273 / 318 Exhaust Manifold Question

-
For 273's there is no "performance manifolds". The 2 and 4 barrel manifolds are the same.

Was hoping you would chine in here @toolmanmike

Do you see any areas to pull just a little more performance out of the OP's '67 273 Commando Build in his '67 Barracuda S.

Are we missing anything here that already has not been discussed?

Thinking his factory single exhaust system and Factory Heat Riser may be his biggest restrictions?
 
... Here is the thing with your 273 and heads. Intake manifold bolts go in at a different angle than the newer aluminum intakes and newer 318 heads.. Then you have port runner size most of them large port. So then you get a miss match at your head ports...

This information is incorrect. He has 920 heads from 66 and 67 so they use the standard intake bolt pattern. They are the best "as cast" flowing small port heads, including 302 heads. They are closed chamber heads. The Performer is also a small port intake.
 
This information is incorrect. He has 920 heads from 66 and 67 so they use the standard intake bolt pattern. They are the best "as cast" flowing small port heads, including 302 heads. They are closed chamber heads. The Performer is also a small port intake.

So then the LD4B aluminum intakes will bolt up too then.

Hmmm . . .

Screenshot_20220426-104100_Gallery.jpg
 
Has anyone ever tried to port/gasket match a pair of OEM 273/318 A body exhaust manifolds? Any noticeable difference in power?

I have a 67 barracuda with a 273 Commando mill, was wondering if I should gasket match the original exhaust manifolds or install the Flowtech full length headers I have. Ground clearance is an issue, my car sits fairly low at the moment.

View attachment 1715917205
I cleaned up my 66 manifolds a bit before installing. Who knows if it made a difference. I just thought it couldn't hurt. If there was a performance increase I would guess may be a couple horsepower. The 273 manifolds, 2 and 4 barrel for any given year., are the same part numbers. Without getting into specifics, there are different casting numbers for some manifolds between 64 and 69 273's but the differences are because of design changes and not for performance. The 340 manifolds of course have bigger ports and outlets and in 72the manifolds changed again with slightly smaller ports, tubes, and outlets. From what I see in the parts books, 273/318 manifolds weren't used on 318's.
2 barrel exhaust compared to the HP 4 barrel exhaust should make a difference but there again, probably not a huge amount. I have never seen a side by side comparison there so who's to say how much for sure. A free flowing exhaust will make a difference though whether a HP single or 2 1/4" dual. I spent the bucks and put the Accurate LTD 4 barrel single system on my 66, more to be correct than for performance. It runs good but nothing to compare it to.
Same with headers. They may add 20 or more horse or torque on one engine and only 10 on the next. I put Tri Y headers on my 73 Challenger 340 car and it didn't run any faster. I didn't richen the carb or tune for them though.
 
273 Commando / Charger engines were given everything to bump up torque, including the single 2 1/2 in exhaust. I have run both exhausts, HP 273 straight thru and 2 in duals, and did not notice any difference. No problem there, but I do agree about getting rid of the passenger side heat valve. I usually just remove the flapper and tap for button head bolts. He also is running a small hydraulic cam. Not sure what pistons / compression ratio. Check for real TDC and start timing at 10* BTDC then optimize. The 4 speed should be a huge plus for a 273. What is your rpm range / where is it's red line. All MOPAR small blocks are great but they are not the same, nor should they be set up the same.
 
Has anyone ever tried to port/gasket match a pair of OEM 273/318 A body exhaust manifolds? Any noticeable difference in power?

I have a 67 barracuda with a 273 Commando mill, was wondering if I should gasket match the original exhaust manifolds or install the Flowtech full length headers I have. Ground clearance is an issue, my car sits fairly low at the moment.

View attachment 1715917205
To answer your original question....yes. I've gasket matched my 273/4 engine and cleaned up slag and other casting flaws so that the gases flow a bit freer. I slicked up any rough casting where I could reach with a long shanked grinding stone. Beyond that, I would have to extrude hone them for the ultimate in flow. I couldn't justify that cost for street use. I also did other engine mods, so, trying to compare a performance increase for just the exhaust changes would be too hard to determine.
 
