1967 Match Race 'Dart GTS 383' vs 'Firebird 326 H.O.'

[69 Cuda 440]

1967

As equal as you could get.

Dodge Dart GTS 383 rated at 280 Horsepower.

Pontiac Firebird 326 H.O. rated at 285 Horsepower.

In 1967, both fell into the C/S Class {10.60 - 11.29 Wt/Hp},
and later {1968} both were again still in the same class
{G/Stock = 11.00 - 11.49 Wt/Hp}.

On the street, handling wise the Firebird H.O. out-distanced
the 'nose-heavy' Dart GTS.

But tweaked and in a straight-line, woud the Dart GTS 383
run away from the Firebird H.O. on the big end.

Some specs to follow...........

 

[mikedevore]

I give the edge to the Dart on this one.

 

[cudavert]

Interesting......those Pontiac engines ain't no lightweights either. I think Pontiac was putting some fairly crazy cams in their H.O. engines, compared to other manufacturers.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

1967 Dart GTS 383

383/280 HP '383 Four-Barrel'

A 'very restrictive' Exhaust System and the detuned 're-jetted' Carter AFB {575 CFM}
put a 'strangehold' on the 383 Engines potential in the 1967 Dart GTS.

The little A-Body now weighed in at a 'bulky' #3208 lbs. with the heavy
big-block, with an additional #176 lbs. on the nose alone.

As for the 383, from 1963 thru 1966, the 325 HP Engine was a 'Steady-Eddie'
in the B-Body cars, but it was in no way a 'Drag Strip Star'.

A typical 'stock' 383/325 HP 4-Speed in a Coronet or Satellite with 3.23 Gears would
mosey down the 'quarter-mile' in 15.80's @ 88 MPH.

But, in a lighter A-Body Car, the #300+ lb. weight savings would make a sharp difference
in the 'quarter-mile'.

In initial 'Performance Tests', the Dart GTS 383, 4-Speed with 3.23 Gears and Sure-Grip
put down a non-exciting, but respectable 15.40's @ 92 MPH.

 

[cudavert]

The little A-Body now weighed in at a 'bulky' #3208 lbs. with the heavy
big-block, with an additional #176 lbs. on the nose alone.

But even at 3208 lbs., I'll bet the Pontiac Firebird couldn't be much lighter than that, and not really bad for a big block car. What was the comparison in torque between these engines?

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Good question Mr. Cudavert,

The 1967 Pontiac Firebird H.O. with the 326/285 HP (Code L76 Engine}

Weighed in at #3140 lbs. {-68 lbs. less than the GTS 383}

326/285 HP
285 HP @ 5000 RPM
360 Ft/Lbs. Torque @ 3200 RPM's

383/280 HP
280 HP @ 4200 RPM's
400 Ft/Lbs. Torque @ 2400 RPM's

I'll print comparative specifications in next post...

 

[YY1]

I'll bet the weight distribution is terrible for the dart, not to mention the severe limit for tires with those wheel wells, esp vs the firebird.

Wonder why a 340 wouldn't be a better choice, esp the 340 Barracuda without the wheel well limitation, and with better weight distribution.

One thing that immediately comes to mind is the horrible tire technology of the day versus the amount of power that got to the wheels.

The pontiac would have an advantage here, as IIRC they were using wider wheels (7?), and Mopar seemed to favor 5.5, 6, and 6.5.


...and if you've ever driven one- a 60s or 70s firebird doesn't really handle any better than ANY torsion bar Mopar. (and even the c3 vette isn't all that much better)

 

[YY1]

So, does the OP actually own a 69 440 Cuda?

I'd argue that that car is just slightly one step away from a one-off spec built factory drag race car.

I'd also argue that that car is possibly THE BEST platform for what many consider a "muscle" car.

With today's tire technology, and what can be done with a B/RB engine, not to mention performance suspension,that could also make it handle- that car is as close as it gets to "having it all", and aside from gas mileage, can stand with many of today's $40K plus supercars.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

1967 Pontiac Firebird H.O.

Car Weight.......#3140 lbs.

