The Manifold im using on my 455 is 1 1/4" taller than a stock manifold, which I thought was cool because,well it just looked good to me. Now another guy on this site used the same manifold and had to cut a hole in his hood so that it would close. I know that I can use either 350 or 455 mounts for the engine so my question is... Is there a difference in the final height of my engine depending on what mounts I use? And if not is there any alternative to cutting my hood and getting a scoop?
Thanks

 

maybe an O4B ?? n sell the "cool "manifold.
mounts --someone else can help

 

It doesn't matter what mounts you use as far as height. The center of the crank will be in the same place. Now the 455 is about 1 inch taller than a 350. You didn't say what the car was.

 

The car is a 1970 cutlass. I remember hearing something about the 455 mounts making the engine sit lower or something probably was bs..

 

The mounts can make a difference.The 350 frame pads & 350 mounts will position the engine slightly lower in the chassis,compared to the 455 pads & mounts.It's not a huge amount,but I have noticed the difference.I've done many of these swaps throughout the years.Regardless,that crosswind intake is not that tall,& it will fit under a stock hood.What type of aircleaner do you have?

 

NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

The combination of SBO frame mounts with SBO motor mounts puts the crank centerline in EXACTLY the same place as using BBO frame mounts with BBO motor mounts. The engine CAN'T sit any lower without the oil pan hitting the crossmember. Any difference between the two combinations is only due to manufacturing tolerances and/or sagging rubber mounts. This rumor is harder to kill than the "offset engines in Supremes" rumor.

 

The whole "supreme" thing is total BS,we know that,but I have noticed a slightly difference in height,with the 2 different pad/mount combinations.
Using the exact same engine,with the same oil pan,etc. When I install it with the 455 pads/mounts,I can slide my fingers under the oil pan,between the crossmember.When I do this same thing with the 350 pads/mounts,I get stuck.Like I said,it's VERY minimal,but I have seen this difference more than once,whether it is with new rubber mounts,or solid steel mounts.It doesn't matter if it's a Cutlass,442,or a Vista.
Like I said before,regarding the intake,it will fit under the hood.The car pictured below has a Torker with a 1" spacer,Holley carb,& a 3" filter with drop base.It all fits under the without any mods to the hood.The Crosswind,Torker,Performer,& Port-O-Sonic are all with 1/4" of each other,& I have had all of them under that hood,with my spacer & air cleaner assembly.I have done R&D for Bill Trovato,when making custom aluminum oil pans,& have used that car,as well as a few of my others.I used the 350/350 pieces for the mock-up,so I would know that if it all clears this way,it will clear with the 455 stuff.That oil pan is now a production piece after 2 trials.
By no means am I trying to outknowledge you.I am just stating what I have found with my own experiences,but again,that whole "supreme exception" IS total BS.

 

I have had issues with aftermarket "off shore" small block motor mounts that I run in my 64.
I found that the left and the right Advanced Auto mounts were different and the passenger side was considerably thinner metal. I usually place the mount in a bucket of cold water and weld up the holes, redrilling them to lower the motor the desired amount for hood clarance (you want 1/8" or more between the oil pan and the cross member).
64's have low hood lines and I am able to run my 455, with an Edelbrock Performer and a Q-jet or Demon and a drop base 3" air cleaner with out interference issues.

 

I run a Crosswind and a 3" drop base air cleaner and a Demon 750 and have no hood interference. I think it's a great manifold for the price.