To answer your original question....yes. I've gasket matched my 273/4 engine and cleaned up slag and other casting flaws so that the gases flow a bit freer. I slicked up any rough casting where I could reach with a long shanked grinding stone. Beyond that, I would have to extrude hone them for the ultimate in flow. I couldn't justify that cost for street use. I also did other engine mods, so, trying to compare a performance increase for just the exhaust changes would be too hard to determine.
Now extrude hone. That's a cool process. For squeezing every lst oz. of power out of those factory manifolds. The small block drivers manifold restriction around the steering shaft is like they say "like pooping through a straw" No way around it except for electric steering and may be a B or C body manifold.

extrude hone process.jpg


extrude hone before.jpg


extrude hone.jpg
 
Considering all things on your 273 Commando Build are set up properly and are good choices. Let's talk about your camshaft selection for a bit.

Here are the Stock Specs for the 273 4 bbl camshaft:
Lift: 415 / 425
Duration: 248 / 248
You probably had some pretty good low end torque with this stock cam,
With the power band around Idle to 4,500 rpm.

_______

Now the likes of the specs of a mopar performance 340 camshaft:

Lift: 429 / 444
Duration: 268 / 276
Lobe Center 114
RPM Range: Idle - 5800 rpm

_______

Now the likes of your Comp Cams XE262H

Lift: 462 / 469
duration: 262 / 270
Lobe Center 110
RPM Range: 1300 - 5600 rpm

As you can see this camshaft does not start making power until you get to 1300 rpms, whereas the other camshafts start making power right away at Idle on up to 5000 rpms.

_________


With your small displacement 273 engine and a 4 speed would think you would want to set it up for lots of low end torque on the bottom end to get everything rolling without hesitation, instead of having to wait to build rpm to 1300 rpm and then go from there.

Quote:
Okay, now you've really peaked my interest. I love the 273 Commando in my Barracuda, however it's a little soft on torque.

____________

The Comp Cam XE262H cam is probably fine for a decent compression 318 or 360, but think it is a little much to go after the low end torque you want out of your small displacement 273 Commando.

Want to get things perfectly dialed in for how you want to use your car and how you plan on driving it.
I have always loved low end torque engines when you put your foot into it at low rpm it is ready to go.

____________

Camshaft Comparisons / RPM Ranges:

upload_2022-4-26_14-32-18.png



upload_2022-4-26_14-32-39.png
 
Last edited:
Considering all things on your 273 Commando Build are set up properly and are good choices. Let's talk about your camshaft selection for a bit.

Here are the Stock Specs for the 273 4 bbl camshaft:
Lift: 415 / 425
Duration: 248 / 248
You probably had some pretty good low end torque with this stock cam,
With the power band around Idle to 4,500 rpm.

_______

Now the likes of the specs of a mopar performance 340 camshaft:

Lift: 429 / 444
Duration: 268 / 276
Lobe Center 114
RPM Range: Idle - 5800 rpm

_______

Now the likes of your Comp Cams XE262H

Lift: 462 / 469
duration: 262 / 270
Lobe Center 110
RPM Range: 1300 - 5600 rpm

As you can see this camshaft does not start making power until you get to 1300 rpms, whereas the other camshafts start making power right away at Idle on up to 5000 rpms.

_________


With your small displacement 273 engine and a 4 speed would think you would want to set it up for lots of low end torque on the bottom end to get everything rolling without hesitation, instead of having to wait to build rpm to 1300 rpm and then go from there.

Quote:
Okay, now you've really peaked my interest. I love the 273 Commando in my Barracuda, however it's a little soft on torque.

____________

The Comp Cam XE262H cam is probably fine for a decent compression 318 or 360, but think it is a little much to go after the low end torque you want out of your small displacement 273 Commando.

Want to get things perfectly dialed in for how you want to use your car and how you plan on driving it.
I have always loved low end torque engines when you put your foot into it at low rpm it is ready to go.

