Match Race ~ 1965 Valiant '273 Commando' vs. 1973 'Duster 340'

[69 Cuda 440]

Match Race

1965 Valiant V-200 ~ '273 Commando'
vs.
1973 'Duster 340'

Can the light {#2750 lbs.} Valiant hold off the heavier 'Duster 340' {3205 lbs.}

Back-in-the-Day, after NHRA re-factoring, both cars fit into the same {11.50 to 11.99 W/Hp} Class.

* 273/235 HP vs. 340/240 HP

Weight Difference = #455 lbs.

 

[318willrun]

The '65 is gross horsepower, the '73 is net. Everyone knows that there is more than a 5 horsepower difference between the two motors. A 318 2bbl was rated at 230 horsepower gross (68-71). So, basically, were asking if a 318 2bbl would beat a 340 4 bbl in a 450 pound lighter car. Providing they both had the same tranny's and both had about the same gearing, the valiant would be in a world of trouble. The horsepower and torque difference would more than make up the 455 pounds.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

With both cars carrying >

* 3.91 Gears 'Sure-Grip'
* 7" Cheater-Slicks

Nothing else, except Distributor timing adjustments and Carburetor tweaking.

This would be closer than expected.......

Mopar Ratings

273/235 HP......... 235 HP @ 5200 RPM's ~ 280 Ft/Lbs. @ 4000 RPM's
340/240 HP......... 240 HP @ 4800 RPM's ~ 295 Ft/Lbs. @ 3600 RPM's

The NHRA did re-factor the 273/235 HP to {220 HP}
The NHRA did re-factor the 340/240 HP to {262 HP}

 

[bad440]

The 340 would still walk all over the 273

 

[69 Cuda 440]

1973 'Duster 340'

* Low Compression..... 8.50 - 1

 

[318willrun]

1973 'Duster 340'

* Low Compression..... 8.50 - 1

Horsepower has been calculated, regardless of compression. Flow is more important than compression when it comes to performance. Example: A 318 2bbl with 10:1 still looses to a 340 4bbl with 8:5 to 1. 340 takes this win

 

[rbdart]

I guess I will have to go with the anemic 340.....guessing low 14's

 

[273]

450 lb = somewhere around 80 hp so that puts the 273 around 300 hp vs 262 hp 340, If going by NHRA re factoring.

 

[Oldschoolcuda]

My 65 Valiant Signet with 273 commando & 3.23 rear managed a 15.5 @ 91 mph 1/4 mile at Va. Motorsports park with skinny 14" tires a full moon and nice wind behind her ( one and only time I've run her in quarter as brakes scared the crap out of me at finish). 3.91's would definitely wake up the 273 and a 200 is about 100 lbs lighter than a signet but believe the 340( even a 73) would walk all over that valiant. The 73's were running high 14's with 3.23 gears so a step up to 3.91's could put it into the 13's.

Oldschoolcuda

 

[70aarcuda]

from this weekends Divisional race in Vegas...

7575 F/SA Mark Kirby, Bakersfield CA, '73 340 Duster 11.158 ....take 3 tenths off that for sea level...

Better take alot weight out of the 273 car...

 

[jimynick]

I've had both a 273 67 Valiant 100 and a 340 72 Duster. I never ran the Valiant at the track, but the Duster would turn 14.2's @ 98-100 mph all day long. The 273 was a power pack car with a 4 spd and 3:91 SG and while it ran pretty good for a mouse, it ran a whole lot better when I swapped in the 68 340. :thumrigh:

 

[69 Cuda 440]

1965 Valiant V-200

A 'Stock' 273/235 HP ~ w/3.91 Gears ~ A-904 Automatic ~ 7" Slicks

Could run as low as 15.20's @ 88 MPH on a 'good day'.

In 1965, they were found classed in D/SA {11.30 to 11.88 Wt/Hp}
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1973 'Duster 340'

A 'Stock' 340/240 HP ~ 3.91 Gears ~ A-727 ~ 7" Slicks

Were capable of 14.55's @ 92 MPH, on a pretty consistent basis.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

If the 1965 Valiant '273 Commando'

Had an Aluminum Dual-Plane Intake and a Carter #3447 AFB {600 CFM} or Holley
{600 CFM} it might have made it interesting.

 

[rbdart]

Wow,I figured the duster would've ran at least 14.50's if not a little better...

 

[318willrun]

Wow,I figured the duster would've ran at least 14.50's if not a little better...

You are right, it should have unless it was in high altitude. We had a '76 Dart Sport with a 318 that we put a TQ, cast intake and 360 heads (cut .040) with a used 340 cam. The car went 14.41 at 96 mph with 3.21 gears and a stock 727 (stock converter too). The '73 340 had the same intake, carb, heads and cam we used, except it had a bigger bore and would have most likely had better compression, and much better gears. I guess a lot is to be said for timing, tweaking, and shifting at the right time (we shifted the 318 at 5500 rpm).

 

[69 Cuda 440]

The 'Factory Performance Book' on the 1973 'Duster 340'

* 3.21 Gears
* 4-Speed............ 15.08 @ 91.6 MPH
* Automatic.......... 15.17 @ 89.6 MPH

------------------------------------------------------------------
* 3.55 Gears
* 4-Speed............ 14.81 @ 94.8 MPH
* Automatic.......... 14.95 @ 93.7 MPH

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

Optional, not available from the Factory.

