whats my Horsepower gain with these mods?

-
A fatter exhaust system helps performance and reduces heat build up that hastens the demise of the exhaust manifold. a 2 1/4" will benefit from a good turbo type muffler.

The next best thing is buy a high output coil and a good ballast


Fancy, expensive ignition systems are a waste on these engines because, with their long stroke, it is not safe to run them fast enough for them to make any difference. A modified cam will give a lot of power increase per dollar, but don't get crazy with this because you quickly start losing low end performance as the cam gets more radical.

The 170's relatively short stroke allows it to rev high and the 170 is the engine to use if you will turn over 6,000 rpm frequently. a 170 CID slant six HyperPak would deliver a comfortable 182 hp, and turn 8000 RPM if you kept the cam lobes lubricated.

If it's performance you're after, another thing you should seriously consider is swapping the rear end to a shorter ratio- 3.23 was standard, though 2.79 was an option for highway mileage (unlikely with a 170) and 3.55 was an option for performance. Both these two are not uncommon in the 7 1/4" rear ends which are standard behind /6 cars.with a 3.55 rear end, and while the tradeoff is a lower top speed, the reason it was used was to leverage the slant six's torque. It's amazing how many people think right away of hot rodding their engines when a rear end ratio swap will make such a greater effect on their seat-of-the-pants power.
~~~~super 6 swaps~~~
Get both the intake and exhaust manifold together and the throttle linkage is different, so be sure to get everything between the gas pedal and the cylinder head. The Carter BBD is a good 2-bbl carb, easy to rebuild and tune, and will give great performance. This is also how to spot the super six; the air horn is bigger than a 1bbl, so the old air cleaner won't fit. If you're not sure what it looks like, go pop the hood on any 2bbl V8 mopar, where it's the standard item. (The carburetor was somewhat different from the one used on V8s).
The 170 had a shorter stroke than the 225, but the same head and valves. Low end torque was less, but ultimate power was the same. In addition, with the lower block height it was a sturdier engine, and with the shorter stroke could rev higher with less chance of an rpm failure. The Achilles Heel was the cam lobes.
 
And don't forget about the long rod 225. That combo uses the longer (7.005") 198 slant six connecting rod coupled with either the KB239 or the KB268 Keith black pistons for the Chrysler 2.2 4 cylinder engine. The 2.2 standard bore is only .045" over from standard bore on the slant. The piston pins are the same diameter and the valve reliefs are even in the same place. When used with the long rod, deck height is about .012" in the hole which raises compression significantly. 12.1 is entirely possible with the KB239 with additional milling of the block and or head. Those pistons are also pressed OR floating which will make for a very nice bottom end. With the long rod, bottom end torque is greatly enhanced. The KB268 piston is for low compression or turbo applications, while the KB239 is for higher compression.
 
Did someone say CLAMS???????? Huh I didn't see any!!!!!!!
 
Here is my combo: Long rod 225 with KB239 pistons as described above. A custom ground Oregon solid camshaft .489 230 duration @ .050" ground on a 105 LSA. You've seen my ported head thread. It has 318 valves, 440 Magnum springs set up at 120 seat pressure. I am putting it in a 63 Dart 2 door sedan with an 833 overdrive 4 speed and 4.30 gears. The .69 overdrive ratio will allow for a final drive ratio of 2.967 in high gear but the 3.09 first gear ratio will give me a 13.287:1 first gear ratio. That will make for a hell of a launch. My only concern is too much compression. I am probably going to have to run a custom thick head gasket to retain the use of pump gas. We'll see.
 
Okay guys, so let me get this straight: The consensus/implication seems to be that adding a 2bbl and better exhaust to a slant six isn't worth the time and effort???? What hobby is this???
I expect folks to be realistic and try to manage the expectations of the newbies. That's our job as "been there, done that" veterans. But jeez, have we given up completely on positive encouragement?
.


positive encouragement is not calling people out on an open forum. NOBODY said there is NO gain with a 2 barrel , only next to none. if you got something to say about me or who i am , grow a pair and send ME a PM

where is YOUR positive encouragement ????????

AND we havent even started on BOOSTED SLANT SIXES
 
Yeah we need Dedman to come give us a turbo speech. Bill, where are you? We need your 2 cents.
 
My wrenching time and money spent was fun :cheers:
and before I removed all the 1 parrel stuff and adding better spark and easy flow helped me allot :happy1:
It loves running 2200 rpm down the hwy at 65 mph all day long.
before it did not have passing capabilities it has now :thumblef:
And runs much cooler and seems effortless.

I am ready to do it again but better :bball: diggin some /6'ing.

I can say all I know for sure is I have more hp and at lest 4 mpg on the hwy gain...

can I share a new Video here :burnout:


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U10NASEf2go"]1962 Plymouth Valiant Slant Six Drag Racing Barona drag Strip 2-18-2012 - YouTube[/ame]
 
Cool. I don't know though, why in the world people route their fuel lines like that. Wait till yall see how I do mine. Gonna be the way Chrysler shouldda done it.
 