____________

Camshaft Comparisons / RPM Ranges:...

To me the rpm is what makes a 273, especially with a 4 speed. They go higher than your run of the mill 318 or 360 with the same cam. You can't easily compare a solid lifter Mopar cam to aftermarket specs. With 10.5:1 compression ratio, timed right and cylinders sealed up, they are not torque limited.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget how the rear axle ratio plays a part in off-the-line performance. The more gear you have, the less important the lower RPM torque is.
 
Don't forget how the rear axle ratio plays a part in off-the-line performance. The more gear you have, the less important the lower RPM torque is.

He's got 3.23s in an 8 3/4, that's an all around pretty good ratio for a street car.
 
Okay, now you've really peaked my interest. I love the 273 Commando in my Barracuda, however it's a little soft on torque. The hot ticket apparently, is to use a 318 short motor and transfer all the 273 HiPo top end over to the 318. The 273 heads are 920 which are closed chamber and similar to 302's, and I'm running a Comp XE262H camshaft. I'm hoping something like this would run as well as your buddy's 318.
F yeah, that works! I did the exact same thing 25 years ago. 318 short block with everything else 273-4. +45 cubes...almost 20%! Huge difference on the street. And all the A body manifolds look like that to clear the steering box, From 64 to whenever they widened the steering box mounts. 2bbl-4bbl 273-318 were all the same.
 
Thanks guys, l guess l got my answer regarding stock cast iron exhaust manifolds, and as a bonus an understanding that using a 318 short motor with all the 273 HiPo top end stuff should make for a better overall street mill.
 
F yeah, that works! I did the exact same thing 25 years ago. 318 short block with everything else 273-4. +45 cubes...almost 20%! Huge difference on the street. And all the A body manifolds look like that to clear the steering box, From 64 to whenever they widened the steering box mounts. 2bbl-4bbl 273-318 were all the same.

Did you use a rebuilt 318 short or just a good used stock standard short motor that you had available? Was the difference in torque very noticeable?
 
You have headers. The best bang for the buck will be to get the car at stock ride height and put the headers on it. Nothing you ever do to those stock manifolds will ever make the same power. As for gaskets, this IS the 21st century, not the 1970s anymore. Remflex gaskets will conform to most all imperfections and SEAL.
 
You have headers. The best bang for the buck will be to get the car at stock ride height and put the headers on it. Nothing you ever do to those stock manifolds will ever make the same power. As for gaskets, this IS the 21st century, not the 1970s anymore. Remflex gaskets will conform to most all imperfections and SEAL.

Headers help power everywhere - low, mid-range and high rpm. Good headers - TTI or Doug's - don't hang low, leak or rattle.
 
Did you use a rebuilt 318 short or just a good used stock standard short motor that you had available? Was the difference in torque very noticeable?
I found a 68 318 short block pulled by a local wrecker for $100 (that place was cool, different short blocks lined up, heads were on another shelf) cylinders were in great shape, no taper and still had a cross hatch. even though I lost 'compression', I picked up 45 cubes (and 80 ft lbs!) and I think that really woke the bottom end up. Top end not sure but you use the bottom end EVERY TIME on the street, top end not so much. Those were my findings. I was so pleased with it, I made it my signature......If you want to refine that package even more, get a camshaft made for the 318's lower compression. Not sure what that will get you though. It ran great as it was. Later I installed a Performer intake and 5208 headers, ran even better. Performer had to be modded for the 65 intake bolt angles: hardened washers and clearancing the holes. Worked great, no leaks.
 
Last edited:
I found a 68 318 short block pulled by a local wrecker for $100 (that place was cool, different short blocks lined up, heads were on another shelf) cylinders were in great shape, no taper and still had a cross hatch. even though I lost 'compression', I picked up 45 cubes (and 80 ft lbs!) and I think that really woke the bottom end up. Top end not sure but you use the bottom end EVERY TIME on the street, top end not so much. Those were my findings. I was so pleased with it, I made it my signature......If you want to refine that package even more, get a camshaft made for the 318's lower compression. Not sure what that will get you though. It ran great as it was. Later I installed a Performer intake and 5208 headers, ran even better. Performer had to be modded for the 65 intake bolt angles: hardened washers and clearancing the holes. Worked great, no leaks.

