New Ram Exhaust

Speedway Motors is advertising a new Ram-type SBC exhaust manifold. I have messed with a number of tubing headers that rusted and chromed units that rapidly blued so I kind of like the permanence of the cast iron manifolds. The new manifolds look like a higher arched form of the SBC rams horn manifolds, but so far I am not aware of any performance tests. The shorty block hugger 1 5/8" headers for SBC have been tested in many places and seem to be worth about 30 H.P and maybe 30 ft. lb. of torque so I am reluctant to just go to the new type without seeing some tests. Those circle track racers who have to use "stock" manifolds often pay a lot to get the interior of stock manifolds gouged out but even then they do not seem to offer the same performance advantage of the 1 5/8" tube headers. Has anyone seen any test of the new "high-arch ram" SBC manifolds. I would like to try them if they offer the same performance as the shorty tube type headers.

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Well this is a new-old topic which has been discussed before:

http://www.clubhotrod.com/t1036.html

Probably the "new" cast iron ram manifold is too new to have been tested, but I can answer my own question from the new Speedway catalog (Catalog 221) because on the same page showing the cast iron high arch ram manifold there is a stainless steel shorty-tight-fit header for exactly the same price! Tubular stainless steel should solve the problem of corrosion and offer the same performance as has been documented in many dyno tests. Still I guess some magazine can churn out an article where someone dyno tests the new cast iron ram manifold. For looks and the same price with known performance benefit it looks like I will go with the stainless steel tube headers. Thanks for listening.

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

I would really question 30hp from shorty headers without some solid dyno data on a like for like application. I suspect the head pipe shape has an influence too. The driver side one, due to clearance issues with ride height, steering and lining up to go past the m.c., is usually contorted in a way that's not the best for flow.

Those ram horns from Speedway look interesting, especially the way the outlet flange is "tucked in" for clearance. The overall design reminds me of the Y-block Ford truck manifolds from the '50's. With that high arch and the tuck in, routing the plug wires neatly might be an issue. The stock manifolds were pretty much a "straight" down shot, and the wires could be routed up from underneath. With that tuck in that may not be possible. And the high arch might eliminate most of the "ready made", over the top looms. It would be nice to talk to someone who's really used them for that point. BTW, Chevrolet is reproducing the rams horn manifolds in the 2" outlet configuration. If you shop around to some of the GM Performance dealers (Scoggins-Dicky, Sallee, etc) you can get them for something in the low $100 range each. They do have some extra lumps, and the generator bracket flanges on them, but some saw and gringer time can eliminate them. Originals are available at swap meets and on ebay, but the restoration guys bid them up pretty high. At three bills the Speedway ones are probably a comparable value considering they don't need the extra work.

If you go the tube header route beware of the cheapie ones available. Typically they skimp on the flange thickness, and are often built so poorly they leak from day one, or soon thereafter. I prefer a 3/8 thick flange plate, and milled welds at the tube ends. Costs more, but you're less likely to end up with that annoying tick-tick-tick leak sound. That is the nice thing about the cast iron ones. The flanges are less likely to warp, and the thicker material makes them quieter too.

As for hogging out the innards. You may already be aware of a slurry honing process wherein a clay like substance, loaded with abrasives, is forced through the casting to "hone" the inner surface. Here's a link to Extrude Hone for more info. http://www.extrudehone.com/

Don,

I am looking hard at the Sanderson cast series

http://www.sandersonheaders.com/page...um/qp1000a.htm

They are a bit pricey, but they really look sharp and fit into places with very tight clearances. They are also available with ceramic coating which seems to be the very best way to keep headers of all types looking new. Sanderson also makes top quality tube type headers for many applications.

Pat

Bob, Thanks for your reply. I have had my share of other aftermarket manifolds which "almost fit" and leak around the welds which is why I was interested in the iron manifolds. However, your comment is bad news to me in the sense that I was counting on headers to be the main performance enhancement on my mild 350 build up based on the dyno data of several succesive improvements of a Goodwrench 350. Now I wonder what headers they used; I was only interested in the diameter of the tubing as 1 5/8" but maybe they used longer headers. So what you are saying is that the shorty headers do not give as much performance improvement as longer tubes? If that is so then maybe the ram-type headers are just as good and the only thing of interest is the ease of fit in a narrow frame.

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Don Shillady
So what you are saying is that the shorty headers do not give as much performance improvement as longer tubes? If that is so then maybe the ram-type headers are just as good and the only thing of interest is the ease of fit in a narrow frame.

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

---

Pretty much. The tubular headers will still give you some benefit, depending on what the rest of your set-up is, just because of the smoothness of the inside of the tube. Especially if they're coated with ceramic like Pat noted. Here's an article that has some good info; http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/49178/

Pat, one thing to be aware of with the cast Sandersons, there's a left and a right, they're slightly different. The reason I bring this up is that my bride bought me a set for my '32 a few years ago as a Christmas present (ain't she wonderful!). Sanderson has them drop shipped from the coater. The coater probably has some low cost shipping department grunt who neither knows, nor cares, that they're different. I got two of the same side. When they didn't clear the steering I got to looking at their catalog closer and noticed the difference. A phone call to Sanderson confirmed that they were different, but I had one heck of a time convincing them that they had shipped me two of the same side. I guess they assume that their customers are too dumb to know the difference. After taking some abuse from some guy who claimed to be the manager, and who insisted I pay the freight so they could correct their mistake, we came to an agreement.........................after I re-educated him on what a credit card chargeback was. Anyway, the upshot is I agree with you, coated inside and out is best. The Sanderson product is top notch, good quality stuff. Their customer service?............Maybe dealing through a customer oriented dealer would be a better solution.

