The King's rides....And other celebrity car stories...

A lot of people are interested in cars that were owned by celebrities. I have to admit I fall into that category. Here's a few interesting stories about celebrity rides. # 1. Elvis Presley. You gotta start any celebrity discussion with the "King". It's widely known that Elvis had a lot of Cadillacs from the '50's until his death in 1977. But he also liked musclecars and sports cars as well. His favorite car was the Stutz Blackhawk. The Stutz Blackhawk was a custom hand-built luxury performance car based on the Pontiac Gran Prix platform. Elvis had four of them between 1971 and 1977. The first one was the prototype based on a 1970 Gran Prix. A businessman named James O' Donnel revived the Stutz Motor Company and teamed up with retired Chrysler Stylist Virgil Exner to create an exclusive high end luxury performance car. The 455 Pontiac / TH400 powertrain was powerful and reliable and was easy to get service and parts for. The Blackhawks could do 0-60 in 8 seconds and had a top speed over 130 mph. The bodywork was hand-rolled steel done by Ghia in Italy. The interior featured lush Australian wool carpeting, rich leather and real gold and walnut on the dash and accents. O' Donnel was smart in first marketing the car to celebrities. Frank Sinatra wanted the first one as well. When O' Donnel showed the car to Elvis he wanted to buy it on the spot. O Donnel  explained that he needed the car to show to other people and obtain orders, and that it was scheduled to debut at a big car show the following week. Elvis replied-"Do you think you'll sell more cars with you driving it, or with me driving it?" Sinatra refused to allow any pictures to be taken of him and the car and refused to let O Donnel borrow it for the car show where the Blackhawk's debut was planned. Elvis happily posed for pictures with the car and said O' Donnel could say he bought the first one and use his likeness in advertising it. He also agreed to let O' Donnel put it in the car show, and to take delivery after the show. Wisely, O' Donnel sold the car to Presley. Sinatra was furious, but O'Donnel didn't care. He'd made the same offer to Sinatra about buying the car as he did to Elvis.  Sinatra refused. Elvis made the deal. Elvis promoting the car was so huge,the impact couldn't be measured in dollars and cents. Orders from other celebrities poured in. Sammy Davis Jr, Evel Kneival,Dean Martin,Wilson Pickett,Lucille Ball,Elton John,Paul McCartney,Jerry Lewis, Robert Goulet, Boxer Larry Holmes,Frank Sinatra-after his initial anger and threat to never,ever buy one subsided-probably his close friends Martin and Davis having them helped, and countless others all purchased Stutz Blackhawks after Elvis did. Anyhow this first one got wrecked in an accident and Elvis had it stored at Graceland several years. Eventually it was restored. He bought another '71 model and a pearl white '72 model as well. However his favorite was the 1973 model. It was black with red leather interior. This was the car he was driving when he was photographed returning to Graceland on August 16, 1977 just hours before his death. This car is on display at Graceland. He also had a BMW 507 when he was in the Army in Germany. It was high-performance roadster that had been specially built for and driven by German race-car driver Hans Stucker.  Elvis thought he bought it, but the contract was in German. He had only leased it, and had to turn it in when he left Germany.  Another interesting story is the Elvis 'Cuda. While on tour in Ohio in 1971 Elvis had watched the car-chase cult classic movie "Vanishing Point" and decided he wanted a Challenger. He and Sonny West went to the local Dodge-Chrysler-Plymouth dealer. They didn't have a white Challenger, but they did have a Sub-Lime 'Cuda on the showroom. It was a 340 / Torqueflite model. After some negotiation, Elvis bought the car. He took it home to Tennessee, registered it, ( lucky for the future owners ). and kept it 8 months before selling it. The car went through various owners over the next 40 plus years. The current owner bought it with the intention of making it a badass hot rod, maybe even swapping a 440 or a crate hemi into it. When he was going through papers from the car he found a Tennessee registration from 1971 that listed the car's vin number and the owner's name and address-Elvis Aron Presley,### Elvis Presley