idk...i would have ran hard fuel line... a great looking /6 though
 

Attachments

  • s61.jpg
    101.8 KB · Views: 317
  • s62.jpg
    206.8 KB · Views: 292
Yeah we need Dedman to come give us a turbo speech. Bill, where are you? We need your 2 cents.

Hell stroker Bill catches so much crap from people about his beliefs on the boosted slant I'd be surprised if you get him too post

Op here's my build thread read it if you want the car is very close to coming back together and its a detailed blue print in how to boost a slant. You will see were I make mistakes and screw something up or I nail it and get it right. I've asked a ton of questions on different forums.
I wouldn't be where I was today without guys like shaker223, turbovaliant66, Bill Dedmen, and a host of other guys that have helped me down the line.
Alot of it boils down to ones own ability and the size of there wallet
Just my opinion
Hope this helps
Aaron

http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=126611
 
Thanks for contributing, Aaron. Yeah, Bill is kinda misunderstood.....he has such a fire that it sorta overflows everywhere.....wish more people had that in the hobby, really.
 
Bill is kinda misunderstood.....he has such a fire that it sorta overflows everywhere.....wish more people had that in the hobby, really.

the last interaction i had with him was a blast ... he really has a ton of knowledge and a lot to offer ....
 
the last interaction i had with him was a blast ... he really has a ton of knowledge and a lot to offer ....

Bill is a awesome individual and will share any and all knowledge he has and its been a treat to having the opportunity to get to no him
Aaron
 
SS did you mention 2 1/4" exhaust as being beneficial to the slant?
 
Just ran a 11.14 at 116mph in Vegas on my first run trying nitrous.Only spraying a 60 shot cause my engine has over 300 passes on it.Guzzi Mark
 
Just ran a 11.14 at 116mph in Vegas on my first run trying nitrous.Only spraying a 60 shot cause my engine has over 300 passes on it.Guzzi Mark

Congratulations madmax/6 :cheers: You sure get allot of speed at the second end of the track as well as the first half :burnout: Thank you for all you have dun and shared :thumblef::hello1:
 
Bill is a awesome individual and will share any and all knowledge he has and its been a treat to having the opportunity to get to no him
Aaron

Thanks for all the kind words. You guys are the best!!!

I will make this kind of short (I said "kind of") because it's 3.55 A.M. (not P.M.) and I am wore the F*** out...

Before I go into any kind of rant on here, I have some disclamers to announce:

1. I have never owned a slant six car before in my life (except for a little '69 Valiant I had for about 5 minutes in 1980.) That one doesn't count; the marriage was never consummated.

2. I have never owned a turbocharged ANYTHING before now... nor have I ever worked on one.

3. Practically everything of value I know about this /6-turbo bidness, I learned from FABO member Tom Wolfe (Shaker223.) He is one of the smart dudes that showed me that you don't have to break the bank, rob a liquor store, or invade Ft. Knox to make about 500 horsepower from the leaning tower of power. His car, and the '66 Valiant of Ryan Peterson are living, running, examples of the awesome performance available from the 225 motor and a hairdryer. Without those two, I would probably be doing something else for a hobby right now. I didn't say it was cheap; it's not, but the money you save because of the stuff you DON'T have to buy when building one of these amazing motors, will make you smile.

4. There were other people who helped me and my partner, Freddie Nielsen, along the way. I'd like to thank Frank Brent, Charrlie Schmid and Social Security for making this do-able. Frank is a U.S. distributor for Australian slant 6 speed equipment, and Charrlie has experience beyond words with hopped-up slant sixes of all persuasions. When these guys (all of them) talk, I listen!

5. The total lack of experience with turbos and slant 6s has caused my partner, Freddie Nielsen, and me to make a couple of mistakes, but they're not irreversible; we'll get them fixed... For example, our intake manifold is a long runner model that needs to be a short-runner, and our header may have passages that are too long. I'm sure we'll discover a whole bevy of other mistakes, once the thing is operational.

But, I digress: what I wanted to impress on you guys is that ~I~ am a newbie at this turbo/slant6 business and you should take that into consideration when you read anything I write here.


Having said that, here's what I think about all this:

Bear in mind, now, this is JUST MY OPINION. Your mileage may vary...


The following is written in reference to the 225 motor. The 170 is a different kettle of fish.

Slant 6 motors (remember, this is a 225 thread) were built (though, not intentionally) to be force-fed air and fuel.
Whether it's done with a supercharger, nitrous oxide, or a turbo, it once-and-for-all, makes an end run around the built-in breathing problem that slant sixes suffer from birth. Because of their small bores, they can never have the kind of breathing that will deliver horsepower in the 1.75hp-per-cubic-inch range. Not with that cast-iron, 2-valve head, at least.

The engine is rpm limited because of the long (4 1/8") stroke, so it's never going to deliver the goods at 8,000 rpm. That's the rpm where most small-block Chevys that are really "built" seem to make big power. I'm talking the small-displacement, short stroke models.