Engine..326/285 HP {L76 Code}
Bore......................3.71"
Stroke...................3.75"
Compression.........10.5-1
Deck Height..........+.011 {ab}

Cylinder Heads
Casting #141 {Big Valve, Big Port, Small Combustion Chamber, High-Flow Rate}
Combustion Chamber.. 52.0 CC
Intake....................... 1.92"
Exhaust..................... 1.64"

Camshaft
Hydraulic
Lift................ .386 " Intake / .421" Exhaust
Duration.......... 269* Intake / 277* Exhaust
Overlap............ 47*
Valve Springs... 95 lbs. Valve-Closed / 225 lbs. Valve-Open

Carburetor
Carter AFB #4243
CFM Rating...... 600
Throttle.......... 1 7/16" x 1 11/16"
Venturi's......... 1.186" x 1.537"

Exhaust
Dual-System
Primary.......2.00"
Outlet........ 2.25"

Rear-End Gear Ratio's
3.08 / 3.23 / 3.36 / 3.55 / 3.91

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Frank,

These cars were evenly matched.

 

[bad440]

just out of school my friend had a 67 firebird 400 auto.we ported the heads shaved them put in a hydro crane cam ,headers a 750 dp and that car ran 12.60s all day. it was a fun car.but it was a 400

 

[69 Cuda 440]

I'll bet the weight distribution is terrible for the dart, not to mention the severe limit for tires with those wheel wells, esp vs the firebird.

Wonder why a 340 wouldn't be a better choice, esp the 340 Barracuda without the wheel well limitation, and with better weight distribution.

One thing that immediately comes to mind is the horrible tire technology of the day versus the amount of power that got to the wheels.

The pontiac would have an advantage here, as IIRC they were using wider wheels (7?), and Mopar seemed to favor 5.5, 6, and 6.5.


...and if you've ever driven one- a 60s or 70s firebird doesn't really handle any better than ANY torsion bar Mopar. (and even the c3 vette isn't all that much better)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1967 Dart GTS 383

Shipping Weight.......................#3208 lbs.
Weight Distribution {55/45}......#1765 lbs. {Front} / #1443 lbs. {Rear}

Factory Stock Wheels & Tires.....14" x 5.5" / D70 x 14" {6.21" Width}

 

[1972DusterPaul]

Give me the Fire Chicken...

A friend in high school had a triple red convertible 326 with a 2-speed powerglide.

After high school I helped him put in a 428 with a 4 speed...one of the funnest cars I ever drove.

Paul

 

[Vitamin c]

My first car was a 67 326 HO firebird. It had a two speed transmission, 3.23 rear, dual exhaust, and a carter AFB. Fun car, but no rocket ship. I steered clear of the mopars. I could run with the 396 chevelles and such, but had to go from a roll. it was over if I got caught from a red light. Eventually I had a turbo 350 and a holley carb, and edelbrock manifold that helped a bit.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

On the 1967 Firebird 326 H.O. 'High Output'

The 2-Speed Automatic was a 'dog' in that car.

The M-22 4-Speed {2.52 ~ 1.88 ~ 1.46 ~ 1.00} was the
only way to get down the 'quarter-mile'.

The 326/285 HP was rated for 285 HP @ 5000 RPM, but that motor
could pull up to 5500 RPM's {Red Line} easily.

 

[Vitamin c]

Yes the two speed was a boat anchor! Car had mono leaf rear springs and a single "traction bar" thingy if I remember correctly. Also 4 wheel power drums. took forever to get the thing rolling, then couldn't get it stopped once you did!!! As a kid, I just didn't have the knowledge to know how to go fast. It was my daily transportation so I really couldn't tear it apart for gears and such.im guessing I high 13 second car

 

[69 Cuda 440]

1967 Firebird 326 H.O.

Curb Weight.......................... #3455 lbs.

Shipping Weight......................#3140 lbs.
Weight Distribution {58/42}.... #1841 lbs. / #1299 lbs.

Very 'nose-heavy'

Nice 'option' was Gear-Ratio's...... 3.08 / 3.23 / 3.36 / 3.55 / 3.91

 

[67redcudavert]

By the late 70s Pontiac had made great strides in handling on Firebirds. My wife has a 79 Formula she bought new that has the WS6 package which includes 15X8 wheels, 4 wheel discs, special springs and shocks, 1.25 dia. front sway and .875 dia rear bar and special variable-ratio steering box. The handling it has is incredible, like you're on rails, no lean at all, WAY better than any late 60s-early 70s car.

