[68RCodeConv]

I'm looking at buying a set of 351C-4V headers for my 73 vert from Ford Powertrain Applications (FPA). Supposedly their headers fit better and have more ground clearance than Hooker Comps (which are the other headers I am considering). Any opinions?

 

[JeffTepper]

I have the Hooker Super Comps and ground clarance is a problem. I have seen a set of the FPA's installed on a 68 Shelby 500 and they fit beautifully, have lots of ground clearance, and according to the guy who installed them, were relatively easy to get in there. I vote for the FPAs

 

[390GTAcv]

If Stan(the owner) says they're better , you can BET that they are .

 

[iexcelr8]

I put them on my '68 390 'vert when I was doing my engine rebuild. FPA says that you can install the headers with them already on the engine. It was not possible for me, so I put them in the engine bay and bolted them on after I lowered the engine down to within a few inches of the motor mounts. For the 390, I think it would be darn near impossible to get them bolted up with the engine already in the car. Putting the starter on with the headers installed is a bear b/c the headers hug the block fairly closely. It just takes patience though.

That said, I am very happy with them. I had to use the lowering bracket for the steering, but I have no ground clearance problems with the headers.

 

[imBOSSter]

I just bought some for my 351C 2V... haven't got the engine back from the builder yet, so I haven't installed them, but they look awesome. They use a one-piece flange and look like they should have good ground clearance. Don't forget to order the drop bracket if you have power steering...

Doug

 

[70stroker]

I have a set on the Torino in the sigpic. They replaced a set of Super Comps. The Hookers had about 2 to 3 inches of clearance and always leaked badly, I went with his Shorties for a 429 CJ, so ground clearance greatly improved. They are very well put together and sealed right up with no problems. I would buy a set of headers from him with no hesitation.

 

[70stroker]

If you want to take a look at the ones on my Torino, let me know. I'll be around all weekend.

 

[RichLong]

Yep! 390 Tri-Y's with the ceramic coating. I've only trial fit them, but they fit fantastic! You can get a glimpse at them on my web page.
www.longbros.com/richjr
Stan said they'd fit , even with my Mustang II front suspension.... and they sure do!

 

[dodgestang]

I have FPA 351c 4v headers on my cleveland in my 65.
They provide very nice ground clearance (alot more than the old tubular automotives) on my lowered car.

http://www.dodgestang.com/images/exhaust8.jpg

 

[BossBill]

As the owner of a lowered Boss with Hooker Comps all I can say is SCRAPE.
Here are the measurements of lowering:
http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=1&Board=forum&Number=735243

The H/Cs hang way down -- 3" ground clearance with headers; car has 5.5 at the frame.
I actually hit a big bump on the street and scrapped the headers.
FPA, if they have more clearance than Hookers would be VERY good.

 

[My427stang]

I run Supercomps on my 427 and they fit good but are a b**** to get together. I never did a 351C with FPA's but in a 390 stang and a 428 Cyclone, we bolted them to the motor and swung it in. They fit perfect in both cases.

Make no mistankes, they wont make the horsepower at 7000 rpm the Hookers will, but the are beautiful and should make more low end (what a C needs IMO)

Also the owner was a great dude to talk to, explained why he does things and seems real sharp. I would not hesititate, and I wont hesitate, to buy them again

 

[mrkadra66]

I installed a set of Tri-ys on the 289 in my '66 this spring. Fit was great and even cleared the clutch z-bar. I highly recommend FPA