Match Race ~ 1970 'Duster 340' vs. 1969 Mustang 'Mach 1' 351W

-
6

69 Cuda 440

Legandary Member
Legendary Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
4,244
Reaction score
436
Location
Wilton, Connecticut
Match Race

Pony Car High-Performance Match-Up

1970 Plymouth 'Duster 340' {340/275 HP}
vs.
1969 Ford Mustang 'Mach 1' {351W/290 HP}
 
That were quite a bit slower than the duster and heavier. And the 71 duster would kick it's but even harder. But they are nice looking and better handling than a duster. I'm in the market for a Mach.
 
wouldn't this be a 70 mach 1 against a 1970 challenger or barracuda? those were the mopar "pony" cars
 
no it should be a 69 vs a 69 , all the A bodies fit the pony car criteria but none better than the 1st and 2nd gen barracudas , if your going to go top dog mustang against top dog barracuda the Mustang loses no matter what you version of top dog Barracuda you chose , the Mcode 440 , the SS Hemi or even the 340 Cuda all sold in 69 and all of them smoke the big block Rustang .

PS the 273 powered 64/65/66 Barracuda is the first and original " Pony Car " .It also smoked the 65 /66 Rustangs .
 
Would be no contest against a 70 340 duster as a stock 69 351 W Mach1 would give you mid 15s in the quarter on a good day. They were heavy for a stang & factory HP was over rated. Beautiful cars though.

Oldschoolcuda
 
cannucky said:
no it should be a 69 vs a 69 , all the A bodies fit the pony car criteria but none better than the 1st and 2nd gen barracudas , if your going to go top dog mustang against top dog barracuda the Mustang loses no matter what you version of top dog Barracuda you chose , the Mcode 440 , the SS Hemi or even the 340 Cuda all sold in 69 and all of them smoke the big block Rustang .

PS the 273 powered 64/65/66 Barracuda is the first and original " Pony Car " .It also smoked the 65 /66 Rustangs .
Click to expand...

The 69 boss 429 and mach 1 428scj were quicker than the barracudas you mentioned can't count the SS hemi not a production car.
 
General Specs

1970 Plymouth 'Duster 340' {340/275 HP}

275 HP @ 5000 RPM's
340 Ft/Lbs. of Torque @ 3200 RPM's

Shipping Weight.......... #3109 lbs.
#3109 lbs.~ 275 HP = 11.30 Wt/HP

1970 NHRA Factor = 310 HP

#3109 lbs. ~ 310 HP = 10.03 Wt/HP {1970 NHRA Class > G/Stock}
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1969 Ford Mustang 'Mach 1' Fastback {351/290 HP}

290 HP @ 4800 RPM's
380 Ft/Lbs. of Torque @ 3400 RPM's

Shipping Weight.......... #3381 lbs.

#3381 lbs. ~ 290 HP = 11.69 Wt/HP {1970 NHRA Class > J/Stock}

No re-factoring changes in 1970.
 
My stock bore 70 340/4sp swinger walks my buddy's 69 428 mach 1. Pisses him off too!
 
1969 Ford Mustang 'Mach 1'

Base Model
* 351/290 HP > 'Code M'
* 4-Speed {Wide-Ratio} 2.78 / 1.93 / 1.36 / 1.00
* 3.25 Gears.

Results > 15.60's @ 89 MPH.

Add Options;
* 4-Speed {Close-Ratio} 2.32 / 1.69 / 1.29 / 1.00
* 3.91 Gears w/Traction-Lok
* Shaker Hood {Air Scoop}

Results > 14.90's @ 93 MPH
 
The Cleveland lost so the W will get it's clock cleaned.
 
351/290 HP 'Code M'

Bore........................... 4.001"
Stroke........................ 3.500"

Compression Ratio ....... 10.70
Piston Type.................. Flat w/Notches {6.99 CC Volume}
Deck Height................. -.015"

Cylinder Head............. #C90E-G
Chamber Type ............ Closed
Combustion Chamber... 58.90 {Minimum} ~ {60.4 Factory Level}

Intake Valve............... 1.852"
Exhaust Valve............. 1.548"

Camshaft................... Hydraulic
Lift............................ .425"/.450"
Duration..................... 256*/270*
Overlap...................... 33*

Valve Spring.............. Single-Coil w/Damper
Valve Closed............. #89 lbs.
Valve Open............... #233 lbs.
 
Camshaft Specifications

______________1970 '340'_________1969 '351W'

Camshaft.............. 'Hydraulic' .................. 'Hydraulic'
Lift...................... .430"/.445" ................ .425"/.450"
Duration............... 268*/276* ................. 256*/270*
Duration @ .050" .. 210*/221* ................. 206*/221*
Overlap................. 44* ........................... 33*
LSA ..................... 114* .......................... 115*

Valve Spring ........ Single-Coil w/Damper ... Single-Coil w/Damper
{Valve-Closed} .... #96 lbs. ..................... #89 lbs.
{Valve-Open} ..... #242 lbs. .................... #233 lbs.

Fairly close in specifications.
 
I'd argue the "better handling" point too.

My sway bar equipped 70 B body out handled 80's mustngs.

My 71 torino gt was no match in the handling department for even a non-sway bar torsion bar Mopar.
 
