QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

There are 3 holes that allow height adjustment of the torque arm. Lopping off the top hole would give clearance.

Edit: You may not need to cut it off. It might be enough to just never use the top mounting position. Hard to tell since I can't get it put in place.

Beater79TA

Good to know. I'm running the same K-member, bellhousing, and a T56 Magnum with the FBody tailhousing conversion so I'd run into the same problem. Post up what has to be removed to make it work and if the mount bolt for the transmission mount lines up correctly.

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

Link to my build thread,

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/ltx-...ml#post6000192

If you're going to build a Y-pipe to fit, then all you need to do is notch and box the back of the crossmember, and extend the slots forward. You don't actually need to shorten the torque arm bracket, just don't use the top mounting position.

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

Pulling the solenoid will make no difference. The casting in the trans is still in the way.

toddoky

I'm glad you tackled this early on Qwktrip, as I knew sooner or later someone would want to try to use the crossmember on an LS/T56 swap using non-Hooker engine brackets. I've put together a mock-up of the crossmember and a 4th-gen F-body T56 extension housing how it sits using the Hooker engine brackets and I'd like to send them to you if you can PM me your email address...I would post them here but still can't get pictures to load. You are more than welcome to post them from here yourself if you want to.


You may see some differences with your set-up and the mock-up that will explain the differences better besides the fore/aft offset differences between the Hooker engine brackets and what you're using.


I'm sure we'll all learn something from your exercise.

Beater79TA

The problem may originate with the BMR K-member. I initially installed the LS1 with a 4L60E and noticed an engine setback issue. It moved the motor close enough to the firewall to physically not leave enough room for a factory dipstick tube. I had to use a Lokar flexible braided stainless one with a smaller diameter to get it to fit. Best guess is it moves the engine back about 1/4 to 1/2 inch and up by the same amount. This also forced the holes for the transmission mount to be slotted to allow the bolts to go into the transmission and through the crossmember into the mount.

The problem remained the same when I switched out the transmission to a T56 Magnum with a FBody tailhousing. I had to slot the new crossmember just a touch for the transmission mount bolt.

So people using motor mounts other than the BMR K-member might not have issues with the transmission crossmember if their mounts really do maintain factory engine position for a thirdgen. Yet another reason I'm considering modifying the original engine K Member and putting it back in.

toddoky

Yes, the reverse lockout solenoid was in place during mock-up of the crossmember. I'm going to send photos of a mock-up I just did of the transmission parts in question and the crossmember to Qwktrip so he can compare them to what he's experiencing in his situation. There are no issues similar issues when using the crossmember with the Hooker engine brackets.

Alice89

iTrader: (6)

I was asked to upload these by toddoky:

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

I need to do myself a service and learn how to weld. I even have a gas MIG welder sitting in the garage. LOL!

toddoky

It is a good skill to have for sure. I think I'm fairly certain about the major cause of the non-compatibility you're experiencing between the crossmember and your BMR subframe. The Hooker engine brackets and crossmember work in tandem to place the LS crankshaft and transmission centerline axis in the same location as the stock SB engine and transmission was set up with. If the BMR subframe moves the engine up and/or back, then it will cause you to have to drop the tail of the transmission down from the stock position to enable the top of the trans to continue to clear the trans tunnel/firewall sheet metal. The only way to prevent that would be to cut open the tunnel and rebuild it around the transmission. I believe this to be the case in your situation due to the interference you are experiencing between the crossmember and the reverse lockout solenoid; there is no such interference when using the crossmember with the Hooker engine brackets, even with the torque arm bracket set to the highest set of holes as you see in my mock-up photos.

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

That Hooker crossmember is definitely STOUT! I am still working out ways to use it without too much complexity.

I have two Y-pipes so I could cut one up to make fit. Or I could go back to stock K-member with Holley engine mounts. I have always thought the tubular K-member was puny in comparison and regretted buying it anyway.

toddoky

I'm not familiar with the design of the BMR K-member, but it may be easier to modify the engine mount position plates (move them forward and down) on it than it is to modify the crossmember, depending on how it's configured.

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

It doesn't use mount plates like stock K-member. It has permanent engine stands.

http://www.bmrsuspension.com/?page=p...360&superpro=0

toddoky

Even easier than I thought it looks like...as long as there was access for a MIG gun, I'd saw through the stand tubes and nudge the engine forward until you can get the rear of the trans case to clear the front edge of the crossmember. You're in the unfortunate position of having engine and transmission mounting components that were not designed to be compatible with each other and will need to modify one or the other to get them to play nice together.

Beater79TA

It would probably be easier to modify the stock K member for the AC compressor and pan clearance and put it back in than modify the tubular unit. That's my plan for some point during the next 12 months since I'm not happy with fitment or the tubular lower control arms it requires.

toddoky

That method could also provide very desirable results.

BADNBLK

iTrader: (11)

For those wondering what they look like in satin black Cerakote high temp ceramic coating. Only pics I have so far

QwkTrip

iTrader: (22)

Boy, that's a mouthfull of words! LOL!

Looks good.

BADNBLK

iTrader: (11)

Haha! Truth! Thanks man

toddoky

Ceramic job looks great, I'm really interested in seeing you get your car together.