Boulevard, Memphis, Tennessee.....and turned handsprings all the way home, and decided to restore it to it's original condition. The other funny one is the 1971 Pantera. Elvis bought it for $2,400 in 1974 for then-girlfriend Linda Thompson. That should have thrown up a red flag right there. Panteras were $10,000 when they debuted in 1971. The buff magazines called them the "Poor Mans's Lamborghini". However with the base price of a Pontiac Trans-Am being $4,300 and a Corvette being a little over $6,000-I doubt any poor people bought Panteras. They were selling for $12-15,000 in 1974 dollars. If somebody was selling one for $2,400, you knew there had to be a problem. The problem was electrical and sometimes it just wouldn't start for no reason. Wait an hour-it would fire right up. Memphis tow-truck drivers joked about several times picking up a furious Elvis and towing it back to Graceland. After one such incident he shot it, and the car started! It's on display at the Petersen auto museum in L.A. Before putting it in there the current owner asked Lisa Marie Presley if she wanted to display it at Graceland with the Stutz and the Cadillacs and Harleys and other toys. "Absolutely not." She said. "My daddy hated that car." "It left him and Linda stranded a bunch of times." "He thought it must have had a Gypsy curse on it or something ."  # 2. Evel Kneival. Evel was a huge Elvis fan-his jumping leathers were a lot like the King's show jump suits. So naturally he had to get a Stutz Blackhawk. His was blue. Evel also had a Ferarri 246 Dino, and a Cadillac Eldorado that was made into an El Camino type pickup. # 3. Steve McQueen. Some high-end sports car dealer back east really stepped in it trying to sell a 1971 Porsche 911S that was supposedly owned by the King of Cool. Actor Chad McQueen-his son-saw the ad and wrote Hemmings Motor News and the dealer a letter rebuking this claim. It basically said-"Gentlemen-"Steve McQueen's personal Porsche 911 is in my garage." It's not a '71 model, it's a 1969 911S." "It never left the family." "He purchased it brand-new in 1969." "He drove it several years and then gave it to my sister." "She kept it many years." "When she died of cancer a few years ago, her husband gave it back to me." "Like I said, it never left the family." "There's no possible way that you have Steve McQueen's 911." "It's in my garage."  The company quickly pulled the ad and apologized and vowed to do some research. Apparently while filming the race-car epic "LeMans" in 1970 and '71-McQueen drove a real Porsche 917 racer in the film, and got a lot help from the factory racing team to make it realistic. One day on the set he was talking to Ferdinand Porsche-the CEO of Porsche-and commented on the wonderful, twisty mountain roads they had in France and said "I wish I had my 911 over here." ":It would be great fun." Having formed a friendship with the star while working on the film, Mr. Porsche wanted to please his friend, so he called Stuttgart and had a new 911S shipped to France, which he said the actor could play with until filming wrapped. We all know pre-'90's 911s do not suffer fools lightly. Even experienced race car drivers like McQueen. Danny Ongais-who won the Indy 500 was once asked-how do you corner fast in your 911? He responded-"I don't corner fast in my 911".Anyhow, in the course of hot-rodding on his day off-McQueen wrecked the car. He wasn't injured, but the car was practically totalled. McQueen offered to pay for it, but Ferdinand Porsche said not to worry about it, they'd write it off as an expense of making the movie. The car was shipped back to Stuttgart and repaired. Even though it had been wrecked it was sold with the story of having been driven by McQueen while filming the movie. Apparently when the last owner sold the car to the dealer he told this story. Either the dealer manager, or an ad salesman at Hemmings-no one will admit it now-misunderstood and instead of saying the car was DRIVEN by McQueen, advertised it as being OWNED by McQueen. The car was eventually sold, at a much lower price than they were initially asking. The buyer was very lucky that Chad McQueen is a gearhead and happened to be reading that magazine and saw that ad and took action. Otherwise he'd have paid many thousands more for the car!! Remember the old saying-"Buyer Beware."  Mastermind            

What part of "Bang for the Buck" are you people not grasping?