'Heads Up in the Quarter-Mile'

*1970 'Duster 340', 4-Speed and 3.23 Gears w/'Sure-Grip'
vs.
* 1969 Mustang 'Mach 1' 351W, 4-Speed {Close-Ratio}, and 3.91 Gears w/'Traction-Lok'

I'd still take the 'Duster 340' everyday of the Week.
 
I don't think there's even a contest here. 3.91s would have probably been a special order option, and you'd have been cruising at lifter pumpup speeds by the time you hit 100 MPH. There's a reason you don't see many Fords at the Pure Stock Drags; for some reason, they rarely put a total package together that ran that well on the street (I'm not a Ford-basher either; I own two).

Now today, anyone can build a really stout 351W-based engine, but even with the decent C9OE heads, the '69 Mach wasn't exactly a quick car. I'd guess, based upon even your data for the 3.91 geared Mach, that the Duster would trap about five miles per hour faster, even though it was rated at 15 fewer horsepower. In reality, the Mach was probably putting out more like 250 horsepower rather than 290.
 
69 Cuda 440 said:
Camshaft Specifications

______________1970 '340'_________1969 '351W'

Camshaft.............. 'Hydraulic' .................. 'Hydraulic'
Lift...................... .430"/.445" ................ .425"/.450"
Duration............... 268*/276* ................. 256*/270*
Duration @ .050" .. 210*/221* ................. 206*/221*
Overlap................. 44* ........................... 33*
LSA ..................... 114* .......................... 115*

Valve Spring ........ Single-Coil w/Damper ... Single-Coil w/Damper
{Valve-Closed} .... #96 lbs. ..................... #89 lbs.
{Valve-Open} ..... #242 lbs. .................... #233 lbs.

Fairly close in specifications.
Click to expand...


Those cam specs on the 70 340 are not right....
 
krazykuda said:
Those cam specs on the 70 340 are not right....
Click to expand...

here we go. I am sure there is a FORD expert that has something to say

Close is fine for this match race

On a different note, the 1st gen mach 1s are the only mustang I like
 
This thread reminded me of some of my runs in my '68 Barracuda Formula S 340 back in the early 1970's. I got the car in June, 1969 used for $1700 with 17,000 miles on it. After a few tries at the track, I was able to get the car reliably in the 13.50's at 105. That was quick for a 340, but not really unusual. Many 1970 Dusters and Darts at the time were in the 13.70's.
The best race I had though was at Irwindale Raceway where I was pared up with a new 'Cuda 440+6, bright Yellow. We were neck and neck through the 1000 foot point when I started pulling away from him and won the race. The 340 was popping a little at top end so I went to change the plugs. The Challenger driver came up to me with my hood up and said "I have to see your Hemi. I haven't been beat before, so it must be a Hemi in your car." His mouth dropped when he saw the 340 there.
My favorite cars to race were big block GM's as they never had traction sufficient to launch effectively against my Cuda.
I still have the Cuda and am trying to get the coin to get the body work done and get new black paint on it.
Bob
 
Aaron65 said:
I don't think there's even a contest here. 3.91s would have probably been a special order option, and you'd have been cruising at lifter pumpup speeds by the time you hit 100 MPH. There's a reason you don't see many Fords at the Pure Stock Drags; for some reason, they rarely put a total package together that ran that well on the street (I'm not a Ford-basher either; I own two).

Now today, anyone can build a really stout 351W-based engine, but even with the decent C9OE heads, the '69 Mach wasn't exactly a quick car. I'd guess, based upon even your data for the 3.91 geared Mach, that the Duster would trap about five miles per hour faster, even though it was rated at 15 fewer horsepower. In reality, the Mach was probably putting out more like 250 horsepower rather than 290.
Click to expand...

Aaron,

Correct on the horsepower factors,

1970 NHRA Factors >

The Mopar 340/275 HP was re-factored to {310 Horsepower} in both Stock and
Super/Stock.

The 1969 Ford 351W {290 HP} was re-factored to {260 Horsepower} when classed in
Super/Stock.

But, the NHRA 'punished' the 351W in Stock Class, and left it at 290 HP, as punishment
for Ford 'over-rating' that Engine.
 
RLF Cuda said:
This thread reminded me of some of my runs in my '68 Barracuda Formula S 340 back in the early 1970's. I got the car in June, 1969 used for $1700 with 17,000 miles on it. After a few tries at the track, I was able to get the car reliably in the 13.50's at 105. That was quick for a 340, but not really unusual. Many 1970 Dusters and Darts at the time were in the 13.70's.
The best race I had though was at Irwindale Raceway where I was pared up with a new 'Cuda 440+6, bright Yellow. We were neck and neck through the 1000 foot point when I started pulling away from him and won the race. The 340 was popping a little at top end so I went to change the plugs. The Challenger driver came up to me with my hood up and said "I have to see your Hemi. I haven't been beat before, so it must be a Hemi in your car." His mouth dropped when he saw the 340 there.
My favorite cars to race were big block GM's as they never had traction sufficient to launch effectively against my Cuda.
I still have the Cuda and am trying to get the coin to get the body work done and get new black paint on it.
Bob
Click to expand...

Awesome...I think that's my favorite Barracuda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top