Good advice Kurt!
18,000 orig. mile 318 build
- Thread starter Jonnylightening
- Start date
-
Infecteddog
Well-Known Member
Your average cheap long tube headers available now were practically designed around these cars. They'll be captured below the FR suspension but never scraped at all.
LD-340 is a great manifold on a 340 or 360
Ports are too big for 318 - leave a lip at the manifold/ head interface.
The similar manifold for a 273 or 318 is an LD-4B - best manifold for this motor IMO
If you ride has air conditioner that you are keeping an LD-4B won't work use the performer
Ports are too big for 318 - leave a lip at the manifold/ head interface.
The similar manifold for a 273 or 318 is an LD-4B - best manifold for this motor IMO
If you ride has air conditioner that you are keeping an LD-4B won't work use the performer
Jonnylightening
Well-Known Member
Went to the local U Pull It and picked up a pair of '93 mag. exhaust manifolds along with a few other odds n ends. I also came across 8.25 rear out of a 74 charger. I didnt purchase it but was debating, for i can probably snap it up cheap. Whats your thoughts? Ill prolly run my 7.25 until winter but really wanna put some smoke to it for next sping.
Good catch on those manifolds, you won't regret it. Don't forget to cap the air recirculation ports on your existing heads before mounting the new manifolds - if you have said ports.
Cheap is good. If you have space for the 8.25, go for it - and if you don't need it in the long run, you should be able to find a buyer for it.
-Kurt
Jonnylightening
Well-Known Member
I thank you guys a bunch for the help!! Ive been driving the car around and its a rear nice ride other then the little miss here n there (spark plugs) it runs like a new engine. Only thing id like to do if i get the rear (8.25) is check the gearing n maybe do the c clip eliminators later on for peace of mind.
daredevil
Well-Known Member
I built the 318 in my 72 duster years ago and used a short duration erson cam with about 450 lift at first. A performer intake and an eddy carb.Blackjack headers and a head shave and plunge cut under the 1.88 valves i added finished the package. Ran 9.0 1/8 mile untill I found an 8.75 and added 3.91 gears and a b&m holeshot converter. That change netted about 4 tenths and I was running 8.60s and would run with the 350 z28s. Gained a lot of respect when they realised it was a measly 318
Jonnylightening
Well-Known Member
thats awesome!!! I wanna build a sleeper so bad outta mine.
Get that little miss taken care of first. Find out what's causing it (plug change is smart, but make sure that's the case).
The HEI swap seems to be pretty popular around here if the problem ties back to the ignition module. And, as I said before - if it has lean burn, get rid of it.
Seeing as your junkyard seems to get old stuff frequently, you might want to keep a look out for 920 heads (closed chamber from some 273s or intro-year 1967 318s) as a quick and cheap way to bump up compression on a stock LA 318. No pushrod or rocker antics - just drop them in and go.
Only problem: You probably won't find a pair of good 920's just hanging around, and if you do, their age may be an issue. I wouldn't necessarily bet that a home valve lapping job would get you out of the woods on 40+ year-old cylinder heads. But stranger things have happened.
-Kurt
Jonnylightening
Well-Known Member
What about the later 318 (302) heads? Ive read that they flow pretty decent and have the closed chamber bowls
txstang84
Well-Known Member
Ordinarily, I'd largely agree with this statement, but you have to ensure your core parts are within serviceable limits, or you run into issues like this poster:
http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=322854
In a nutshell, he chased a crappy idle problem down to worn throttle shaft bushings after rebuilding a believed good carb.
I'm not trying to dissuade you from using a used carb, just be damn sure whatever used one you buy is usable and only needs basic organic repair to properly function...then and only then can you begin truly tuning your carb for effect. Happy hunting and I can't wait to see some good reports on this one!
Also a good option if you find them.
And on that used carb note - don't try it. Too much of a headache potential.
I'd suggest the new Summit 600cfm carb which has fantastic reviews (and a bowl design that won't leak like a Holley) and no reports of loose throttle shafts out of the box due to poor castings.
However, I think a 600cfm might be a bit over the top for a smog-era 318 with minimal mods. You don't want your engine budget getting sucked through the venturis with no purpose other than to score your cylinder walls prematurely.
-Kurt
The Summit carb is just a new version of an ugly Holley design that was so unpopular that they quit making it. It may be a good carb ( I don't know) but it's still ugly with a capital U. I would stick with a traditional style Holley and enjoy the benefits of good parts availability and proven performance potential. And 600 cfm is not too big for a mild 318. The cop 318s had Thermoquads and Quadrajets from the factory.
Ugly counts for nothing when you're stuck on the side of the road leaking fuel bowls or trying to change a power valve.
The TQ and QJ's are both effectively designed spreadbores, not squarebores. Still, probably wouldn't hurt at all at 600cfm.
-Kurt
mguner
How many is too many?
Dual exhaust with X or H pipe, a good dual plane intake with 4 bbl carb, cam upgrade to a 340 spec or up to a 268 or so High energy type, Non computer (lean burn) electronic ignition with the advance curve set up properly, rear end gears in the 3.21 to 3.55 range.
Don't think 600 cfm is to big , I used an 850 thermoquad off a 440 and my 318 ran great . All it had was holley intake , heads shaved , headers a with dual exhaust and a mild cam , forget the number . All I can say about the carbs is Holley is super easy to fix side of the road , if it breaks down , TQ not so much , but the TQ is super reliable , never had a problem with mine .
txstang84
Well-Known Member
Nope...600 cfm is about right--even for a stock/mild 318. I've personally had better luck with Edelbrocks for mild engines...but I've never had ANY carb strand me on the side of the road...fuel filter on the other hand...well, that's another story.
Going back to Kurt's comments:
302 castings are no better or worse than any other 318 LA casting...the only advantage to using them really is the small combustion chambers to bump the compression, but if you're trying to keep things simple, buying a new set of heads only increases cost.
I'll stand by my statement of using a used carb; it's OK to use one, just be a picky buyer...not every one of them can be brought back to reliable service unless you want to make "my grandfather's axe", in which case, you won't save much (if any) money.
As far as the Summit carbs-I have used one of them on my stock 5.2. It worked fairly well...by that I mean it ran great when WOT; idle and putting around town was a little fat. It can be a fine carb (regardless of who thinks it's ugly or not), especially for a mild build, but that doesn't negate the likelihood for fine tuning via swapping out squirters, idle or air restrictors, pump cams, jets, power valves, etc. The DVD that comes with the carb does allude to it in skimming detail. In a nutshell, if you were to decide to purchase the Summit carb, do yourself a favor and buy the tuning kits to go with it
I elected to pull that Summit carb off in favor of a rebuilt Edelbrock 600 sitting on my bench. After filling the bowls and making some minor idle and mixture adjustments, it was running like a sewing machine.
Again, I think a correctly tuned 600 would be a good match...downsizing the cfm rating says nothing about how the carb is jetted...an overjetted 500 will waste more fuel (potentially scoring cylinder walls) compared to even a correctly tuned 700 cfm carb.
Jonnylightening
Well-Known Member
Ok guys i havnt touched the motor yet but did get a good used eddy performer intake and a like new holley 600 from my buddy. But i might hold off n just build up my 318 outta my 75 d100 over the winter n jus keep my current one for a spare. However i do need to get a new set of tires because i burnt my old ones off....lol Jk but my current ones are dryrotted from sitting. Currently it has 195/70r14 all around. I wanna keep with a sleeper look but would like to go alittle wider in the rear but also a street tire thatll work nice on the street and little strip. Any ideas? What do you guys run on your cars?
I would look at a set of Police car/Ramcharger rims..(15" x 7", or 8", don't recall...) They look low profile, offer the width you eventually will need.The Cooper Cobra standard radials ,used to be fairly sticky. Figure what you want it to do,start on getting a safe & functional chassis. That's how I was taught, 3-400 honest horsepower on a worn out chassis,is not a good thing.....
If I recall correctly, don't 16x7" rims from a B-series van also have the 4.5" bolt pattern?
-Kurt
That's a good question, and they would be budget.. Nice find,Kurt...
Yes, and many of the Fords had the 4.5" bolt pattern as well. I know the bolt pattern will fit, but not about if the brakes will clear. But the old Ford 4.5" bolt pattern rims may be another option...
I have one of these rims that I pulled off a junkyard van by mistake (thought it was a 15"). I'll have to check it for all specs.
While I can't speak for all Fords, they did go up to a 5" bolt pattern from 4.5" on the 15" rims used on Lincoln Continentals after 1972. Also just found from Googling that the '80-82 F100's have 5 on 4.5". No idea of the rim size. Ford cars may be a tough source - 15" is about as big as it gets on them, and only the largest of their full-size cars will run the 7" rims (and you'll still probably wind up with the 5" bolt pattern). Also - far as I know - the '71-73 Mach 1 Mustangs and a few Torinos of the same era were the only Ford products to get standard steel 14x7" 5-on-4.5" rims (and you can't get 1968+ dog dish hubcaps on them - the wheel stamping is larger).
Ought to be a real mish-mash at the yards, but I'd be most concerned that any other brand of rim has the right size hole to ensure the rim will be hub centric.
Still might be easier to pick up the van rims - mine came from an '87 B150, which ought to be plentiful in the OP's yard. Genuine Mopar part, fits right, hub centric - can't get better than that.
I'll pull out my 16" rim this afternoon and get all the specs on it (and whether it'll support '68+ dog dish rims too).
One other tip: If you want to run 16" steel rims and go for an ultra-sleeper look, you can mount your 15" hubcaps with 15"-to-16" adapters - they look like trim rings, but you can install the ring in the rim, and the hubcap in the ring. Again, B-series vans may have them, and Ford used an identical adapter too from the same supplier: http://www.fordification.net/pn/d2tz-1210-a/
-Kurt
Jonnylightening
Well-Known Member
I do have a set of 2 15" wheels on the front of my d100 i think they are around 7" wide. What about staggering the two like the LO23 dart 14s in front 15s in back?
No harm in trying the 15" rim fit - especially if you have a tire removal tool handy.
Incidentally, I checked the van rim today. 16x7" with a 2-3/4" hub, 4.5" bolt circle, and it accepts an 8" hub cap. A drop in fit with exception to diameter and width (the two things we want in the first place, of course), and it looks no different than a stock rim (though your sidewall profile will probably begin to look a bit different):
'68 Satellite 14" rim at left (5.5 in width, I believe), and the 16x7" van rim at right, next to it.
-Kurt
-
