My 273 turned out to be a 318...what did I buy?

-
serodgers66

serodgers66

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2024
Messages
9
Reaction score
42
Location
Pittsburgh
Hey there. I bought a 1965 Valiant a month ago. Seller said it had a 273. Finally had a chance to truly get underneath it and look at the engine block casting....4387530-31823.....a 318! Look at the passenger side....08-87...from 1987! This is my first mopar and I am getting into cars a little later in life. I don't have any friends who are really into older cars so I am reaching out to my new community. Here are a few photos of the engine....What do you folks see? The good, the bad, the ugly....I'll take all feedback. I thank everyone in advance for their help!

Steve

IMG_3643.JPEG


IMG_3642.JPEG


IMG_3644.JPEG
 
serodgers66 said:
Hey there. I bought a 1965 Valiant a month ago. Seller said it had a 273. Finally had a chance to truly get underneath it and look at the engine block casting....4387530-31823.....a 318! Look at the passenger side....08-87...from 1987! This is my first mopar and I am getting into cars a little later in life. I don't have any friends who are really into older cars so I am reaching out to my new community. Here are a few photos of the engine....What do you folks see? The good, the bad, the ugly....I'll take all feedback. I thank everyone in advance for their help!

Steve

View attachment 1716236173

View attachment 1716236175

View attachment 1716236176
Click to expand...
Not a bad thing. 87 is probably a roller cam engine with the famous 302 casting heads. Good chance of it unless it's been messed with. A 318 4 barrel with headers is a swap that many 273 guys strive for.
 
Not an issue... looks like a dressed Hi-po. I'll guess you're not chasing a points car, so clean it up and have fun with it

Looks like the early 273 style alternator bracket and rod kickdown linkage.
 
In large both the 273 and 318 look the same and most everything for a 273 works on a 318 and inversely. About the only thing different are the pistons themself.
I'd stay with the 318


Alan
 
I see someone's hot rod! LOL The fuel hose splitting the feed line to the carb bowls is one way to make it easier to swap jets at the track. So it has a Holley carb on it - probably a 4150/60, and explains why there's no bimetal choke in the intake. The intake someone will recognize.

A lot of it looks like it was fit in well. Wiring at minimum needs to be wrapped and supported. More later
 
Mattax said:
he intake someone will recognize.
Click to expand...

Looks like a later, cast iron 4bbl intake. (you can see the choke well on the passenger side) so might be a 67 (ish). @serodgers66 , there should be a casting number on the intake that'll clue you in. Likewise, if you are curious, you can pull a valve cover and see which heads are on there. If it's running good.. keep it going!
 
Looks like a factory egr intake to me.
Carb is a 4010/4011 style……might even be a spread-bore.
That could be answered by pulling the air cleaner off.

The proximity of the brake line to the header is a little sketchy imo.

475100C5-D3F6-44F6-B72C-66E7224A90D1.jpeg
 
Last edited:
The alternator, fan, pulleys all look like they are correct for mid 60s. Water pump looks like it must be have its intake on the driver side - that too is correct through '69.
1713047622404.png

It has a mechanical choke and cable.
Later Chrysler magnetic pickup distributor and ECU (instead of points). Maybe could use some tweaking if your into that, but should work fine.
I think wire harness support clips are missing (zip tied instead)
Some wire mysteries along with the long hose laying on the inner fender.

Wiring on this side is a bit of a mess.
1713048209890.png

The wrong wire gets melted or pinched into something grounded and there will be a short. Two of the firewall harness clips are there so thats good.

There's some nice examples of '65 engine bays on this forum. Some with engine out and harness in. You can see how the wiring is routed.
Only wiring I see different from factory will be the distributor and ECU. I can't see th starter relay, and ther eis a grammet with wires running inside so maybe some more modifacation. That's not bad or good. Its the execution you may want to clean up, or at least support and protect.

1713048597136.png
 
PRH said:
Looks like a factory egr intake to me.
Carb is a 4010/4011 style……might even be a spread-bore.
That could be answered by pulling the air cleaner off.

The proximity of the brake line to the header is a little sketchy imo.

View attachment 1716236199
Click to expand...
I know a few people who have made those work well. Had a rep for coming from the factory with metal shavings in the passages. This one must be OK since its been running for the new owner.
 
A roller 318 can go several hundred thousand miles. If the timing chain has been replaced, which is probably a good bet considering everything that's been swapped over, you're golden.
 
You came to the right place, this is the place to be. Pardon our occasional disagreements, but everyone’s pulling in the right/same direction. Tell us your plans with your car and you will be given plenty of option to help you get you there. When it all shakes out, were mopar brothers.

