Search results for query: *

I’d use the cast crank, use a lighter piston like a hyper rite tic, and internally balance it. The balance job will be more because you need to put heavy metal (Mallory) into in. But the cast is plenty strong and then you can run the neutral balancers, flex plates, and converters. I’ve got a ‘78...

Agree100%. Too many over thinkers here. OP- it will be fine. I don’t support Hughes in any way, but any cam under 225*@.050 will do you just fine. Pistons as long as the rings can seal are fine. Oil pump of any style HV, JP, or standard is fine.

I was going to say - if the car is a toy (not a restoration) have the assembly internally balanced, use the Dakota pilot bearing assembly, and trim the transmission's input shaft and you can use the engine parts you have.

The easy answer is the intake is not sealing very well so it's pushing oil everywhere. That being said - it should not be pushing oil. So the "real problem" is ring seal. Might be able to do a quick re-ring deal to fix that, or pull it and go full rebuild. Either way the oil is a problem, but...

I/we can see that. That’s why I’m happy to see where it goes.

I buolt a 440 short block with the open chamber quench dome KBs in the late 90s. It’s still on the stand. After all the blueprinting and matching to get all the pistons in the same spot in the block, I lost all interest in doing a set of heads to make them work properly. It’s still sitting on...

Great work all around.

Cool. I did one on an E body, and put it into the fenderwell so it wasn't visible.

The very first one I built was a column shift B wedge. It was a bet and I used only parts from the dart and the donor engine and trans. I used all the original column parts, built the mounts, and angle milled the LH manifold. But it was a C body log.

Cool... My very first engine when I was 16 was for a friend... About a year after he was doing an intake swap and pulled my 3/8 drive extension... 50 and still learning.

I missed it then. I got into cars in late 86.

440

Found a couple mock-up pictures. Goal as I said was a tall intake, carb, and plate, with a good air cleaner, under the flat hood. Also with custom made under-chassis headers. This picture shows the RH inner fender in stock form. It's been modified now to allow for more pipe clearance as all the...

I think the B manifolds fit the 67-up “later A”. I’ve done that before. I do not believe they will work in the early a although my experiments were with the RB it wasn’t even close where that shorter deck provided the room.

It’s a lot easier with a new coil-spring front suspension and rack and pinion.

You manifolds are out. And I’m not sure which pan you have, but the smaller the sump and more central it is, the better. The performance pans have the volume added to the front of the pan. That will hit the K frame without some serious cutting.

I was looking on my phone for the pictures but I did mock up a couple years ago. If you search the forums on early a big blocks there’s stuff around on them. The ‘67 was designed to allow a big block. The early a never was. So with torsions bars and full inner fenders it’s tight. Plus the floor...

I should clarify- im using the ‘65 only big block 727 and the stock floor cable shift, and my goal was to have a taller intake with nitrous plate under the flat hood. Plus there’s some other tricks being built into it. But all that being said- a big block doesn’t fit easily- at least not in...

It won’t fit with as produced parts from anybody. To put the RB in mine I’m having to: Notch the K frame. Fab mounts for the engine and transmission. Modify the trans cross member. Modify the trans tunnel on the floor. Modify the left side inner fender steel to allow more room for headers...

Was that Car Craft or Mopar Action? That was when I was reading every magazine I could find. I think I even had a subscription to Super Stock and Drag Illustrated... lol

The one for the baffled pan works with either. The one for the non baffled pan will not work with a baffled pan.

You can get almost any ring from almost anybody. But sets are cheaper. I don’t bother with gapless, and I tend to run Hastings or Speed Pro most. With done Mahle or Total Seal (normal gap type).

I was going to say the results are in question based on how they are presented..

I modified the crap out of the inner fenders, trans tunnel, trans mount, and Kframe but I wanted it set back and lowered in the chassis. Mine will have stock suspension but upgraded brakes.

X2.

I’d go with the lightest you have.

Honestly I never use the paper on anything unless there's a fitment issue. I use a thin skin of Ultra Grey around the ports, and in the corners of the valley. Haven't had issues with that approach but I've only been doing them since '86.

What transmission, and what car is it going in? The issue I can see is rpm drop with gear changes and a heavier balancer up front. In my opinion, lighter to me would be best because of the least amount of inertia on the opposite end of the crank from the convertor.

I didn’t see the pistons. Weird how a top end package means the lower end gets torn up for it. It’s more of a “power package”.

x2