Sorry, I'm A bad boy..
273HP, boat anchor or?
- Thread starter 64mopar64
- Start date
-
64mopar64
Active Member
Bad Boy Bad Boy whatca gonna do when they come for you?Sorry, I'm A bad boy..
pishta
I know I'm right....
What am I missing here? Did you delete the post? 273......does anyone build a Ford 260 when 289s and 302/351 are the same family? 273 had a steel crank, so did a bunch of 318s, and with the same stroke.
> "They love to rev.." so can a 318, same stroke.
> "They had good high compression pistons" you can buy the same (better quench) compression pistons for a 318 for LESS. " >"They came stock with a single plane 4bbl Intake" yes, and it kinda sucked. A 318/360 4bbl will bolt up to later 273s and the port mismatch won't hurt it much as the factory 318-4bbl was the same intake as the 360-4.
>"they made 235hp in 4bbl trim" put all that on a 318 short block and see what it'll make with gobs more torque
>"they made 275 in D-Dart trim"..once again, Build a 318 with those cam specs or even base that build on a 318 block and see what intakes. Displacement is so important on an NA motor on multiple levels. If you got a 273 work with what you got, hey you can keep it "original"... if you don't touch the 9" brakes and single pot MC and the points ignition. It's your car, your choices. Many opinions on this. Do you wanna race it or cruise it. Cruising and enjoying it is a lot ore fun that trying to fix it under a race deadline unless your into that and that's not the best motor to race unless it's a class race.
> "They love to rev.." so can a 318, same stroke.
> "They had good high compression pistons" you can buy the same (better quench) compression pistons for a 318 for LESS. " >"They came stock with a single plane 4bbl Intake" yes, and it kinda sucked. A 318/360 4bbl will bolt up to later 273s and the port mismatch won't hurt it much as the factory 318-4bbl was the same intake as the 360-4.
>"they made 235hp in 4bbl trim" put all that on a 318 short block and see what it'll make with gobs more torque
>"they made 275 in D-Dart trim"..once again, Build a 318 with those cam specs or even base that build on a 318 block and see what intakes. Displacement is so important on an NA motor on multiple levels. If you got a 273 work with what you got, hey you can keep it "original"... if you don't touch the 9" brakes and single pot MC and the points ignition. It's your car, your choices. Many opinions on this. Do you wanna race it or cruise it. Cruising and enjoying it is a lot ore fun that trying to fix it under a race deadline unless your into that and that's not the best motor to race unless it's a class race.
Depends what you want, everyone and or project can be different. A lot of built street engines are gonna fall in the 0.9-1.3 hp per cid, 273 = 245-355hp, 318 = 285-415hp, 360 = 325-470hp, there's a lot of overlap, some might want a more wild (say 350 hp) some might want 350hp done super mildly eg.. 273 vs 408.
That's too bad on the shape of that 273. I have wondered about 273 Commando in a stock class drag race build. And what nicer than an A-body '67 Barracuda? It certainly has some advantages in the small cube arena. Higher compression, solid lift cam and tight heads with a small stock 4 barrel? If built right, to NHRA specs, it could certainly surprise a Stock class.
Im guessing somewhere in the "K" class range? (Though that may be by year.)
I'm just thinking, I bet it would be throttle quick and very consistent. Which is what class racing is all about.
Im guessing somewhere in the "K" class range? (Though that may be by year.)
I'm just thinking, I bet it would be throttle quick and very consistent. Which is what class racing is all about.
Last edited:
Basically heads dictate horsepower, not cubic inches. Cubic inches dictate at what rpm you will run. If you read his first post, he intends to put a gen III Hemi in the car and wanted to know if the 273 was salvageable. You are wrong about quench between 273's and 318s as well. 273's are usually about -.020 to 0 deck height. My experience was quite different with 273s. I would never run a 318 over a 273. I would run a 318 if that was what I had, but I kept 273s and 340s. Passed on 318s and 360s. Nothing I have ever had was "original" stock. A 67 Barracuda would have 10 in drum brakes and a dual master cylinder with a Commando 273, even my brothers 67 273 2 barrel Barracuda had those brakes. Just to let you know, I'd build a 289 over a 302 any day of the week.
A good thread to read.
67' Barracuda 273 (Camshaft Results at the Track)
1967 Barracuda '273 Commando' (Fastback 4-Speed) Car Weight #2975 lbs. (w/o Driver) 273 (+.040) with JE Lightweight Pistons (10.5 - 1 Compression) (Old School) #2658920 Cylinder Heads (Competition Valve Job and Gasket/Port Matched) Valves = 1.78 Intake / 1.50" Exhaust Combustion Chamber 57.3...
www.forabodiesonly.com
@memike Who's the guy with the 273 Valiant that class races?
pishta
I know I'm right....
Somehow my phone started this post on #26...? I wasn't wrong on quench, I stated the higher compression pistons you can get for the 318 (as in aftermarket) have a better quench than the 273 pistons. All that other stuff about it being a 67 with its 10" brakes and dual MC were not seen by me for.some reason. I agree the 67 had alot more going for it than the earlier brakes of the 65. Iirc the 67 273 had the same casting head as the 318? The early 273 could have had the closed looking chamber heads... why do you like the 289 over the 302? Smaller stroke for quicker RPMs?
Yes, not your usual 273 thread. He had a 67 Barracuda with a stuck Commando 273 complete, but when he opened it up it had serious rust, corrosion, and a dropped exhaust valve head. A real shame. Not sure how you could have better quench than a zero deck hight with factory pistons a little over 9:1 compression ratio and run on pump gas? 67 heads 318 were the same as 67 273 heads. The best of both the 318 and 273 were the 68 and 69 engines with higher pistons and then use the 67 heads. All 64-67 273s had closed chambers, 68 and 69 273s came with the open chambered 318 heads. As for the 289, I liked the head combustion chambers better, slightly longer rods, no "rail" rocker arms, and my brother had a "K" motor 289 in a 65 Mustang coupe. That was a quick car. 302s just seemed much slower for whatever reason. Even the standard 4 barrel 302s were slow compared to a stock 273 Commando.
-
