Nope. Sanderson makes a set for the 300/340 for those years, but a 350 with headers runs into the same issues with frame clearances as putting a 350 and headers in the '78-'87 G body Regals. Not a direct fit, but people have had luck using Hooker headers (there's only one real template I think for all 350 headers, since hey all route the same) in the G body Regals. Maybe same results could be achieved with the '67 Skylark? I would imagine using a set of TA's small tube primary headers (1 5/8") would give even better results, since the tubes are smaller in diameter and would afford better clearance. TA is the only vendor offering tubes in this size; all the rest use the larger 1 3/4" primaries. Best wishes, Gary
I know for a fact that the Hooker headers will fit the G body, and it looks like all the makers of these headers use the same or very similar template. Hookers have excellent ground clearance (better ground clearance than I've seen with chevy small blocks and headers in G bodies!) Anyone ever put TA's smaller tube primary headers into a G body? I imagine with the smaller primaries it would fit even better, unless it differed in design vs the larger Hooker headers. Gary
Yes you mean "fit" cut, weld hammer, then yes they fit, cause that is what I did. A dent to clear motor mount on driver side. And cut bend, fit , weld passenger side. Granted I think I have 1 3/4 tubes which made it tighter Josh
I bought them used off ebay back before I put the 350 in. And the were used, so not 110% sure if the are Hookers or poston buick but remember they look same. I try to get some pics to post.
hooker headers fit with minimal denting on one tube for the upper control arm. we have a 67 with a/c and a 350 with hooker headers. if you don't believe it, come to ct and i'll show you. sheesh.
Here's an example of Hooker headers in a G body taken from this website: https://gbodyforum.com/threads/hooker-headers-fit-buick-350-engines-in-gbody.35498/ Gary Woohoo, seems this same person has already put up a thread on this very subject on this website: http://www.v8buick.com/showthread.php?243593-Headers-into-a-Gbody
Mine rook fab of the passenger header, little grinding of the frame for clearence, the colum shift linkage I had to similar mod. Being the car has the rare split bench with console and leather seats, I decided to keep it. I must have poston headers, sorry Gary for the mix up
No prob, the main goal here is to gather some information regarding what fits and what doesn't. Upon closer inspection, it seems Doug's headers are routed a bit different, so it makes me wonder just how many other differences the other manufacturer's have? The TA headers seem to be almost identical to the Hookers in terms of routing, but the smallest difference can make a huge difference with fitment (as you already know!). Headers are such a huge PITA...which could even be overlooked if they just FIT...and had good ground clearance! Nothing worse than flattening out your primary tubes on anything other than pristine terrain. We need some shorties. Gary
Mine rook fab of the passenger header, little grinding of the frame for clearence, the colum shift linkage I had to similar mod. Being the car has the rare split bench with console and leather seats, I decided to keep it. I must have poston headers I noticed the Hooker badge on the driver side header, sorry Gary for the mix up
I guess I should have done this sooner (thanks for the reminder). Let me count the ways that shorties are advantageous over manifolds and/or full length headers: 1) fitment 2) ground clearance 3) anything is better than the manifolds (power wise) 4) cost vs full length or custom headers for both the headers and 5) less coating required since they're smaller and need less coverage 6) weight savings over manifolds and full length headers; which also means 7) less strain on hardware (especially on the heads), which can also lead to 8) longer exhaust gasket life expectancy 9) wider range of applications 10) primaries would be farther away from crucial areas (such as fuel, brake, and transmission lines, not to mention the shift linkage), which goes along with the fitment statement, but also keeps them cooler, especially when the primaries are coated. It also means your coating is less likely to get scraped off/damaged (not just because of ground clearance and installation), but due to prolonged contact with other interferences. 11) you wouldn't have to beat/hammer/dent up/cut/reweld your brand new headers (and save some skin on your knuckles to boot) just to get the damn things to fit! Did I forget anything? To maximize power on a N/A engine, scavenging is required. You can't get this full effect with manifolds, which is why I harped on about the scavenging merger pipe with manifolds to help them out. Headers have their own scavenging effect independent of pulses from the other cylinder bank, and so the merger pipe is less necessary; though with shorties the scavenging effect probably wouldn't be as good as full length headers, and so a merger pipe would help. The passenger side exhaust manifold has a much better design than the driver's side, which might as well be a 'log style' manifold. Independent tubing separating cylinder pulses and using each one to aid the other in exhaust evacuation would be a vast improvement over this manifold design. This is the whole point of using headers in the first place. Clearly, fitment and the hot air stove pipe (for faster warmups) was the main goal of this driver's side manifold. Shorties are a compromise between fitment, ground clearance, cost, and application range VS the performance of cast iron manifolds and full length headers. Down pipes could be fabricated with little effort (a retro-fix on TA's manifold downpipes would suffice), and could also be larger size (say 2.5") that will give an increased airflow potential your engine can actually utilize (vs the 2" exit port diameter of the iron manifolds). Having them exit similar to exhaust manifolds would also permit the use of the driver's side downpipe to cross under the oil pan (much like the OEM single exhaust) for a large single or tight dual exhaust setup with limited space applications. Gary
I emailed TA. I will see if they replied. I have a 1970 GS 350 original 4 speed. I am close to LA. So my car can be their guinea pig. I responded to the header poll from a few years back as well.
The shorties are going to happen. Trust me. Someone (if not more than one) will make them. With the aluminum heads coming out, shorties are inevitable.
Two such sets of shorties should be produced: The first, which is oriented toward milder applications, would be 1 5/8" primaries and 2 1/2" collector, which when mated to a similar sized downpipe, would serve well as a high velocity scavenging system with the downpipe having the same size as the collector--effectively mimicking an extra long collector, maximizing low-mid range torque. The second would be oriented toward higher-end applications, and would be the traditional 1 3/4" primary, 3" collector size, compacted into a neat package with a myriad of application potential. Another set of downpipes (3" in diameter) could be made for these, and would give a similar 'extra length' collector to help make up for the short collector length typically associated with shorties. Both could come with a corresponding size 'reducer' that bolts on and gives some length where a custom exhaust could be welded up, much like an exhaust system would be for the manifolds. The existing exhaust hooked to manifolds could even be used, with some minor modifications needed to adapt it to the shorty reducers. The range of applications would pretty much be limited only to what the Buick 350 itself could physically fit into. Gary
For those of you who haven't already, cast your vote (or just peruse the thread and comment) here for Buick 350 shorties: http://www.v8buick.com/showthread.php?270832-Buick-350-Shorty-Headers
I'm all for new products available to the market. Just pointing out that the scavenge benefits of a shorty header would hover near or above the typical hp peak. It has to do with the relationship between the sizing of the pipe (length and diameter, emphasis on length) and it's mathematical relationship with the cylinder, not so much "flow". Useful internet calculators based on age-old formulas are abound.