Welcome aboard.
 
Mattax said:
The alternator, fan, pulleys all look like they are correct for mid 60s. Water pump looks like it must be have its intake on the driver side - that too is correct through '69.
View attachment 1716236186
It has a mechanical choke and cable.
Later Chrysler magnetic pickup distributor and ECU (instead of points). Maybe could use some tweaking if your into that, but should work fine.
I think wire harness support clips are missing (zip tied instead)
Some wire mysteries along with the long hose laying on the inner fender.

Wiring on this side is a bit of a mess.
View attachment 1716236194
The wrong wire gets melted or pinched into something grounded and there will be a short. Two of the firewall harness clips are there so thats good.

There's some nice examples of '65 engine bays on this forum. Some with engine out and harness in. You can see how the wiring is routed.
Only wiring I see different from factory will be the distributor and ECU. I can't see th starter relay, and ther eis a grammet with wires running inside so maybe some more modifacation. That's not bad or good. Its the execution you may want to clean up, or at least support and protect.

View attachment 1716236200
Click to expand...
The hose on the passenger side is the fuel line to the electronic pump mounted to the frame rail out of view. The red wire is the feed to that pump. Certainly an opportunity to clean up the wiring. I appreciate all of your insight and time. This is so helpful for someone with limited experience. I am an engineer by trade so I want to digest and understand all of this. I have the factory manual, Stockel's Auto Mechanics fundementals, and Peterson' Automotive Troubleshooting and Repair Manual that I have been diving into. But being able to ask real people about things is much more helpful. Thanks again!
 
serodgers66 said:
The hose on the passenger side is the fuel line to the electronic pump mounted to the frame rail out of view. The red wire is the feed to that pump. Certainly an opportunity to clean up the wiring. I appreciate all of your insight and time. This is so helpful for someone with limited experience. I am an engineer by trade so I want to digest and understand all of this. I have the factory manual, Stockel's Auto Mechanics fundementals, and Peterson' Automotive Troubleshooting and Repair Manual that I have been diving into. But being able to ask real people about things is much more helpful. Thanks again!
Click to expand...

Motors Manuals are nice references as well

www.ebay.com

1967 30th Edition Motors Auto Repair Manual 1967 30th Edition | eBay

<p>Comes as shown in the pics 1967 30th Edition Motors Auto Repair Manual 1967 30th Edition. Condition is Used.</p>
www.ebay.com
 
serodgers66 said:
The hose on the passenger side is the fuel line to the electronic pump mounted to the frame rail out of view. The red wire is the feed to that pump. Certainly an opportunity to clean up the wiring. I appreciate all of your insight and time. This is so helpful for someone with limited experience. I am an engineer by trade so I want to digest and understand all of this. I have the factory manual, Stockel's Auto Mechanics fundementals, and Peterson' Automotive Troubleshooting and Repair Manual that I have been diving into. But being able to ask real people about things is much more helpful. Thanks again!
Click to expand...

I was afraid it might be hose for fuel. I was hoping the fuel filter weas getting fed from the mechanical pump that was hidden in the shadow.,
Only reason to run an electric fuel pump would be if the cam is lacking the eccentric. But that long hose suggests the steel line has been cut short.
IMO the main issue is long runs of rubber hose - mostly safety thing.
Electric pump brings its own issues with the factory wiring strategy but can work. That can be a thread of its own.
Those books are all good for the basic understanding.
Supplement that with factory service manual, and there's a host of factory TSBs, and technician's tips at Hamtramck Historical Library
Imperial Club Master Technician Service Conference - Chrysler's Training for Mechanics and www.mymopar.com
 
For those that haven't seen the exterior of the car. It's a badass little ride

www.forabodiesonly.com

First time Mopar Owner - a '65 Valiant Signet two door hardtop.

Hello Everybody. I'm from Pittsburgh, Pa and I just picked up this 1965 Valiant Signet. Has a 273 with a Holley 4 barrel, two piece headers, old school exhaust cut-outs, 3.23 sure grip 8 3/4 rear, and air shocks. The car is loud and leaks just about every fluid there is...but is guaranteed to...
www.forabodiesonly.com www.forabodiesonly.com
 
Sweet little car! I like it, a lot!
The engine swap appears to be pretty well thought out; with a collection of solid, well considered (but not fancy or over the top- a good thing) modifications- but as said, the execution could use a bit of cleaning up.
From what I can see of the build, only two things concern me once the wiring and lines are sorted out.
If it has the original '65 transmission, there will be a discrepancy between the convertor nose and the 87's crank flange. '65s were designed with a smaller diameter convertor nose, which was enlarged in '68 or so; meaning the pocket in the '87's crank flange is too large to properly support the convertor. There is a reducer bushing used to correct the situation that gets pressed into the crank flange. But if this was not done at the time of the swap, it could result in some weird vibrations or worse- a cracked flex plate. Now that it's together it is impossible to tell unless the PO can clue you in. But it is something to be aware of, and if something begins to develop, you'll know to stop where you are and correct it.
Second, the master cylinder. The originals are a single-reservoir design which was superseded by a dual-reservoir design in '67. The singles functioned well, but any brake leak or other issue does result in loss of the entire braking system- which is why the dual reservoir systems were developed. They split the system into front and rear brakes, so any issues that develop only affect that part of the system, and not a total loss of braking. A future upgrade to a later dual pot master along with it's matching distribution block should be on your "to do" list. Take it from somebody that has experienced a brake line failure on a single pot master- it's not the kind of excitement you're looking for when you go for a spirited drive.
Other than that, it looks like it's going to be a really fun car!
 
PRH said:
Looks like a factory egr intake to me.
Carb is a 4010/4011 style……might even be a spread-bore.
That could be answered by pulling the air cleaner off.

The proximity of the brake line to the header is a little sketchy imo.

View attachment 1716236199
Click to expand...
I owned a 68 charger at one time where the brake line was too close to the header pipe.
Took me awhile to figure out why my brakes would drag
 
WV64Signet said:
Looks like a later, cast iron 4bbl intake. (you can see the choke well on the passenger side) so might be a 67 (ish). @serodgers66 , there should be a casting number on the intake that'll clue you in. Likewise, if you are curious, you can pull a valve cover and see which heads are on there. If it's running good.. keep it going!
Click to expand...

PRH said:
Looks like a factory egr intake to me.
Carb is a 4010/4011 style……might even be a spread-bore.
That could be answered by pulling the air cleaner off.

The proximity of the brake line to the header is a little sketchy imo.

View attachment 1716236199
Click to expand...
Yup, that's a later spread bore manifold, ~'79 or later- that's when they went to the smaller diameter, diagonally bolted thermostat housing offset to the driver's side, instead of centered.
I see no evidence of an adapter or sealing plate, so I would agree it's probably a spread bore Holley.
 
Mattax said:
The alternator, fan, pulleys all look like they are correct for mid 60s. Water pump looks like it must be have its intake on the driver side - that too is correct through '69.
View attachment 1716236186
It has a mechanical choke and cable.
Later Chrysler magnetic pickup distributor and ECU (instead of points). Maybe could use some tweaking if your into that, but should work fine.
I think wire harness support clips are missing (zip tied instead)
Some wire mysteries along with the long hose laying on the inner fender.

Wiring on this side is a bit of a mess.
View attachment 1716236194
The wrong wire gets melted or pinched into something grounded and there will be a short. Two of the firewall harness clips are there so thats good.

There's some nice examples of '65 engine bays on this forum. Some with engine out and harness in. You can see how the wiring is routed.
Only wiring I see different from factory will be the distributor and ECU. I can't see th starter relay, and ther eis a grammet with wires running inside so maybe some more modifacation. That's not bad or good. Its the execution you may want to clean up, or at least support and protect.

View attachment 1716236200
Click to expand...
Is the fenderwell cut only on the driver's side for the headers?
 
@Professor Fate. is right on the money with a swap to a dual pot master cylinder. Highly recommend doing it for safety sake. Here's when I did mine in a 66. I now have headers so there is a little more space.
Professor Fate said:
Second, the master cylinder. The originals are a single-reservoir design which was superseded by a dual-reservoir design in '67.
Click to expand...
IMG_20150604_154359.jpg
 
66fyssh said:
@Professor Fate. is right on the money with a swap to a dual pot master cylinder. Highly recommend doing it for safety sake. Here's when I did mine in a 66. I now have headers so there is a little more space.

View attachment 1716236314
Click to expand...
I don't mean to hijack the OP's thread, but how well did your headers fit with power steering? Doug's?
 
66fyssh said:
@Professor Fate. is right on the money with a swap to a dual pot master cylinder. Highly recommend doing it for safety sake. Here's when I did mine in a 66. I now have headers so there is a little more space.

View attachment 1716236314
Click to expand...

I will absolutely be installing a dual master cylinder at a minimum. Thanks for all of the suggestions to protect the lines from the exhaust heat. Thanks for sharing your pic!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top