I get a lot of flack from people about the opinions I voice on here and most of the time I just ignore them. If some yahoo that drives a Dodge Ram pickup with a sticker of Calvin ( of the comic strip "Calvin&Hobbes ) pissing on a Chevy Bow-Tie wants to tell me that Mopars rule and Chevys suck then that's his opinion and I'll just forget it. Like one of Murphy's Laws-"Never argue with an idiot because people might not know the difference."  That aside, what really burns me up is people saying that I'm too "Old School" and I'm just against anything modern. Really? How many times have I recommended that people use "Vortec" heads when building a small-block Chevy or "Magnum" heads when building a small-block Chrysler?  How many times have I recommended that someone with a GM product should use an HEI distributor instead of a point-type? Or use the Petronix conversion that fits under a point-type cap?  How many times have I recommended that someone with a GM car that has a 2-speed Powerglide / ST300 trans should swap it for a 3-speed TH350? What I'm saying here is I always recommend stuff that offers the most value for the dollar-or as we always say "Bang for the Buck". For example I think aftermarket fuel-injection systems are grossly overpriced. They start at $2,000 in most cases, and for anything other than a small-block Chevy the price is often over $3,000-3,500. Why would you do that when an Edelbrock manifold costs about $200 for most applications and an Edelbrock or Holley carb costs about $400. For $600 "Joe Average" can bolt on his new carb and intake in a couple hours in his driveway with hand tools, and it will run like a champ. Or he can spend 3 or 4 grand and countless hours trying to get the fuel curve right, and it won't run any better, or in some cases not as good as the simple carb and intake!!  High-Performance Pontiac did a comparison test on a hot 455. The fuel injection system cost $3,895 and made 15 hp LESS than the Performer RPM / 850 Holley combo!!  Now why would you spend Four grand to make LESS power??  I think fuel-injection is great-if you have a car that's fuel-injected from the factory-say an '80's or 90's "5.0" or 4.6 Mustang, or an LB9 or L98 Camaro, Firebird or Corvette, ( or later LS models )-they run great stock, and Holley, Accel, Edelbrock, and Trick Flow offer ported manifolds, larger throttle bodies, etc that work in CONJUNCTION with the factory system. I wholeheartedly endorse those products. However I just can't bring myself to tell someone to spend $3,500 on a whole new fuel-injection system that doesn't work as well as a simple $600 carb and intake setup!!!   I know I gripe about people doing it all the time-but if you just ":Gotta Have" fuel-injection on your '67 Mustang-go to a junkyard and get the engine and wiring harness out a wrecked "5.0" and have fun. And this validates my point further-I guarantee the engine, wiring harness and T5 tranny from an '87-95 Mustang-won't cost 4 grand from a junkyard!!!  Another one that irks me is overdrive transmission swaps. Richmond or Tremec 5 or 6-speed conversions cost about 3 grand on up. So your cruising rpm at 70 mph on the freeway will be 600 rpm less? Honestly-if your car came from the factory with a 4 or 5-speed-why can't you just use that?  Or spend 300 bucks changing the rear-axle ratio, rather than 3 grand changing the tranny. Hot Rod did the Tremec swap on "Project Disco". Why? The Car was a '79 Z/28 Camaro. '79 Z/28's had either a BW T10 4-speed or a TH350. Nothing less than stellar to begin with, and either would have worked just fine with the hot rod LS engine they were using. In my opinion they spent ten grand on this car that they didn't need to. 3 for the tranny, and another 3 for the 9 inch Ford rearend. I've said it a million times-Z/28's have an excellent 8.5 inch ring gear 10-bolt Posi from the factory. I've had 400, 4-speed T/A's ( they use the same rear ) that I abused mercilessly and NEVER had an ounce of trouble with the rear end!!  Then they went for the Wildwood 4-wheel disc brake setup that cost another 3 or 4 grand. Again, why? 1970-81 Camaros and Firebirds have excellent brakes to begin with-11" inch rotors up front and 9.5 or 10 inch drums in the rear. I've said it before-I know circle-track racers that run Camaros and have run an 8-lap heat race,a 25 lap semi, and a 50 lap main event back to back to back on a 1/4 mile track  and the brakes never,ever faded, even with the rotors glowing red!  All we had to do was run Dot 5 fluid and semi-metallic "Police" pads! Are the staffers at Hot Rod saying that this system can't stop the car safely in daily driving or on a weekend trip to the drags??  No-they have to showcase their advertisers products to stay in business. That's what I'm saying- a lot of "Gotta Haves" you see in magazines are unnecessary.  Another thing is Roller cams. Most cars built since the '80's have roller cams from the factory. So if your hot rodding a small-block Ford or Chevy from '87 and later or a '92 and later "Magnum" Mopar-Edelbrock, Competition Cams, Lunati, and other companies offer high-performance roller cams for these engines at reasonable prices. But if your building an engine that had a flat-tappet cam from the factory the shoe is on the other foot. Often the parts alone to convert say a 400 Pontiac or a 440 Chrysler or 390 Ford-or anything other than a small-block Chevy- to a roller vavletrain cost $2,000 or more!! Why should you spend 2 grand instead of 3 or 400 for a cam, that isn't going to make any more power or be more reliable than the flat-tappet??!!  That's all I'm saying. Consider the cost versus the gain. Mastermind          

Some forgotten engines that are still viable...

