Extended Collectors for Hooker SC?
Thread Starter
Drifting
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 37
From: Stockton Ca
Extended Collectors for Hooker SC?
Forum: After much thought I'm considering 1 3/4 SCs for my 74 4sp.
I was very concerned about losing low/mid due to larger tubes.
My research tells me that what is lost due to big tubes, can be gotten back w/collector extensions?
The question is: How long can the collectors be extended and still make it through the x member?
I believe that SCs come w/6" collector. I'm thinking that I need 10" or
more to get what I want. Is there room to add that much collector
extension? TIA
I will head to the dyno right away just to see how much headers are worth over RHs on a strong engine. I really want to join the
300 RWHP club!
R
I was very concerned about losing low/mid due to larger tubes.
My research tells me that what is lost due to big tubes, can be gotten back w/collector extensions?
The question is: How long can the collectors be extended and still make it through the x member?
I believe that SCs come w/6" collector. I'm thinking that I need 10" or
more to get what I want. Is there room to add that much collector
extension? TIA
I will head to the dyno right away just to see how much headers are worth over RHs on a strong engine. I really want to join the
300 RWHP club!
R
Race Director
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 17,676
Likes: 201
From: Who says "Nothing is impossible" ? I've been doing nothing for years.
I believe you are talking about merge collectors and on some race engines appear to increase HP slightly or not at all depending who you talking to and which company they represent.
If you are near the 300HP at the wheels then 1 3/4" primaries is not too big. This losing torque myth is never going to end. If you make more HP by making a change then you make more power period, both HP and Torque.
I have no idea when and where this losing the bottom end power to gain some up top originated but I wish it would go away. Just like 5 years ago you couldn't run a solid roller with a 750 Holley DP with mechanical secondaries and single plane manifold on a 355ci motor has gone by the wayside and is more the norm now when back then everyone thought you were nuts, this losing torque BS has to stop and it will sooner or later.
As for your original question, forget about extending the collector on a set of Hooker SC and be happy if you can get them to fit
If you are near the 300HP at the wheels then 1 3/4" primaries is not too big. This losing torque myth is never going to end. If you make more HP by making a change then you make more power period, both HP and Torque.
I have no idea when and where this losing the bottom end power to gain some up top originated but I wish it would go away. Just like 5 years ago you couldn't run a solid roller with a 750 Holley DP with mechanical secondaries and single plane manifold on a 355ci motor has gone by the wayside and is more the norm now when back then everyone thought you were nuts, this losing torque BS has to stop and it will sooner or later.
As for your original question, forget about extending the collector on a set of Hooker SC and be happy if you can get them to fit
Last edited by MotorHead; Jul 10, 2010 at 02:39 PM.
Thread Starter
Drifting
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 37
From: Stockton Ca
MH: Thanks for sharing your experience and hard won knowlege.
Right now w/smog RHs 280 RWHP and 315 RWTQ.
I built this engine for strong mid range where I spend most of my driving.
I cruise at 3,000 rpm and spend more time under 3,500 than over.
I would like more top end but not at the cost of low/mid.
Moving the HP/TQ peaks up higher is part of bigger tubes is it not?
My research indicated that extending the collector improved HP/TQ
below peak output. Since there is not much room for the extensions, it looks like a moot point.
Thanks
R
Right now w/smog RHs 280 RWHP and 315 RWTQ.
I built this engine for strong mid range where I spend most of my driving.
I cruise at 3,000 rpm and spend more time under 3,500 than over.
I would like more top end but not at the cost of low/mid.
Moving the HP/TQ peaks up higher is part of bigger tubes is it not?
My research indicated that extending the collector improved HP/TQ
below peak output. Since there is not much room for the extensions, it looks like a moot point.
Thanks
R