Thanks Pishta, that's definitely what l'll do next.
 
Look at the sweeping flow of your Commando manifold, looks like a Stock 340 performance manifold.

Then look at this standard A Body manifold on this 72 Duster 318, it is not the 340 manifold, just the standard manifold.

The shape and the way your's kicks out looks like it will deliver more performance. So Yeah, you do have some nice Commando manifolds On there.

View attachment 1715917320
View attachment 1715917321

Any chance you have a better picture of what your passenger side exhaust manifold looks like?
The 340 (68' - 71') output to tail pipe is larger, flat and no cone, the sweeps are similar. A guess is the openings at the head may also be larger on the early 340's. If I were to use the best cast iron exhaust instead of headers, I would buy the after market ones for the early 340, around $600.00. Don't forget the special bolts and cone washers to go with them.
 
The 340 (68' - 71') output to tail pipe is larger, flat and no cone, the sweeps are similar. A guess is the openings at the head may also be larger on the early 340's. If I were to use the best cast iron exhaust instead of headers, I would buy the after market ones for the early 340, around $600.00. Don't forget the special bolts and cone washers to go with them.
The problem with using the '68-up 340 exhaust manifolds on a '66 and older A-body 273/318 is that they don't fit the body very well, you need to custom make the whole exhaust system, and you'll have a hard time keeping head to manifold gaskets from blowing out due to the very thin sealing area on the mismatched port sizes between what a 340 head has for a port, and what the 273/318 head has.
 
The problem with using the '68-up 340 exhaust manifolds on a '66 and older A-body 273/318 is that they don't fit the body very well, you need to custom make the whole exhaust system, and you'll have a hard time keeping head to manifold gaskets from blowing out due to the very thin sealing area on the mismatched port sizes between what a 340 head has for a port, and what the 273/318 head has.
I thought we were talking about 67' 273 heads. I have hanging onto a 65' 273 4 Bbl intake being it's rare and compatible for the early 273's. I tossed the 65' heads out last year due to its small ports. I can't keep everything.
 
I thought we were talking about 67' 273 heads. I have hanging onto a 65' 273 4 Bbl intake being it's rare and compatible for the early 273's. I tossed the 65' heads out last year due to its small ports. I can't keep everything.
My mistake, you're correct that the OP was talking about a '67 model. The 340 manifolds will fit that car fine, but, the port mismatch I mentioned still applies.
 
Just curious. Will the magnum 318 exhaust manifolds fit in the earlier A bodies? Seems like that approach hasn't been mentioned..
 
Thanks Pishta, that's definitely what l'll do next.
I agree with most of the suggestions here, the important thing is to pay close attention to the advice being given. For example, if you’re going to use a 318 short block make sure it’s a 68 or 69, so you’re getting the high compression block. Once you bolt your 920 heads on it the C/R difference is minimal, and will make it better suited to modern pump gas. If you want to keep your ride height low, use your 273 manifolds or go with Dougs or TTI headers. Since you have the standard intake bolt setup, an Eddie performer would be good, an air-gap would be better (don’t forget aluminum intakes and headers will also shed weight compared to iron anything) The aluminum vs steel wheels advice is solid... I make sure to determine the weight of the aluminum wheels before buying. If you decide to home-port/gasket match anything you might as well port everything (intake to head, head ports, and exhaust manifolds. Spec your carb carefully and once you decide on your parts list check with the guys here about a cam. I believe you could go for a Comp XE268H with what you have now plus a hi-comp 318 block. 3:23’s are alright street gears, but with the build you’re doing find a 2500-2800 TC - you’ll be surprised how it wakes up a mostly stock setup.

EDIT: Doh! Disregard TC chatter, it’s a fun speed!
 
Last edited:
-
Back
Top