After the last post talking about engines that I would not recommend spending money on, I had some questions about which ones, outside of the obvious would I recommend. Here's the list in no particular order. # 1. 289 Ford. A lot of cars had these from 1963-68. In a light car-Mustang, Cougar, Falcon, Comet or Fairlane-they can really run with the right equipment. In heavier cars, their just too small. # 2. 396 Chevy. With the current "Bigger is Better" trend in the buff magazines, and GMPP selling 502 and 572 inch crate motors, people often overlook the original Rat Motor. However the L78 was rated at 425 hp in the '65 Corvette-just 25 hp shy of the legendary LS6. There was a lot of them produced between 1965 and 1972. ( Technically after 1970 they were 402 inches, but some Chevelles, El Caminos and Camaros were still marketed as SS396s ). Anyhow if you have a 396 / 402 or can buy one for a reasonable price by all means use it. You can make just as much power as a 454, just at a little higher rpm. # 3. 383 / 400 Chrysler. The "Bigger is Better" thing has infected Mopar enthusiasts as well.  With Mopar Performance selling 472 and 528 inch Hemis and 505 inch wedges, a 426 Hemi or a 440 is now "Entry Level", or so it would seem. However, there's a lot of cars out there built from 1963-71 with 383s and from 1972-78 with 400s that have a ton of potential. You can make just as much power as a 440 with a 383 / 400, just at a little higher rpm. If you have one, don't chuck it and spend a bunch of unnecessary money buying and building a 440. Remember the axiom "Biggest engine you can afford". Emphasis on the "Afford" part. # 4. 430 Buick. Buick enthusiasts will fight with machetes for a 455, but these are often overlooked. They were used in practically every model from 1966-69. Any speed equipment-heads, intakes, cams, etc that fit a 455 will fit these so there's plenty of parts available. And anything 430 cubes is going to have some serious torque. # 5. 428 Pontiac. Poncho enthusiasts primarily concentrate on the 400 used from '67-78 and the 455 used from 1970-76. The "hot" thing in the buff magazines now is to put a cut-down 455 crank into a .030 over 400 block to make 461 inches.( I say cut-down because 400s have 3.00 inch main bearings and 455s have 3.25 inch mains. These builders are making 4.21 and 4.25 inch cranks with the smaller 3 inch mains to be more reliable at high rpm. Smokey Yunick was doing this in the early '60s when he and Fireball Roberts were the scourge of NASCAR. He was cutting down 421 cranks and putting them in 389 blocks. They won 22 races in the 1962-63 season ) Anyhow-428s were only built from 1967-69, but they were used in almost every model-mostly "big" cars. If you have one or can buy one cheap by all means use it. They can make every bit as much power and torque as a 455, and rev higher. If you want to-Eagle, Kauffman and Butler performance also offer 4.00 inch stroke cranks and rotating assemblys if you want to make a 428 / 433 from a 400.  # 6. 403 Olds. These were only built from 1977-79 but there were millions of them used in Olds 88s and 98s, Buick Rivieras, Electras, and Park Avenues, Pontiac Catalinas and Bonnevilles,and Trans-Am and Formula Firebirds. Anything that fits a 350 Olds will fit these so there's plenty of speed equipment-intakes, cams, headers, etc.  403s actually made more torque than the 400 Pontiacs, at a lower rpm. The only reason people think their "dogs" is the fact that except for  WS6 Formulas and T/A's that had 3.23:1 gears-they were used in big, heavy cars with salt-flats gearing like 2.41:1 or 2.56:1.  If you have a 330 or 350 inch Cutlass, a 403 is a bolt-in swap, and 53-73 extra cubes will give you a nice power and torque boost, either stock or modified. Hope this helps. Mastermind

Engines not worth your time or money.....