Under the hood is another story, though. A very weak 403 Olds engine, but that can be remedied. But then again, that's where all cars were at back then.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Posting some actual 'Back in the Day' Performance Test Results

1967 GTS 383 / 4-Speed / 3.23 Sure-Grip

Tires = D70 x 14" {25.40" Tall x 6.21" Tread-Width}
Rims = 14" x 5.5"

Test Result...........15.40 @ 92.1 MPH
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance Tune-Up
* Autolite A-42 Spark-Plugs
* Larger .010" Jets (Carburetor Calibration}
* Performance Curve Distributor {Initial @ 1500 RPM and Fully Advanced @ 34*}

Test Result.......... 15.08 @ 94.5 MPH

 

[fishmens67]

please share the results. I know the real street results, it was my 67 fastback with slightly warm 68 383 456 gears against my now brother inlaws firebird 400 4spd, I beat him everytime. lol

 

[ramenth]

So, this is another thread raggin' on the 383.

Kinda gettin' old by now.

 

[YY1]

I find it interesting that the firechicken is MORE nose heavy than the BB dart.
(although I do understand the pontiac block is much heavier than a chevy 350)

I'l I've ever heard about BB darts for the past 30 years is "no traction", no traction, no traction, no traction".

I've never heard that claim about big block 1st gen gm f bodies.

My brother once had a 67 Dart 2 door post. The owner before him put in a 383.
No idea what the build specs were (although it did have two 4 barrels), or the gear.
Eevn with 80s/90s tire technology (although I'l positive they weren't high end), it had...no traction.

A friend once had a 301 turbo 79/80 trans am.
Despite having 15x7+ wheels compared to my 14x6s,
It really didn't handle any better than my 73 Rallye 318 Challenger.
...and was only marginally quicker.

My 9.5 to 1 383 70 Super Bee, with "too big" 284/484 cam, 3.55 gears, "poor choice" Torker intake, stock converter, headers, 12" bias ply rear tires, and "backyard laboroatory" Holley frankencarb, did smoke a big block 71/72 camaro while I had 2 "heavy" passengers and the camaro had none. Surprised me, too, but a win is a win!

 

[cudavert]

I find it interesting that the firechicken is MORE nose heavy than the BB dart.
(although I do understand the pontiac block is much heavier than a chevy 350)

I'm not surprised. Don't forget that the camaro/firebirds used those giant subframes that went back and stopped at about the car's front floorpans. I actually thought the firebird would equal or maybe even outweigh the BB darts. Yes, the pontiac engines were chunky.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

There wasn't much you could do to get better traction out of the
'nose heavy' Big Block A-Body, back in the day.

Other than 'Super/Stock Springs', and a set of 50/50 'Drag Shocks'.

And that was no fun ride on the Street, it you attempted it.

A 'Pinion-Snubber' from Coletti Chrysler-Plymouth out of Oregon was good
for the 4-Speed Cars, but did little for the Automatics.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance Test {April 1967} - Albany Dodge {Albany, New York}

1967 GTS 383 {4-Speed w/3.23 Sure-Grip}

* Replaced 14" x 5.5" Steel Rims and D70 x 14" Tires
* Installed 14" x 6" Cragars with 7.75" x 14" Tires {26.5" Tall}

* Performance Tune-Up
* Dual-Point Distributor w/Performance Curve
* Hurst Shifter {Competition/Plus}

* Tested at Lebanon Valley Dragstrip

* Test Result...........14.93 @ 94.7 MPH

Not Bad..........

 

[YY1]

IDK about adj pinion snubbers being of little effect on auto cars.

I ran one and it helped a lot....and much cheaper than traction bars, for the same effect.

That same "no traction" argument was also used to critique the A body Barracuda, with the noted exceptions of A- the weight of the back glass in the fastback, actually helped the car have better weight distribution, and get better traction off the line, and B- the generous wheelwells did a LOT to allow more tire choices to also aid traction. The f body gm also has genorous wells.

Those subframes (IIRC also the same as nova), although heavy, were relatively poorly engineered, and were no where near as good at distributing stress as a Mopar unibody, therefore affecting handling, and allowing the torsion bar/true unibody Mopar to be an equal, check that, BETTER handling car, despite the gm designer's intentions.

That same sub-frame engineering is why you see 10:1 "dog tracking" novas as opposed to Dusters and A bodies in general.

While we're discussing gm handling...ever stand behind a coil spring rear gm car as it gets on it?
I absolutle HATE that coil spring "shimmy". To me, I can feel that all the time, while driving a gm car.
Makes my skin crawl. F bodies are rear leaf, though, right? I'm not a "pony" car guy, anyway...

..and speaking of torsion bar/rear leaf/unibody handling...

If you like go-carts, you'll LOVE that setup. Lots of "drifting", but I used to be able to out-handle rack and pinion, wide tire, thick sway bar, fox body mustangs in that 70 Bee. Scared a lot of them, in fact.