This Ebayer Is Really Smoking The Good Crack!!

-
Johnny Dart said:
Not true.....They are not all the same.Yes they will all interchange,but they are not all the same.For example.

1970 340 valve covers:
Passenger side part #3462684
Drivers side part #3462913

1970 340 multi carb (6-pack) valve covers:
Passenger side part #3577253
Drivers side part #3577223

In 71-72 there were 2 different valve covers. One for electronic and non electronic cars.68 & 69 had different valve covers.73-74 had different valve covers. If you need any part #'s let me know.


The valve covers he is selling are true 6-pack valve covers.

Are they a bit pricey...Well yes.
But they are a very unique piece.
There is someone out there building a AAR Cuda or T/A Challenger 6-pack looking for those,or a Mr.Norms 340 6-pack Demon who will probably pop for them.
Click to expand...



Great info Johnny Dart.....:cheers:

I see you have quite a bit of knowledge on Mopar valve covers, but my question is are the Mopar part #'s actually stamped on the covers and if so, where.

I have several sets of valve covers that have been sitting around along time and I would love to know what vehicles / motors they came on.

I believe the chrome ones on the 340 motor in my gallery are 6-pak covers, but I've never seen another set in chrome............ :-?

Has anyone else seen these on a car or know where the part #'s are stamped ???

Thanks FABO
 
6pk2goDemon said:
...but my question is are the Mopar part #'s actually stamped on the covers and if so, where.
Click to expand...
That's the problem w/parts and part numbers, especially OEM stuff. The same parts may have originally come from two or more different suppliers who, apart from the packaging, may have used different or no markings for internal and/or external cross-ref. The example I know of personally and hate the most is brake rotors for my truck. Using the casting number from the hub will get you the wrong part every time. It's a crap shoot. I don't know how the resto guys do it.
 
6pakDemon.

Good question,I have really never checked for part #'s on them.The #'s are from my Chrysler parts interchange manual

I know the difference looking and them though. I guess it just happens from studying them through the years.

The right 340 six-pack cover has a edge on it for the vacuum lines.

The 70-72 318 has a lower left side bracket for the wire's than the 70-72 340 valve covers.

Up to early 69 small block valve covers had the wire holders dirrectly on top of the valve covers,instead of on the sides and above.

I'm trying to find your gallery to see your chrome valve covers. Back in the day guys/gals would like to get a set of chrome covers from Direct Connection to give there motor some bling. I believe some of the 440 six-pack cars came standard with chrome valve covers
 
Just shows ya.There's more money than brains out there.
 
spikekid999 said:
that dude is smokin some serious crack. all 318/340/360 valve covers are the same. wounder how much the dude payed for the carb from him in his feedback
Click to expand...
Really sorry to bust your bubble. The 70-71 parts manual lists a different part number for left side and right side valve covers for all LA engines. OK, so much for being a wise guy. Actually, the 340-6 does use different valve covers (by part number) than the 340-4. Why? I don't know. Interestingly, the manual also lists different numbers for a 71 340-6, which to my knowledge was never made. The 71 318 & 360 used the same valve cover pair (by part number). With 340-6 cars going for ~$100k at Barrett-Jackson, it makes sense to get the numbers right.
That said, I agree with the general sentiment, I'd have to be seriously doped up to spend that kind of money on a pair of valve covers.:snakeman:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top