Had some people ask me to elaborate on a previous post where I had said that certain engines aren't worth your time or money-that they'd be more useful as boat anchors. This is usually because their either obsolete-remember the Flathead Ford reference? Or even if their not obsolete-there is zero parts availability, or their too small to make serious power. And some of these can come from a family that has a highly desirable engine in it. Here's some that you should avoid.  # 1. 332-352-360 Ford. These are technically an "FE" engine-the same family that includes the 390, the 427 and the 428. You never see a 332-their too old. Unless your restoring a 1960 T-Bird or '65 Galaxie to the nth degree for concours shows I'd forget a 352. The reason is there big and heavy-like a 428-but their only 352 cubes. In any performance application you'd be much better off with the much lighter, and better power producing 351W and 351C engines. As for the 360-they were used in trucks and had the dual attributes of no power and crappy gas mileage. I'm not kidding-I don't know what Ford was thinking. Again their only 360 cubes and their a small-bore design. You'd be way better off with a 351W.  Any performance parts that fit a 390-i.e. intakes, headers etc will fit these-but why? Stock or modified they still don't make anywhere near the power and torque a 390 does. Honestly the only "FE" engines worth having are the 390,427 and 428 inchers.  # 2. 265-283-307 Chevy. Unless your restoring a '55 Chevy or a '57 Corvette to the nth degree, I have no idea why anyone would want a 265 or 283 inch Chevy. They run fine for a small engine, but that's the problem. A 327 or 350 costs no more to buy or build yet makes substantially more power. The 307 was created by putting a 327 crank in a 283 block, to make a torquey, "entry-level" V8 for Chevy trucks and station wagons back in the '60's. Again-especially since they had 2bbl carburation and single-exhaust and were usually in trucks or heavy cars-Chevelle wagons, etc-they weren't bad-they ran ok and got decent gas mileage. But their only 307 cubes. A 327 or 350 makes way more power and torque and costs no more to buy or build. The same goes for the 305 made from 1977-1995. The 307 had been dropped after 1973. Why they decided in '77 to cast another small-bore block and throw a 350 crank in it-is beyond me. Anyone who owned or drove any Chevy car or truck from the '80's or '90's hates 305s. They have no power,and don't really get any better gas mileage than the much more powerful 350!  # 3. 265-301 Pontiac. These were lightweight "economy" V8s, and nothing interchanges with the "traditional" 326-455 engines. If you have or want to buy an '80-81 301 Turbo Formula or Trans-Am, I hope your doing it with the intention of swapping in a 400 or 455, or changing the transmission as well and swapping in a small or big-block Chevy! I'm serious. There is zero aftermarket parts available for the 301.  # 4. 260-307 Olds . I don't know why GM thought it was cool to build small V8s that had no power and got crappy gas mileage in the late '70's and '80's, but they did. These wheezed out 120-140 hp, and made the Cutlasses and other cars they were in complete slugs. Some things like heads and intakes will interchange with a 350, but why? A hotted-up 307 won't really run noticably better than a stock 350! And probably won't have as much torque. If you have or want to buy a Cutlass or Buick Regal that has one of these engines, the easy path to power is swap in a 350 / 403. It's a bolt-in.  # 5. 300-327-340 Buick. These small V8s were used in a lot of Buick Skylarks in the '60's. The 327 was used in a lot of Jeep Wagonneers. The problem is there is zero aftermarket replacement parts for these engines, and they don't make anywhere near the power of the more modern '68-77 350 V8. I had a friend who bought a '64 Skylark Convertible that had the 300 / ST300 powertrain. He swapped in a 350 / TH350 combo-a bolt-in by the way-and was astounded at the improvement in performance and drivability. It had way more power and was much nicer to drive, and got better gas mileage!  # 6. 