Search results for query: *

Rear axle ratios the same? 3.91 was available in 1970 while 3.55 was the highest available ratio in 1974. And it looks like the standard ratio for 1970 was 3.23 while in 1974 it was 2.94. I think the 240# weight difference is enough for what you describe to make sense, just curious if there...

Found a weight for a 1970 Swinger 340 - 3170#. https://www.hamtramck-historical.com/images/dealerships/DealershipDataBook/1970/70_Dart0028.jpg 105# lighter than a 1970 Duster 340 or 225# lighter than a 1974 Duster 360 and 240# lighter than a 1974 Dart Sport 360.

Very well could be. The AMA specs list the curb weight for a 1974 Scamp with a 318 at 3190#. That's 205# lighter than the '74 Duster 360. Now, the Duster came with HD suspension (+20?) so maybe 180# more? Add the 120# difference based on MY and you are at potentially a 300# difference...

I see 2930# for a 1970 /6 Duster compared to 3055# for a 1974 /6 Duster, a difference of 125#. Virtually the same difference between a 1970 Duster 340 and a 1974 Duster 360 at 120#. Before all the nitty-gritty of 4spd v automatic, undcoating (+30 lb!!) or powersteering, etc. I would have...

Sounds like a /6 model? I was comparing V8 to V8.

This lists curb weight for a '70 340 Duster as 3275# The 1970 Hamtramck Registry - 1970 AMA Specifications - Valiant & Duster '74 Duster 360 - 3395# The 1970 Hamtramck Registry - 1974 AMA Specifications - Valiant And just for comarpision sake; '73 Duster 340 - 3220# The 1970 Hamtramck...

They didn't weigh as much as a new Challenger. The '74 with a shock mount bumper was certainly heavier than a '72, but not by that much. The only other thing I can think of that added weight were door bars. Maybe 100#, at most? And the later '74 Duster 360's didn't even have the shock mount...

No argument. Plus the different RPM peaks makes me thing something is going on, as I mentioned. Could be they rated it after the peak when it was dropping so the '71 340 in effect made 275@5000 but 285@4800 (the same peak as the later low comp motors). So maybe the net rating at 5000 is 5 hp...

The Dealership Data Book for '71 shows a net rating for the high compression 340 of 230@5000 and 310@3200. https://www.hamtramck-historical.com/images/dealerships/DealershipDataBook/1971/71_Valiant_Duster_14.jpg RPM peaks are different, even though the '74 360 4bbl used the same cam. So I...

245@4800 and 320@3600 per the factory published numbers The 1970 Hamtramck Registry - 1974 AMA Specifications - Valiant

Wikipedia says the Viper motor was LA based, so it must be true. Right? Viper engine - Wikipedia

I don't think there is a part that will swap, but the V10 is definitely SB based.

So lizard people run West World??? :lol:

Just tripped over this on the Holley website. 1965/67 and older?? I am sure it is just Holley covering their ***, but....

Trucks might actually be smaller than a c-body. :rofl:

The factory already did a total redesign on the SBM.

In regards to moving the distributor to the front, I think it would be better to drop it all together and add a cam and crank position sensor. I find it somewhat humorous that in many ways, you can look at the G3 and see the evolution of the SBM. Same bore spacing and the 5.7 uses the 318 bore...

Interesting that the SB2 NASCAR engine did this to the intake ports but left the exhaust ports side by side in the center. That would lead me to believe that a symmetrical intake port had more benefit than a symmetrical exhaust port.

My ‘91 Dakota with a 318 used the Magnum motor mounts. It is a roller block, but not a Magnum motor. No idea if any other motors had the cast in bosses.

Based on the pictures on the website, the only iron Magnum head Hughes lists doesn’t appear to have the needed material to seal 340 manifolds. Plus they have the Magnum intake bolt pattern and would require the extra cost of redrilling them if you wanted to run an LA intake. The aluminum heads...

340 exhaust manifolds

Good find. I run some 340 manifolds on my R/T heads and had to get adapter cut like mentioned in that post. Some of what it comes down to is how the heads were cast. When I was putting my motor together, a buddy of mine had a set of Magnum heads on the bench and the material around the port...

TKX still needs to have the crossmember removed even if it is more compact than a TKX. Not as much floor pan work, but not a bolt in either. The right TKO might have the mods to keep the crossmember like the kits from Kreisler did but the output shaft is low if the crossmember is kept...

https://www.motortrend.com/features/mopp-0106-1979-chrysler-300/

Do you think the PS pump assembly would clear the stock battery tray?

In what way does this add drama and turmoil to the thread?? Isn't that what this is about now? :poke: :rofl:

Just personal opinion, but not a fan of a multi belt system unless one of those belts turns a supercharger :D . And I don't think they fit the definition of a serpentine belt system because the accessories aren't all on one plane and (generally) there isn't a tensioner. A multi belt setup is...

Here is a thread about the non AC w/ PS issues and some fixes: https://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/threads/van-power-steering-bracket-issues.400011/

You are right, the LA has bosses up at the intake side of the head and then it tapers away from there. The Magnum head has bosses all the way across but the plane is the same as what the LA bosses use. So any head that is solid all the way across that face and has the holes drilled and tapped...

Looks like you are golden then. Those heads appear to match the Magnum bolt pattern on the end of the heads and are built up to match the plane. Based on that, I would grab a Magnum TC cover, a van or Jeep PS bracket and a standard Alt/AC bracket. Edit!!! Just cut the AC mount section off...