170 dog

-
O

oldguy45

New Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
Foresthill California
Hey I just got this 64 Valiant 200 with the 170 Slant 6 and 904 push button automatic, never had the 170 before I have had a couple of 225's though, on this 170 I have had the valves redone and have gone through the Distributer (new points, cond, Vac advance, verifed function of mech advance) I've set the base timming as high as spec allows (10 deg) gone through the carb. double checked valve adjustment, and still this thing is a DOG.


Is this the best I should expect???
 
Welcome to FABO! What compression readings are you getting? Also, what rear end ratio do you have?
 
My 65 has one too. They are dogs... I've got more initial and a fast curve in it. It gets good mileage, and seems to be fine once you're moving. But there's just no torque.
 
At 2.78 Ltr. /170 cube, it is small and old tech engine. No if you could rollerize the engine with a nice F.I. set up and a pverdrive trans with decent gears to get up and go................
 
best thing to do is diag it and make sure there is nothing wrong, i.e the tune, broken parts etc..., then pull the head and shave around .100 off for a 9-9.4:1 comp (vs a 7.5-8.5)

that will really help... then as said throw some 3.55's in it... also some guys have just thrown in a high stall converter and really dropped times at the track
 
tall gears and dont be afraid to spin it. short stroke means 7K+ RPM's. They say ultimate HP is the same as the 225 because of the same head, it just comes in later with the smaller stroke.
 
pishta said:
tall gears and dont be afraid to spin it. short stroke means 7K+ RPM's. They say ultimate HP is the same as the 225 because of the same head, it just comes in later with the smaller stroke.
Click to expand...

i woouldn't do 7K with stock rod bolts lol
 
805moparkid said:
then pull the head and shave around .100 off for a 9-9.4:1 comp (vs a 7.5-8.5)
Click to expand...
Or you could do it the right way and CC the chambers before you shave so you get what you want out of it and not what you happened to shoot in the dark...
 
/6 Matt said:
Or you could do it the right way and CC the chambers before you shave so you get what you want out of it and not what you happened to shoot in the dark...
Click to expand...

well yea you have to cc the chambers, and measure piston to deck height, and head gasket thickness and head gasket bore...

sorry to OP that i left that out...:violent1:

EDIT: i did say around as need to check to make sure
 
805moparkid said:
well yea you have to cc the chambers, and measure piston to deck height, and head gasket thickness and head gasket bore...

sorry to OP that i left that out...:violent1:

EDIT: i did say around as need to check to make sure
Click to expand...
Yeah I wasn't trying to be a smartass or call you out or anything but when I saw what you said I thought "oh jeez, that sounds like what a novice would read and call a plan and something a proffesional would read and call a guidline."

EDIT: I was on the novice end of the stick at one time btw...
 
/6 Matt said:
Yeah I wasn't trying to be a smartass or call you out or anything but when I saw what you said I thought "oh jeez, that sounds like what a novice would read and call a plan and something a proffesional would read and call a guidline."
Click to expand...

very good point.... and great quote
 
/6 Matt said:
Why thank you, and as I just added to that post, I used to be the novice who would read that and call it a plan.
Click to expand...

As totally CHEAP as slant sixes are (some folks GIVE them away!), and as easy as it is to swap one slant six for another, and as potentially expensive as it could be to get a 170 to move the freight as well as a STOCK 225 can do, why not just replace that little motor with a 225?

I believe that Charrlie Schmid has turbo'd a 170 and has gotten some good numbers out of it, but just bolting in a 225 short block would be SO easy and cheap...

The 170 is king of the "specific output" (horsepower-per-cubic-inch) wars, but on the street, torque is the answer to sprightly performance, and cubic inches is the way to get that. It's not going to happen with a 170 unless egregious amounts of cash change hands...

Just my opinion...
 
Yes change to a 225, I did this in when I had a 62 valiant-- much better acceleration.
Lawrence
 
Advertised horsepower was 101 at the crank so maybe 80 something at the wheels and almost 50 years old. I got one of those rockets in my 63.Lightin'bolt she ain't.......Damn right dependable though.
 
Darter6 said:
Advertised horsepower was 101 at the crank so maybe 80 something at the wheels and almost 50 years old. I got one of those rockets in my 63.Lightin'bolt she ain't.......Damn right dependable though.
Click to expand...

i dynoed the stock engine in the dart with 300,000 miles on it...

made 85hp and 134tq lol
 
If you plan on getting rid of the 170 you could drop it off at my place. HAHA I want to do some experimenting with one
 
805moparkid said:
lol... welll... mine has... lol...:wack:
Click to expand...

But your bottom end is not "off the assembly line" stock. The rod bolts were torqued within the last 40-50 years....not to mention that you are playing with dynamite beating on those stock RB's:D:wack:
 
Blue87D100 said:
But your bottom end is not "off the assembly line" stock. The rod bolts were torqued within the last 40-50 years....not to mention that you are playing with dynamite beating on those stock RB's:D:wack:
Click to expand...

yea i know that now... i just was un-educated then...
 
The factory spec of 10 btdc is based on build era and real gasoline.
If you'll disconnect the vacuum spark advance and jack the base timing on up some you will get better throttle responce from todays fuel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top