-plane design. We simply machine the manifold to match the Holley base pattern with 1.7" holes. However, you are using the 1954 version which is a bit different. Awhile back I tried to get my sonic measuring tool probe into the manifold bores to see how far I could bore them out but the smaller holes were a problem for the radius on the probe. If need be, take your manifold around to a couple of shops and see if someones probe will fit and give a decent reading. If you can bore the holes and match the Holley pattern then go for it. Remember that with the Holley pattern, the bore spacing changes, so it is not just a bore job. A milling machine is needed.


Sua Sponte

 

73RR are you doing any type of port work to the runners at all or just simply boring the carb holes bigger. Does the fact the the water passages run through the manifold make for any restriction that could hamper the performance of the '54 manifold compared to the later stockers or the HH intake? Oh, and thanks for the help guys.

 

Don't think the intake is a problem, you probably have a lot more restriction running the round ex port heads vs '54 4 bl oval port heads. Actually you didn't say what heads you have, did ya?

 

Actually I did say, and they are '54 heads. Haven't found any '55 heads that I could afford.

 

No port work! Actually, I may be one of the very few who think that the ports are plenty big are is, at least for street use. T/F and AFC are another subject.
And, as I mentioned, we are not simply running the boring bar through the holes. The bore centers have to be moved if you match the Holley pattern. This then maintains the center wall/divider which we like to keep.
The water passages do not cause any issues. The concerns that I have on the '54 manifold are with the thickness of the casting around the bores. Since the manifolds are not plentiful we have decided to not sacrifice one to the boring bar gods just to have a 'look-see'. I guess I'll have to break down and buy a new probe, someday, just not today...
Breaking through the casting into the exhaust crossover is my concern.

My main concern for you is your stated desire for 'max street performance' while using a 51-53 package. It can be done, but you also mention being on a budget which causes conflicts. In the final analysis I believe that your money will be better spent starting with a later engine (392, 354, 1955-331, 1954-331) if you follow the 'max-performance' theme. The newer/bigger engines give you a better starting point even though more money is spend up-front.

Gary

 

guess that's what happens typing @ 5:42AM! I you a scared of opening the bore holes up Offy has a squeeze plare to match up the holes.

 

heres 1 I hadn't heard of before. Edelbrock DS485 water 4 bl low deck DeSoto Maybe someone can post pic before it goes away.

 

Ds485