Forget it.

Because of the fact that the original plans for the slant 6 were for an aluminum engine (and, that aluminum isn't as strong as cast iron,) the basic specifications for the slant 6 block were robust, to say the least; they had to be... aluminum needs more mass and are to be as strong as it needs to be for reliability, than cast iron. Well, the engine that went on to live in dealerships for many years, turned out to be cast iron.

But, the changes in the cast iron version, from the aluminum parameters, were minimal.

That meant that the resulting engine was an unusally strong critter, not totally unlike a Diesel, in basic construction.

A forged steel crank with mains the size of a 426 Hemi made for an equally-strong bottom end.

Along the way, someone a whole lot smarter than I am, realized that what this all meant was, you could boost the s**t out of this little motor without hurting it. Boost = performance increases!

Tom Wolfe and Ryan Peterson built the prototypes for the engine that is in the '64 Valiant that Freddie and I plan to run. We bald-facedly copied their lead, and we are going to HOPEFULLY going to run within a second of their cars. There are only minimal differences in their "recipe" from ours. But, they did it first; we're just copy-cats. More in the next thread:
 
More in the next thread:

This IS the next thread:

This part of the turbo slant 6 rant will be to try to point out some of the reasons I think the turbo slant 6 is a too-well-kept secret.

Here are some:

There are two (at least) ways to go about this.... mild and wild.

A mild motor would use a basically stock engine with a small turbo and could be built for very little money, considering the performance availble from the finished product.

For example: FABO member Pishta, has built a low-dollar turbo slant 6 that exemplifies what I think might be an interesting build for someone who just wants a "boost" in the performance of their 18-second, stock 225 Duster or Dart.

He is using a junkyard turbo, a stock exhaust manifold and a super six 2bbl intake. He has a stock head on the motor, and runs a stock cam and valvetrain (and, valves.) He could tell you more about it, but I don't think he's spent a lot of money; no intercooler, no forged pistons or rods, stock converter and tranny... basically, just what I said. I would imagine that his engine, so-equipped, would run (with 10 pounds of boost, which is said to be safe for stock, cast, pistons,) somewhere in the mid-15-second range. That's about 85 mph...

That would be about a 3-second improvement over a stock 225. I think that in order to get that kind of improvement with a normally-aspirated motor, you'd probably spend a little more. A cam and kit, a 4bbl, headers, and a milled head would probably get you there,

The Wild" version of that motor isn't really THAT different, but here is what we did in copying Tom's and Ryan's builds:

Forged (Wiseco) .065"-over pistons
K-1, 7" (nominal) rods
Ported head
1.74" intake valves
1.5" exhaust valves
Head NOT milled (it checked "straight" within a thousandth)
Custom (homebuilt) header
4-bbl Hurricane intake
Holley 4150 double-pumper, modified for blow-thru
MSD 6-AL II (digital) ignition
Bullet cam
New, stock lifters
New 340 valve springs + a set of inners; 135# on the seat; 315# open
Stock pushrods and rockers
Balanced reciprocating assembly
Deepened oil pan and extended pickup
New slant 6 M-P electronic distributor
Solid core Taylor Cable spark plug wires
Snowperformance Boost Cooler methanol injection system Stage I
67 MM Turbonetics turbo
65mm wastegate
Blowoff valve (don't ask... no info)
New heavy-duty oil pump from Frank
Thin steel shim head gasket from Charrlie Schmid
ARP head studs; special order, 220,000psi.
Bolt-stretch gauge for assembly od ARP rod bolts
Ring-file machine to open up the end gaps
NO O-RINGS around the cylinders. BIG mistake!!!
Coldest plug NGK makes.
Intercooler, said to be good for 550 hp. That will do it for us... :)

That's the recipe for "wild." If you need your A Body to run over 120mph in the quarter.

Pray for us...:prayer::prayer::prayer::prayer::prayer:

Tomorrow, I will post the reasons I think this slant 6 turbo is a cheap one, comparatively... It's 5:25 A.M. and I have to get some sleep...

Nytol.:D
 
Here is my combo: Long rod 225 with KB239 pistons as described above. A custom ground Oregon solid camshaft .489 230 duration @ .050" ground on a 105 LSA. You've seen my ported head thread. It has 318 valves, 440 Magnum springs set up at 120 seat pressure. I am putting it in a 63 Dart 2 door sedan with an 833 overdrive 4 speed and 4.30 gears. The .69 overdrive ratio will allow for a final drive ratio of 2.967 in high gear but the 3.09 first gear ratio will give me a 13.287:1 first gear ratio. That will make for a hell of a launch. My only concern is too much compression. I am probably going to have to run a custom thick head gasket to retain the use of pump gas. We'll see.
How about some pics of this little beast?.
 
SS did you mention 2 1/4" exhaust as being beneficial to the slant?

Yup yup. But it needs to be in conjunction with a larger carburetor to really see the fullest benefit. Of course headers will help too. I plan on running 2 2.5" into a flowmaster scavenging Y and then out with a 3" single through a Flow Tech Terminator.
 
How about some pics of this little beast?.

It's nothing more than the completed head, bare block, crank boxed pistons and core rods right now, but I will gladly get some tonight if I have time.
 
-
Back
Top