FS USA Exhaust Headers

[Rod Dittmar]

Ceramic Coated 1 3/4" Headers to fit 351 SBF. Mounting flanges are drilled for both 2" & 3" Ports. I don't know who built these but they appear well made. They also don't appear to have ever been used. A few small scratches here & there probably from a mock-up installation. Also, the LH 4-1 collector has a different finish than the RH one. Certainly not show quality but would be great for the street or track. Currently located near Ann Arbor, MI. $2500 + shipping. NOTE: I have removed the 302 application from the original listing. These would be a better fit for a 351.

 

[DaveM]

They look like Superformance headers.

 

[Rod Dittmar]

They look like Superformance headers.

Dave, I haven't a clue. These are something I acquired a while back when getting serious about a build. There are some #s stamped on the flange of each header pipe. Also note the the double wall on the input end of the collector helping to produce a solid leak free(?) seal.

 

[DaveM]

Yes SPF headers have those numbers and the double wall collectors. I'm not sure if they would fit both 302 and 351 engines considering the taller block of the 351.

 

[Rod Dittmar]

Yes SPF headers have those numbers and the double wall collectors. I'm not sure if they would fit both 302 and 351 engines considering the taller block of the 351.

I was also wondering about that because they are stamped 351. However, I tried fitting them on the 302 block with ARF heads installed in my RCR40 and they fit OK.

 

[Spence]

Hey Rod, Do you still have these for sale?

 

[Rod Dittmar]

Hi Spence,
Yes, I still have them. I've been meaning to re-post these again, but wanted to try them on the 302 in my car just to verify that they do fit the 302 even though they are stamped 351. Just haven't gotten around to it yet....
Rod

 

[Bill Kearley]

Deck height means , no go !!!

 

[Rod Dittmar]

Not so fast here... I had these loosely mounted on my engine last year and they seemed to fit OK. That's why I'm planning to try them again. I'll be removing my current bundle soon and will post my findings.

 

[Jim B.]

will these fit a modular ford coyote motor?

 

[Spence]

Sounds good, still deciding on the powerplant, but it's between a 302 & a 351 sbf, so these could work nicely

 

[Brian]

Crossover headers for 351 and 302 are not interchangeable. The ports are further apart with a 9.5" deck height.

Maybe if you made some funky collectors...

 

[Cliff Beer]

Are these ceramic coated stainless or mild steel?

 

[Rod Dittmar]

will these fit a modular ford coyote motor?

Jim, Pretty sure these won't fit the Coyote. Totally different engine. Rod

 

[Rod Dittmar]

Crossover headers for 351 and 302 are not interchangeable. The ports are further apart with a 9.5" deck height.

Maybe if you made some funky collectors...

Brian, Aren't the ports spaced the same on the heads? Assembled, they would just be 'higher' based on the increased height of the 351 block vs. the 302. Rod

 

[Rod Dittmar]

Are these ceramic coated stainless or mild steel?

Cliff, I would assume they're steel. A magnet attaches itself to them quite firmly. Rod

 

[Brian]

Yes, the ports are the same, but the heads are futher apart.

If they were not 180 degree crossover headers it would be OK, the collectors would just be 1/2" higher and about 1" further apart.

But since half of the tubes in each collector are from the opposite head, this wrecks everything.

 

[Rod Dittmar]

Yes, the ports are the same, but the heads are futher apart.

If they were not 180 degree crossover headers it would be OK, the collectors would just be 1/2" higher and about 1" further apart.

But since half of the tubes in each collector are from the opposite head, this wrecks everything.

Hi Brian,
Thanks for the response and an excellent point which I had never considered. That's why this forum is so great! A whole bunch of experts out there who know a lot more than I do about this stuff. But, just as a test, I tried the pipes again on my 302 based SBF. Here they are in the pictures looking rather businesslike on my engine, collectors and all. I got all 16 bolts in, but having said that, I did NOT tighten them down w/o some type of gasket. So, could they work on a 302? Possibly. Surely they would fit the 351. I have a set of stainless for my build, therefore the offering.
Regards, Rod

 

[Brian]

If they fit a 302 (8.7" deck height)without seriously flexing or very lose bolts and big gaps at the heads they won't fit so well on a 351 (9.5" deck height)

Since the stamping is just on the head flange they may be just indicating the port size of the flange and not the header size.

But they do look very nice. Hopefully if any 351 engined buyers are interested, they're close enough for a test fit without a $150 round trip in a delivery truck.

I agree, I would be inclined to think the code was a Sept 19 2012 date code, 351, Cyl number, then some part number.

But also, they could have been modified before ceramic coating.

Somewhere I saw a picture of a set of snakes on the wrong SBF engine, and it was a mess. Wish I could remember where.

 

[Rod Dittmar]

In rethinking this, these would most certainly fit a 351 (as stamped) better than a 302. When I test fitted these on my 302, the 2 collectors were almost touching each other. Tightening down the attaching bolts on the heads, which I didn't do, would have only made things tighter. I believe the 9.5" 351 block would provide a much better fit for both the individual tubes & the collectors.
Rod