BADNBLK

iTrader: (11)

Thanks man, you're telling me! Now I'm unsure what I'm gonna do with the rest of the exhaust... When it shows up to coat or not to coat. It should be pretty cool as I envision it, guess we will see

robguitargod1

iTrader: (4)

QwkTrip - You need to develop those welding skills! You'll suck at first, but you'll be awesome in no time!. Just like everything else in life, experience makes all the difference. Where are you at in IL? I'm on the northside of Chicago. I'd help ya out anytime if you're near me.

I'm right next to Strange Engineering too if that helps.

grngryoutmyway

iTrader: (1)

Man those coated headers look good.

Has anyone actually mounted the trans cross member with the other style motor mounts ie. Spohn ect yet?

toddoky

Yes, QwkTrip attempted an installation of the crossmember with a BMR K-member with miserable results. I would suspect any installation not using the Hooker engine brackets is going to produce a similar experience.

grngryoutmyway

iTrader: (1)

The BMR K member is even more different. Regular swap mounts on stock k member should just shift the whole thing back to where the tail housing is in stock location. So however much a difference that is between normal and your motor mounts would be the only difference. Not sure if it will work or not. I would try it myself but I figure someone will get to it before I'm ready anyways.

toddoky

Yes, I'm sure someone will take it upon themselves to attempt to install that combination of parts and I'll be as impressed as anyone else if the results produced are positive.

timonator

iTrader: (4)

Has anyone attempted this swap using an f body oil pan instead of the holley /hooker one ?

toddoky

You would have to notch the factory K-member or the oil pan itself if you wanted to use the F-body pan.

BADNBLK

iTrader: (11)

I'm notching mine and keeping my fbody pan.

Jaysz28

iTrader: (30)

I am this setup and am willing to try the Holley crossmember.

I'll PM Qwktrip and see if he'll ship his to me and I'll test fit it to my car.

Maybe this is something we could pass around to different members with different engine mounting options to see what works and what doesn't......

toddoky

If you guys can work that out between you it would certainly save some guys a fair amount of time, money and aggravation.

Jaysz28

iTrader: (30)

and it could help you guys sell more products

toddoky

Yes that's true and there's a bad side to that too, being that we won't have the ability to properly support such applications through the tech service line with only anecdotal fitment confirmations.

dennisbernal91z

iTrader: (2)

Think this would provide enough flow for a 390 SBC with a F1 Procharger?

timonator

iTrader: (4)

So, can anyone tell me if any of the aftermarket tubular k members will work with this system?

BOTTLEDZ28

iTrader: (9)

WOW. As much as I love these new parts, spending $3100 for all of them is a lot to swallow. Not sure that its geared towards the budget minded crowd though. Id factor in another $4K in parts to do a nice LS swap. Thats including a nice LS engine and fully rebuilt trans along with a few odds and ends that would be needed to properly do a nice clean swap.

toddoky

No on the BMR and any others are unknown at this point.

toddoky

You don't have to go "all in" to realize the benefits of the engineering involved in the system. If you are on a tight budget you could use the Hooker engine brackets, crossmember and headers tp get your drivetrain installed and modify any existing exhaust system you have to connect up to the header collectors. You could then come back in the future and get the Hooker dual exhaust in the 409ss version to save some coin. The heat shields are offered for those that want the extra protection, but their use is not required. We will also behin offering the headers in mild steel versions sometime around the beginning of summer, so that will also play well with those who can't afford stainless headers.

Beater79TA

Has anyone installed the dual exhaust in a lowered car? Curious how the over the axle section clears with the car dropped on lowering springs.

toddoky

The system was specifically designed for such applications and provides plenty of clearance around all the rear suspension components.

carattini

Can you sale just the cat Back part?

Do you have a Header that work with this but for the L98 engine?

toddoky

The exhaust system in only sold in one configuration, which is to attach it directly to the Hooker LS swap headers. With that said, it can easily be modified,by someone with the proper skills, to connect to any other type/brand of headers. I've done one such install on a Holley employee's IROC and connected the system to set of Hooker 2210HKR headers that were on his car.

carattini

How much would cost the system less the headers?

toddoky

That would depend on who you buy it from and whether you chose the 409ss or 304ss version of the system. You can find the part numbers for each on the Holley website and pricing for them as well if you chose to buy direct from Holley.

timonator

iTrader: (4)

I have the headers and exhaust, ordered the motor and trans mounts and oil pan.
Do I need to notch the factory k member for the ac compressor ?

timonator

iTrader: (4)

Or even better can I get a look at the motor mount instructions?

ShiftyCapone

iTrader: (7)

Toddoky,

Any idea how much power the cat-back will support?

toddoky

My photo search was inconclusive in being able to make that determination for you; you will definitely have to remove the triangulated frame brace if one is present on your car.

toddoky

A realistic expectation would be around the 450-475HP level, although some users have installed the system on higher HP setups to take advantage of the overall ground clearance, sound and fitment benefits the system provides.

crazynights

iTrader: (3)

Anyone with the dual exhaust kit installed have any sound clips? Overall opinion on the noise level? Thanks