Hooker Fenderwell Headers issue

-
fishmens67:

The 5209HKR you recommend, according to Hooker, is for a Fury B Body. Is that still what I need for a Fenderwell to fit the 440 with Trickflow 270 Heads into my 1972 Swinger?
 
fishmens67:

The 5209HKR you recommend, according to Hooker, is for a Fury B Body. Is that still what I need for a Fenderwell to fit the 440 with Trickflow 270 Heads into my 1972 Swinger?
Those are not going to work, buy once cry once tti headers, they fit
 
Please disregard my previous post which I deleted, the information I gave was wrong.
The 5215 is the header Hooker list for your application.
 
Please disregard my previous post which I deleted, the information I gave was wrong.
The 5215 is the header Hooker list for your application.
I have a set of those if the op wants to come over to Yakima and test fit them
 
I have run the 5215s on my 74 duster with the 440. This is Headman’s on my 68 Dart. They have slip on collectors. Kim

IMG_7368.png
 
Last edited:
& they're often an ugly installation. & why does anyone want to butcher their inners & weaken the structure of the car??? Any option would be better!
Cutting that area for fenderwell headers is not going to weaken the structure of the car. Even though there's a hole, the panels are still welded together, inner fender, firewall, frame. It's still sturdy. I have no inner fenders and guarantee my car is stronger than the factory ever hoped for with my roll cage
 
& I've never seen anyone strengthen the hole after cutting it; no lip bent to stregthen the panel, no doubler plates around hole, or any other method. But I've seen holes burnt with cutting torch & never ground the slag off & always wished I could do quality work like that!
 
& I've never seen anyone strengthen the hole after cutting it; no lip bent to stregthen the panel, no doubler plates around hole, or any other method. But I've seen holes burnt with cutting torch & never ground the slag off & always wished I could do quality work like that!
Have you actually seen a front end bend because of that?
I had my car on jack stands and It didn't move at all.
 
& they're often an ugly installation. & why does anyone want to butcher their inners & weaken the structure of the car??? Any option would be better!
Then there's the guys who say "people have done it sixty years....." I say they've done it wrong. If someone doesn't believe the front structure of these cars is weakened when the inner fenders are cut for headers, then they really should look at one with no engine it the engine bay. SOME applications even require you to get into the CORNER between the firewall and inner fenders. That corner is a NINETY degree and is certainly part of the structural integrity of the front of the car. Just because you've not seen the car bend or buckle, doesn't mean you've not made it weaker. It's not something I would ever consider doing. No way no how.
 
& I've never seen anyone strengthen the hole after cutting it; no lip bent to stregthen the panel, no doubler plates around hole, or any other method. But I've seen holes burnt with cutting torch & never ground the slag off & always wished I could do quality work like that!
Well, if you run some J bars, then you've added strength back. But most I've ever seen had nothing and that's where I agree with you that it weakens the car.
 
Cutting that area for fenderwell headers is not going to weaken the structure of the car. Even though there's a hole, the panels are still welded together, inner fender, firewall, frame. It's still sturdy. I have no inner fenders and guarantee my car is stronger than the factory ever hoped for with my roll cage
I get the impression he was not talking about the addition of a cage or bars, in which case he's right. It makes the car weaker.
 
I get the impression he was not talking about the addition of a cage or bars, in which case he's right. It makes the car weaker.
I usual take a look at stuff before I just go throwing out comments about opinion of how things "look" .
It's not any weaker than having doors on a car.
Like I said before that inner fender is still welded to the firewall, frame, and 90% of it is still there .
Sounds like a wives tale that's been told for way to long like thin wall blocks lol.
 
I usual take a look at stuff before I just go throwing out comments about opinion of how things "look" .
It's not any weaker than having doors on a car.
Yeah well......it was designed to have people holes in it. lol
 
Yeah well......it was designed to have people holes in it. lol
Right, it's a Chrysler with no frame under that part of the car, just spot welded sheet metal, just like the engine compartment but that has a frame that the inner is welded to
 
Right, it's a Chrysler with no frame under that part of the car, just spot welded sheet metal, just like the engine compartment but that has a frame that the inner is welded to
Totally agree. But get into that corner with the hole without reinforcing anything and you HAVE weakened the structure. I think that was his argument. If it was, he's right. But most people with any sense wouldn't do that mod without reinforcement. I know I wouldn't and all I got is half sense.
 
Totally agree. But get into that corner with the hole without reinforcing anything and you HAVE weakened the structure. I think that was his argument. If it was, he's right. But most people with any sense wouldn't do that mod without reinforcement. I know I wouldn't and all I got is half sense.
I think he was bitching about the looks and threw in the weakness for good measure lol
I'm sure it makes a weak point, how much I don't know. I haven't ever seen any cars with fenderwell headers look like they were bent up like a general lee though.
 
I usual take a look at stuff before I just go throwing out comments about opinion of how things "look" .
It's not any weaker than having doors on a car.
Like I said before that inner fender is still welded to the firewall, frame, and 90% of it is still there .
Sounds like a wives tale that's been told for way to long like thin wall blocks lol.
Although often refered to as unitized, Semi-Monocoque is the more correct term, as all panels add strength to the overall structure. And a panel like a inner fender is made stiffer by making bends & shapes in flat sheet, which makes it a structural part. And the fenders become a structural part when they're bolted on, too. Hence, the upper fender structures that is always are rust damaged. K-members are also structural.
So a hole above where frame rails 'Want' to flex near firewall has to have an effect.
Any former engineers out there want to chime in?
 
Although often refered to as unitized, Semi-Monocoque is the more correct term, as all panels add strength to the overall structure. And a panel like a inner fender is made stiffer by making bends & shapes in flat sheet, which makes it a structural part. And the fenders become a structural part when they're bolted on, too. Hence, the upper fender structures that is always are rust damaged. K-members are also structural.
So a hole above where frame rails 'Want' to flex near firewall has to have an effect.
Any former engineers out there want to chime in?
I know you want to be correct sooo bad, but even though there's a hole it's all welded together around it.
1 foot away is the frame.
The firewall inches away.
There is a j-bar added.
It's a wives tale, the only thing that would make it weaker is if the frame rails were rusted out .
I've seen many fenderwell headers cars over my lifetime, none had issues caused from inner fender apron holes or removal.
Most the cars I've seen didn't have jbars
The bad great panel alignment and were drag cars.
Im out of this now.
 
So many want their cars to handle now, with big tires and more, & not all have J-bars or any additional structure, so do yours how you like, I'm just pointing it out for those that might want their chassis to work better.
Anyone have any strain gauges they could apply on the proper spot?
 
-
Back
Top