For what it's worth, Don, I have had nothing but good experiences with all of Sanderson's products, I use them on most everything I build. As Bob mentioned, I buy mine from a friend who is a Sanderson dealer. Sometimes eliminating the middle man is not the best way to go!!!! I have found Sanderson's to be really top shelf quality. Yeah, they're spendy, but ya get what ya pay for!! I would never argue with someone who charges less for his product, he obviously knows what it's worth !!!!

yup, quality motors demand quality headers, Streetster!!! Now that you've had the rest, move up to the best !!!! oh yeah, btw, my birthday is in Nov., if ya didn't get me nuttin yet, I would sure like a Boss 429, or a 427 Cammer, either one, I'm not fussy. Just the motor, not the whole car. Don't want to appear greedy !!! Tee Hee Hee welcome back buddy, missed ya


PS now ya can pound away on my Blue Ovals for a bit.

Hey thanks, we got some good action on this question and I am glad to hear from Streets, actually he is usually right when you filter out the heh, heh, heh and I have seen the inside of a horsepistol myself so I know it is not exactly fun. Going back to the Goodwrench 350 buildup:

http://www.73-87.com/chp/dyno.htm

I found that the improvement over stock was only 26 HP and that they did indeed use the long headers with 1 5/8" diameter pipes. Still there is some improvement and a slight shift in torque to lower rpm so I guess the main thing is to get clearance and take what you get in improved flow. Since I am looking at the $300 range I might as well take a look at the Sanderson headers in the shorty version or maybe just the Speedway stainless steel shorty headers. You guys are great and I am learning a lot!

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Don, just my 2 cents worth, but IMHO Sanderson and Speedway should not even be mentioned in the same post!!! Sanderson's quality is far superior. When you are putting that much money into a project, I would not hesitate to spend the extra bucks for a superior product. But, like I said, just my opinion.

Dave, here is a site that indicates there may be some problem with the Sanderson QP1000 cast iron headers:

http://www.users.qwest.net/~j5/sande...er_problem.htm

It also brings up the question as to why the stock rams horn manifolds do not seem to crack as ofter. Maybe there is something about the bends in the Sanderson design that leads to fatigue cracking after cycling through hot/cold?? Anyway that is starting to favor a good set of tube headers. This also illustrates the power of the Internet to have such exchanges of technical information, so this Forum is great!

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Streets, good to hear from you. Well the truth is I am just a buyer/assembler and not too good at that, but my first major challenge just arrived yesterday in the form of a stainless steel brake line kit and I will have my hands full for a while with bending the small diameter brake lines. Before I would try bending my own 1 5/8" tubing I would go to lake pipes but then that could be a major welding project for me so I am just looking to buy something that fits and won't leak. The interesting thing is that I started with only a few tools and every new job brings with it some new tools, but I do not have a come-along yet; maybe the closest I will get to bending my own is trying to make some top ribs later on. I just acquired a bargain set of Dremel tools because I got the Power brake bracket welded where I thought it should be and then found the master cylinder would not clear the crosmember on the Brookville frame. "Pete" at Brookville said, Oh Yeah, you need to notch the crosmember and box it in to make clearance for the M.C. sooo now I have a nice set of Dremel tools which I used to carefully slice off the misplaced bracket and I can also artfully cut out the notch with the Dremel saw. Another Power brake bracket was only $12 from TCI. So you can tell I am having a fair amount of difficulty just doing the standard stuff and sand bending is beyond my talent. Anyhow, I guess you were right about the Sanderson headers, so let's see what Dave says!
I just stand back when you guys get into it because I was a Ford guy for a long time but that darn long water pump on the SBF and the short stroke converted me to a hybrid Chevy-in-a-Ford-body guy.

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Sorry Don, guess I should have stated a bit more clearly that I was referring to tube headers, about the only thing I do with the cast iron exhaust manifolds I run across is put them in the "clean cast" pile that goes to the recycler!! Sorry Don, I should have been more clear. Let me correct myself to say I don't run a cast iron manifold on anything, and I would recomend the tube headers with the HPC coating. I had a set on my old roadster for about 5 years, they were on the car when I sold it last spring, and they still look great. They were Sanderson's. Sorry for the confusion, Don.

Thanks Dave, I am starting to get the picture from the several comments provided here.

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Well I am just trying to gain some torque on an otherwise mild 350 SBC. Yesterday I looked over a set of stock rams horn manifolds at Joe Butler's machine shop and compared several dyno sheets on the SBC. I am learning from several threads that the exhaust path is the weakest link on the SBC and a buildup of a Goodwrench 350 found 17 Additional H.P. and 53 ft. lb. of torque at 3500 rpm by replacing the iron manifolds with Hooker headers of the long type, not shorty tight-fit type. So with the advice of experts here can we get any comments on experience with the "Chassis type" long headers. Speedway offers two headers with 1 1/2" primaries (not 1 5/8") that do not merge until after making the bend under the frame. Maybe these have to use the smaller diameter tubing to make a total of only slightly more than 3" overall diameter? The Speedway catalog says these fit the '28-'48 Ford chassis so what can I expect in a '29 frame? Then there is the question as to whether smaller diameter tubing actually helps low rpm torque and the comparison between shorty headers and the longer chassis headers. The folks on this forum certainly have seen both types of headers over the years so I am asking is there any way to actually pick up torque and still clear the power brake unit on one side and the starter on the other. I can't quite visualize how it will be to change the oil filter with chassis headers, any problem there? Maybe someone has a picture from the bottom? The picture of the bottom of Magoo's '29 roadster shows just about everything is a tight fit!

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder