70 duster 340 727 vs 65 vette 396 425 solid cam holley 4spd motor was way over rated best of 3
- Thread starter a-bodyguy
- Start date
-
the 71 72 demons and dusters turning 112 on the fastest list same rules
71 72 340 had less adv compression which should help the 68 to 70 340 under the rules
so why is the trap mph 4 faster bevy?
CARB CARB
How much more hp is 4 mph trap speed?
for the nay sayers on fabo about 340s sucking the paint off big block cars including the 383 road runner and 383 a-bodys
heres is the list of alltime fastest 60 foot times of pure stock
71 demon took top honors
L-88 took 2nd place
2nd 60 foot list
a-boy 340s took 5 of the 1st 7 spots fastest 60 foot times
L-88 was 1st or 2nd
yenko nova 391 hp was 5th
faster the hemi cuda 440 6pk 455 gs 455 formula 71 454 zL1 camaro
properly tune 340 sucks the paint of most of the cars back in the day?
3 or 4 cars out of the hole the big block cars see the tail lights and go up in smoke trying to catch up very common
71 340 345hp factor 800 t/quad
72 340 328hp factor 800 t/quad
70 340 321hp factor 625 avs
69 340 316hp factor 625 avs
www.psmcdr.com
heres is the list of alltime fastest 60 foot times of pure stock
71 demon took top honors
L-88 took 2nd place
2nd 60 foot list
a-boy 340s took 5 of the 1st 7 spots fastest 60 foot times
L-88 was 1st or 2nd
yenko nova 391 hp was 5th
faster the hemi cuda 440 6pk 455 gs 455 formula 71 454 zL1 camaro
properly tune 340 sucks the paint of most of the cars back in the day?
3 or 4 cars out of the hole the big block cars see the tail lights and go up in smoke trying to catch up very common
71 340 345hp factor 800 t/quad
72 340 328hp factor 800 t/quad
70 340 321hp factor 625 avs
69 340 316hp factor 625 avs
All Time Lists
www.psmcdr.com
Back in the day? If I am reading the chart correctly, those times were from 1998 onwards....not 1971 -72.
You will get no argument from me about how good the 340 was/is. What I would argue is: if the 340 was quicker with a TQ [ my favourite carb ] than the 625 AVS, that it was because of the extra cfm of the TQ. I am taking about stock standard engines. Have never seen a comparison. There are other factors other cfm that can improve performance.
You will get no argument from me about how good the 340 was/is. What I would argue is: if the 340 was quicker with a TQ [ my favourite carb ] than the 625 AVS, that it was because of the extra cfm of the TQ. I am taking about stock standard engines. Have never seen a comparison. There are other factors other cfm that can improve performance.
Back in the day the 340 was known as big block killer
Some on this site question that
all the 68 to 70 340 needed to run high 12s 13.0 was better intake better carb 3.55s and traction lighting quick out of the hole on the chit tires from back in the day the 71 340 had the carb stock its why the stock class racers use 71 340 cars it makes 30 more and they clean house. Those rules apply to all 340s they all use the same cam and the same 2.02 heads they are blueprinted the 68 has the advantage of a high adv comp ratio over 71 340 yet its still factored lower hp why? the carb is why everything else is the same
All the big block cars on that list were the cream of crop but the blueprinted stock 340 with a t/quad sucked the paint off them out of the hole. **** drivers back in the day with there big block left in the dust 7 cars in the 1st 200 feet race over, good driver 4 cars out the hole
The other noteable small block cars
yenko 350 nova 391 hp factored
70 olds f-85 350/325 hp factory rating 414hp factored 12.3@112@3700 lbs
Nobody is disputing how good the 340 was....& still is.
These guys below nailed it....revved to 6500 rpm....with a 625 AVS...read their other comments in the text as to why the 340 was so good as a package.
These guys below nailed it....revved to 6500 rpm....with a 625 AVS...read their other comments in the text as to why the 340 was so good as a package.
Ode to the mighty 340. -
