hooker 6901-2 stainless

has anybody used these if so how did they fit & was the quality good.

 

those are the same pattern as the non-stainless part#.. and also same as many other companies use. Do a quick forum search on the Hooker 6901's and many use them. Some others seem to like the Hedmans better do to more consistent fitments but I'm not sure if they nake that in a stainless version.

I kinda hate to say it, mainly because these guys are copyright and patent infringement crooks, but the influx of offshore parts creating bargain prices makes it tougher to boycott them if you're on a tighter budget. Look VERY closely at the pattern differences between those Hookers and these. Pay and support your brethren at full US market value so he can make enough off your purchase to afford a single dinner out while Holley performance products pockets the bulk profit and gets even richer?.. or pay some guy overseas his entire monthly wage for what you spend on their copycat version?

http://store.speedmaster79.com/p-50...-70-long-tube-stainles-s-exhaust-headers.aspx

PS. Just another heads up when shopping around for these headers. Even the more expensive ones can have serious flaws such as pinched tubes next to bolt holes(makes it tough to get wrenches on the bolt heads), sloppy slag-like welding on the insides of the tube to flange transitions, weird twists and tubing deformations, etc.

 

There are some guys in this forum who are experts on this topic but tell us about your car such as whether you have a column shift auto etc. It affects the chose of headers.

M.D.

 

Agree. Also what type of steering (power vs. manual).

 

guys.. these are just cookie cutter "one design of bends fit all" patterns that MANY companies have used for the last 30 years or better. All you need do to run power steering with any of these brands is simply use a drop down bracket. The brackets are pretty flimsy though.

 

The Hooker bracket is fairly robust, as I have one sitting on the shelf. The issue I have heard is breaking the bolts that retain it.

 

I'd recommend you do a search on "hooker headers" in this forum to get the full picture.

M.D.

 

I'd have to disagree with that. I've had three different manufacturers' long tubes on my car over the years (Eagle, Blackjack, and Hooker). The tubes on the Hookers are far and away better routed, didn't take nearly as much "massaging" as the others.

 

All you need to do is google image them all and the similarities are very very close. My.. what I believe to be Hedmans.. are nearly identical to these Hookers as well.

In reality these headers are the main posterchild of cookie cutter patterns when you consider that they are bent in often unecessary places on any particular model they may be installed on simply for the sake of fitting several other different models of Fords and Mercury's. Mustangs, Cougars, Torino's, Fairlane's, Falcons, Ranchero's, Maverick/Comets, etc, etc. Nearly anything with a windsor motor can use them. And the year spread between all the various applications is amazing too. From 1965 to 1977 or later. Doesn't get much more cookie cutter than that.

 

Googling the images doesn't give you the dimensions or clearances. Actually trying them does. From my experience, in my car, the Hookers fit much better than the two previous brands I tried. If they make a header that fits multiple vehicles, so what? It's not like these are tuned lengths or anything.

 

Was just replying to your thought of them NOT being a cookie cutter design was all. The design was around BEFORE the Mavericks and Comets were even designed.. so them fitting our cars is just a lucky afterthought.

I do know what you're getting at though and some are on the other side of the fence where they don't like the Hookers and prefer the Hedmans.. or xxxx brand of headers "because they fit better".

Truth be known, I'd like to design and make a jig to produce NICE headers that were actually made for our cars with no more bends than actually required to stuff them into place. Better/longer radii and decent collectors too. But, I'd like to do alot of things and life just seems too damned short with not enough hours in the day to get everything I want to do off the drawing board.

 

Well, if you, or someone, ever does that I'll be first in line for a set. I think the 3" collector on these headers is much too big.

 

All of these headers were designed decades ago, before chassis lowering and high flowing cylinder heads were the norm.

How about larger port openings on the flanges and flat, circle track type collectors in addition to application specific tube bends

I'll just dream on as we will never see them

 

in 1997 i bought a set of headers from dynomax. they were ceramic coated inside and out. cost $289 at the time. they bent them to fit perfect on my 70 f100. it took about 12yrs for them to get any rust or chips in the coating and that was because i stopped cleaning them. they never leaked, ever. ill go with that company again without hesitation for my mav.

 

I can sure relate to what you've been through, since I've worked on many Mav/Comets for nearly 30 years, I gone through the same headers! My last set was Eagle Gold Label 14 gauge, had to have them modified to clear the M/S pitman arm, fully weld up the tube/flange area so port match up with the exhaust, hot sprayed aluminumized coated, still have them too!
A couple of years ago I purchased the same Hooker Stainless Steel 6901-2, just finally got around to testing fitting etc., using one of those P-Ayr plastic blocks (well worth every 300 bucks I spent!) into my 73 Comet 302. Out of all the long tube headers I've had in the past, other than very minor dimpling, so not to rub against passenger shock tower, fitment was perfect! Cleared my manual pitman arm, easily installed from the bottom up, did not have to lift engine at all..........now having said that, I know from past experience, what may fit in one car may not necessarily fit in another without some tweaking........Unlike modern cars of today where fitment quality is done to the millimeters, back when our cars where made, 1/8", 1/4" fitment good enough, add to the fact that after 40 years, things can sag etc........even on models where you have those wrap around shock tower reinforcement plates can interfere with headers.
One other thing about my Hookers, first thing I really noticed was how large the ports are, almost looks like intake ports! I am in the process of having to build up the bottom of the flange/tube just to seal against the bottom of my exhaust ports! Will post some pictures showing the gap below where I used Fel-Pro 1486 gaskets, against the hookers. Kind of makes me wonder if I do have the 6901 (1 5/8") or different model with 1 3/4" tubes? Heads I am using are those ol'AR (Alan Root) J302's and those exhaust ports are larger than any CI factory heads.
But getting back to original post, I believe that regardless of which long tube header one uses, some sort of "massaging" is probably going to be required......
Had I known about those Speedmaster SS headers, I might have purchased those instead! not sure if they where around 2 or 3 years ago? Sure would like to know how they fit etc., going to cost me more than those, to build up the floors of the hookers, then machine the exhaust flanges flat to seal against the ports.......sigh! Well at least my headers will outlast me!
David

for the price, those Speedmaster Stainless Steel headers might be a good option, even if you have to "massage" them to fit your particular application, still be less than what those Hooker 6901-2 units would cost and you still have the longevity of Stainless Steel for 1/3 the price.......(JMO)