* 3.91 Gears
* 4-Speed............ 14.47 @ 96.7 MPH
* Automatic.......... 14.59 @ 95.2 MPH

 

[318willrun]

The 'Factory Performance Book' on the 1973 'Duster 340'

* 3.21 Gears
* 4-Speed............ 15.08 @ 91.6 MPH
* Automatic.......... 15.17 @ 89.6 MPH

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

Laugh out loud! That's a joke! My 318 2bbl (100% stock) in a B-body with 2.94 gears ran 15.90's at 84 mph. My '89 D150 shortbed with a bone-stock (yes, even single exhaust) 360 tbi ran 15.30's with 3.21 and 15 inch tires. Keep post the silly numbers, if you believe them, fine! But I don't buy it for a minute

 

[Oldschoolcuda]

Laugh out loud! That's a joke! My 318 2bbl (100% stock) in a B-body with 2.94 gears ran 15.90's at 84 mph. My '89 D150 shortbed with a bone-stock (yes, even single exhaust) 360 tbi ran 15.30's with 3.21 and 15 inch tires. Keep post the silly numbers, if you believe them, fine! But I don't buy it for a minute

Why so hostile. Were you even alive when these 40 plus year old test's were performed. These numbers reflect accurate historical info. based on ancient tire technology and tuning availability of that era not today's.

Oldschoolcuda

 

[rbdart]

Rutrow...another chi-wa-wah senior...prob never read the history books on such matters..lots of difference in todays tech and yesteryears,tires,electronics etc...lots of diff in age groups that lived those eras from todays groups so they dont comprehend those times...like I can remember when there was no cell phones,computers,electronics,games etc,big malls..my grandson cannot comprehend these things since they've been in existence for his entire life and he thinks anyone over 25 is a dinosuer and are old and ancient....I assure him that we are not cavemen...

 

[SoulSurvivor]

The 'Factory Performance Book' on the 1973 'Duster 340'

* 3.21 Gears
* 4-Speed............ 15.08 @ 91.6 MPH
* Automatic.......... 15.17 @ 89.6 MPH

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

Laugh out loud! That's a joke! My 318 2bbl (100% stock) in a B-body with 2.94 gears ran 15.90's at 84 mph. My '89 D150 shortbed with a bone-stock (yes, even single exhaust) 360 tbi ran 15.30's with 3.21 and 15 inch tires. Keep post the silly numbers, if you believe them, fine! But I don't buy it for a minute

Dude. Don't blow a gasket.

 

[69 Cuda 440]

Mr. 318 Will 'Not' Run,

I'd bet everything I own {Present and Future} that an off the Dealership Lot 'stock' 1973 Duster 340
or 1973 Dart Sport 340 with 3.21 Gears and an Automatic could not break the 15.00 Mark.

I lived and saw it.........

 

[rbdart]

I believe that to be so...straight off the lot,in non-tuned form,not broke in..etc...

 

[318willrun]

Lol... not hostile, or blowing a gasket. Having fun. Especially when I'm being lectured about my age when people don't have a clue who I am.... LOL. Are you ALL READY???? I saw a STOCK 318 2bbl in a Dart custom go 15.70's with 2.76 gears! Put in 3.21's behind that 318 dart and you wouldn't tell the difference from a 340 4bbl to a 318 2bbl. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm........... For whatever reason, it seems the OP wants to offer evidence of doubt to the supporters of the 340 duster. Yes, I'm aware that those old bias-ply tires didn't hook. And yes, they would runner harder after 10,000 break-in miles. Yes, we could say if you tried it on a rainy day the duster is only a 17 second car. My point is, the original post asked which one would win... using 7 inch slicks (not factory). Then he post garbage about these times and say "off the lot". Which 73 duster was sold "off the lot" with slicks????? If your bolting on slicks, don't post off the lot numbers where the 340 duster would smoke away the E.T. numbers of the factory tires. YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, and then tell me I'm probably to young to know what I'm talkn about??? YOU, 69 440 cuda, said "with slicks". I laughed at the numbers you post because those numbers are NOT with slicks??? Or carb tweaking???? or timing??? which you said was legal in this race! you see?? and you get huffy at me?? I beg your pardon, but you asked which car would win with slicks, so no need to post garbage numbers that do NOT apply to the challenge YOU have created... who wins WITH SLICKS????? And carb tweaking, and timing, YOU POSTED! So, your numbers are laughable because it has nothing to do with your challenge... And nobody caught this but me..... shame shame for the finger pointers... lol

 

[318willrun]

Oh, by the way "MR 69 Poor Forty cuda", what is with the "Mr 318 will NOT run"... lol. You hate 318's too? or just me for questioning your numbers that do NOT pertain to this race??? Your created race with the addition of slicks, timing, and carb tweaking? Never once stated this race was off the lot, but post the off the lot numbers to prove a point??? lol sorry.. I'm hav'n fun

 

[318willrun]

Rutrow...another chi-wa-wah senior...prob never read the history books on such matters..lots of difference in todays tech and yesteryears,tires,electronics etc...lots of diff in age groups that lived those eras from todays groups so they dont comprehend those times...like I can remember when there was no cell phones,computers,electronics,games etc,big malls..my grandson cannot comprehend these things since they've been in existence for his entire life and he thinks anyone over 25 is a dinosuer and are old and ancient....I assure him that we are not cavemen...

Speaking of yourself, rbdart? I fully understand the times then and now. Those numbers are NOT with slicks, timing adjustments, or carb tweaking. ALL of which the OP said was legal in this race.... making those numbers laughable because they don't apply to this created race :banghead: