318 build #2 "cost minded" for the '74 Duster

-
j par said:
Take it from the slowest stroker on the Internet lol... 50% of the people on this forum have absolutely no clue as to how fast the car will actually go in the quarter mile.. and those people are quite delusional on their estimates....
Here's my guesstimate...
Out of 50,000 members here with cars I would say $25,000 or more ain't going to see 16 seconds on the quarter mile...
20,000 are going to see 14s and 13s....
About 3,000 are going to see 12s...
About $1, 000 11s...
And maybe a thousand that'll be under 10..
And the only guy that I know that has a duster that's in the low nines and chasing high 8s right now laughs at me when I talk about talking on this forum LOL.... He's too busy making his car go fast to be out here talking about it...
Click to expand...
25k are not going to see 16s so 17s? lol thats on them
only 273 2 barre should post a 16.5 and higher time@ sea level others should take 2 hours to learn to tune a car
318 2 barrel runs 16.0 stock
timming traction carb 99% should be 15.0 or better in Abody
340 cars are mid 13s or better with the above
97 to 99 mph is what they trapped stock 3.23s to 3.91s thats 13.6 to 13.9 with traction and tune
like to know how many 273 cars are part of the 50k you speak of
imo the 50% you speak of most likely dont give a chit
taking money from the camaro guy who said he has 450 hp but he has a 600 vac sec holley with a 3 inch air cleaner
loses by 15 cars to 68 gts 340 auto 3.23s with 85k miles
silly is as silly does easy money
going fast isnt hard its $money
some can go faster with no less money thats talent
much easier to run 10s today then 40 yrs ago
8s low 9s was high 10s 40 yrs ago not really streetable unless gutted 2500 lbs
lots of 9 second cars today with ac power windows today money
 
j par said:
Take it from the slowest stroker on the Internet lol... 50% of the people on this forum have absolutely no clue as to how fast the car will actually go in the quarter mile.. and those people are quite delusional on their estimates....
Here's my guesstimate...
Out of 50,000 members here with cars I would say $25,000 or more ain't going to see 16 seconds on the quarter mile...
20,000 are going to see 14s and 13s....
About 3,000 are going to see 12s...
About $1, 000 11s...
And maybe a thousand that'll be under 10..
And the only guy that I know that has a duster that's in the low nines and chasing high 8s right now laughs at me when I talk about talking on this forum LOL.... He's too busy making his car go fast to be out here talking about it...
Click to expand...
you do realize the car of subject in the last couple of post was talk'n 1/8 mile, right? Other than that, your post was kind of like a post from outer space.... lol
 
bobscuda67 said:
I took my car to Milan Dragway a couple weeks ago and I'm totally embarrassed on how the car performed. They are going to the 1/8 mile racing, which I have never done before. And I don't like it either. Anyway it ran a 10.65 at 77.5 mph. The 60' was really bad at 2.85. I blame it on the 12 year old 245/60/15 BFG tires that are hard and spin very easy. The car is a 340 with a 360 crankshaft and Magnum heads with 340 exhaust manifolds. So it's nothing special maybe 300 horsepower but I expected to be quicker than that.
Click to expand...

bobscuda67 said:
Thanks for the encouragement guys! I forgot to mention that the trans is a 904 with 5400 rpm governor and low gear set with a Trans go kit. The torque converter is a 2800 stall 9 1/2" unit. It also has a 3:55 rear gear. I had a handful just to keep going straight with manual steering and there was rubber on my tail light lenses. And I am looking for some new tires!
Click to expand...
And just to give you how much more you have to look forward too........
Our full size B250 Van with a full size bed, a table, and chairs ran very low 10's in the 1/8 mile with a stock 360 magnum (4bbl and headers). Just get your car to hook up and you'll see the time drop massively. 2.8's 60 ft is some serious loss of time.
 
a-bodyguy said:
25k are not going to see 16s so 17s? lol thats on them
only 273 2 barre should post a 16.5 and higher time@ sea level others should take 2 hours to learn to tune a car
318 2 barrel runs 16.0 stock
timming traction carb 99% should be 15.0 or better in Abody
340 cars are mid 13s or better with the above
97 to 99 mph is what they trapped stock 3.23s to 3.91s thats 13.6 to 13.9 with traction and tune
like to know how many 273 cars are part of the 50k you speak of
imo the 50% you speak of most likely dont give a chit
taking money from the camaro guy who said he has 450 hp but he has a 600 vac sec holley with a 3 inch air cleaner
loses by 15 cars to 68 gts 340 auto 3.23s with 85k miles
silly is as silly does easy money
going fast isnt hard its $money
some can go faster with no less money thats talent
much easier to run 10s today then 40 yrs ago
8s low 9s was high 10s 40 yrs ago not really streetable unless gutted 2500 lbs
lots of 9 second cars today with ac power windows today money
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with your opinion like you disagree with mine because it's your opinion LOL...
How many people do you think on slant six cars on this forum...
I could poke holes in 90% of your argument but that's your opinion so you're welcome to it...
 
Page 10, just trying to keep the current parts list on every page so those joining late can quickly view where we are at.

* '94 5.2 magnum engine
* 20-745-9 Comp Cam Roller
* Hughes Spring Kit with 1110 springs (springs/locks/retainers)
* Weiand Stealth Intake 8022
 
318willrun said:
Page 10, just trying to keep the current parts list on every page so those joining late can quickly view where we are at.

* '94 5.2 magnum engine
* 20-745-9 Comp Cam Roller
* Hughes Spring Kit with 1110 springs (springs/locks/retainers)
* Weiand Stealth Intake 8022
Click to expand...
What's going on here? am I on the correct forum? Is this for a bodie's only?...
We're on the 10th page here aren't we supposed to be talking about whose dog has the most spots?...
 
j par said:
Every 10th I gained on the 60 foot grab me two tenths on the quarter mile..
Click to expand...
And that ^^ can be on par (but not Jpar...LOL) with what many see. However, the real question folks have to answer is did the car drop a tenth in the 60 ft due to added power or traction gained? IF it's traction, the 60 ft can drop but the MPH stay about the same equaling a greater drop in 60 ft time which drops the overall time, but not nearly as much as that tenth dropping because of power. Because gained power will make a difference through the entire 1320. So a car that drops 5 tenths due to a power gain (spinning wasn't the issue) will have a much greater drop in the 1/4 mile vs a guy that drops 5 tenths off the 60 ft by ending wheel spin by adding slicks, because there is no more power throughout the rest of the 1320
 
j par said:
What's going on here? am I on the correct forum? Is this for a bodie's only?...
We're on the 10th page here aren't we supposed to be talking about whose dog has the most spots?...
Click to expand...
We've done well staying on que, with just casual chatter in between the update progress posts on the 5.2.
 
318willrun said:
And that ^^ can be on par (but not Jpar...LOL) with what many see. However, the real question folks have to answer is did the car drop a tenth in the 60 ft due to added power or traction gained? IF it's traction, the 60 ft can drop but the MPH stay about the same equaling a greater drop in 60 ft time which drops the overall time, but not nearly as much as that tenth dropping because of power. Because gained power will make a difference through the entire 1320. So a car that drops 5 tenths due to a power gain (spinning wasn't the issue) will have a much greater drop in the 1/4 mile vs a guy that drops 5 tenths off the 60 ft by ending wheel spin by adding slicks, because there is no more power throughout the rest of the 1320
Click to expand...
That didn't make any sense.. the car that drops 5 -10's because of more power drops 5-10's...???..
A car that drops time in 60 ft is going to eventually have more time to gain more speed..
Not a lot more speed but enough in the second half to gain tenths of seconds in the second half of the run....
 
j par said:
That didn't make any sense.. the car that drops 5 -10's because of more power drops 5-10's...???..
A car that drops time in 60 ft is going to eventually have more time to gain more speed..
Not a lot more speed but enough in the second half to gain tenths of seconds in the second half of the run....
Click to expand...
Maybe my words are were not well written. Example, if a car drops from 2.1 to 1.6 on the 60 ft because of power gain, this car will show much more improvement in the overall 1/4 mile and MPH will be much better vs a car that just hooked up and dropped from a 2.1 to 1.6.
 
Last edited:
318willrun said:
Maybe my words are were not well written. Example, if a car drops from 2.1 to 1.6 on the 60 ft because of power gain, this car will show much more improvement in the overall 1/4 mile and MPH will be much better vs a car that just hooked up and dropped from a 2.1 to 1.6.
Click to expand...
There's a laundry list of variables in what you're talking about but adding one crap load more of horsepower isn't going to lower the 60 ft time...
Also too much traction isn't good...
I remember looking over to my left and seeing this Camaro do a ginormous wheelie with lots of traction and I thought wow cool and when I left him right there that was the last I ever seen of him...
 
j par said:
There's a laundry list of variables in what you're talking about but adding one crap load more of horsepower isn't going to lower the 60 ft time...
Also too much traction isn't good...
I remember looking over to my left and seeing this Camaro do a ginormous wheelie with lots of traction and I thought wow cool and when I left him right there that was the last I ever seen of him...
Click to expand...
we'll agree to disagree on 2 things you said:
  • too much traction isn't good??? Hogwash! if you think spinning is better, have at it!
  • HP doesn't lower 60 ft time???? If you ain't spinning it surely will !!
 
318willrun said:
we'll agree to disagree on 2 things you said:
  • too much traction isn't good??? Hogwash! if you think spinning is better, have at it!
  • HP doesn't lower 60 ft time???? If you ain't spinning it surely will !!
Click to expand...
Okay you win and you're right...
 
318willrun said:
And that ^^ can be on par (but not Jpar...LOL) with what many see. However, the real question folks have to answer is did the car drop a tenth in the 60 ft due to added power or traction gained? IF it's traction, the 60 ft can drop but the MPH stay about the same equaling a greater drop in 60 ft time which drops the overall time, but not nearly as much as that tenth dropping because of power. Because gained power will make a difference through the entire 1320. So a car that drops 5 tenths due to a power gain (spinning wasn't the issue) will have a much greater drop in the 1/4 mile vs a guy that drops 5 tenths off the 60 ft by ending wheel spin by adding slicks, because there is no more power throughout the rest of the 1320
Click to expand...
But in my case I was spinning the tires and backpedaling the throttle to get it to hook so i was down on power for 100'. I think that would be true for most guys in that situation.
On a brighter note in the second round of time trials I cut a .018 light. That was the high point of the day.
 
Again, we bought this engine without ever hearing it run or taking it apart. Of course, the story of this 5.2 will unveil as we go. I assume it will be good by the nature of how we bought it. My biggest concern is that the engine sat for several years since being in our possession
 
Dug a little deeper into the 5.2. I was really worried about rust on the cylinder walls. The engine sat "outside under a deck" for a few years before being moved inside. If the cylinders would have been rusted, we were going to move on with the LA 318. This video just shows what we found under the valve covers and under the heads. Looks like we are moving on with the 5.2.
 
More painting for hits on your Youboob channel? Can you tell us what happened?
 
j par said:
More painting for hits on your Youboob channel? Can you tell us what happened?
Click to expand...
Paint? I didn't paint the engine yet. As for what happened, I wrote it above. I feared rust, and if rusted we were switching to the LA but we are moving on with the magnum, meaning the rockers/cylinders weren't rusted
 
Last edited:
318willrun said:
Paint? I didn't paint the engine yet. As for what happened, I wrote it above. I feared rust, and if rusted we were switching to the LA but we are moving on with the magnum, meaning the rockers/cylinders weren't rusted
Click to expand...
Voice command :rolleyes:... "Pan".…
Glad to hear all is good...:thumbsup:
 
mgoblue9798 said:
Just my two cents, but I would run the magnum heads all else being equal. Stock form you get the flow of the old J heads with better velocity, and the closed chamber like the 302's to keep compression up. Best of both worlds for a street 318.
Click to expand...
Where do you get your information frim?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top