361 Chrysler. These are a "B" engine, which means their a big-block. However-their only 361 cubes. In any performance application-an "LA" 360 or a 360 Magnum is much lighter and will make more power. Or just get a 383 or 400. Or a 440-the intake manifolds don't interchange with "B" and "RB" engines, but everything else does. A 361 is pretty much a waste of time and money. # 7. 351M /400C / M  Ford. These are kind of a pariah. The 400 was used in a lot of Ford cars and trucks and vans from 1971-82. The 351M was used from 1975-82. Although they use "Cleveland" style heads, nothing interchanges with the 351C engines used from 1970-74. The problem is twofold. One-they were saddled with 8:1 compression, a lazy cam, 2bbl carburation and single exhaust, and they were put in heavy cars,trucks and vans with salt-flats gearing like 2.75:1. Two, their big and heavy-almost exactly the same size and weight as a 429 / 460-and share the 429 / 460 bellhousing bolt-pattern. The smart hot-rodder or engine swapper would just get a 460 and reap the reward of the 460's mountainous torque. On the upside-if you have one of these already in the car or truck-they do respond well to basic hot rod tricks. A 4bbl carb and intake and headers and dual exhausts will make a spectacular improvement in hp and torque. Edelbrock and Trick Flow sell high performance heads for these engines, and Edelbrock,Crane, Lunati and Comp Cams offer cams and valvetrain accessories. Just about every year someone enters one of these in the engine masters challenge and pegs the dyno over 450-500 hp. They can make some good power with the right combination of parts. Like I said-if you have one already in the car-by all means hop it up. But I wouldn't go searching for one or try to swap a 351W or a 390 for one. If I was going to the trouble of a Ford engine swap-we all know their not as interchangeable as GM and Chrysler stuff-then I'd go for the big dog 429 / 460.  # 8. 290 / 304 AMC.  Back in the late '60's and early '70's Trans-Am racing was popular and the displacement limit was 5.0 liters ( 305 cid ). All the manufacturers played-in '65 and '66 the 289 Ford and 273 Mopar did nicely. In 1967 Chevrolet jumped into the fray by putting a 283 crank into a 327 block and creating the mighty Z/28 302, which won the championship in '68.  Ford countered in 1969 with the legendary Boss 302.  Pontiac and Chrysler dabbled in it with de-stroked 400s and 340s, but weren't really competitive. While this was going on, AMC was playing with their little 290 inch V8 which was later bumped up to 304. When they wooed Roger Penske and Mark Donohue away from Chevrolet in 1970-it was a bold move and Donohue won the title in '71. Although AMC advertised this hugely on TV and in the buff magazines-it was kind of a hollow victory. Ford pulled out after 1970 which was why there wasn't a '71 Boss 302. Pontiac and Chrysler gave up completely, and Chevrolet gave some back-door support to some racers, but there wasn't a real factory effort. So AMC's Penske-led factory team trouncing a bunch of low-budget privateers isn't the upset of the ages they were making it out to be. Anyway-a 290 / 304 is too small for real performance work. I've said it before-AMC's are like Pontiacs-their all externally identical so swapping is easy. And there's millions of 360s in junkyards in Jeep Grand Wagonneers and pickups. If you have a Javelin or Rebel Machine or Matador with a 343, 390 or 401-by all means use it. I'm just saying if you have a Javelin with a 304-or a Gremlin or Hornet for that matter-a 360 is a bolt-in power infusion, and if their modified the 56 extra cubes makes a huge difference. Mastermind          

Still more on the path of most resistance....

Got a bunch more questions after the last post about projects that would be expensive at the least, and practically impossible at the worst. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to ridicule people for asking questions-but when I explain in detail why something isn't a good idea or would be so costly in dollars and time spent that your better off going in another direction entirely and they persist with their "Impossible Dream" it pisses me off.  And the people that come-up with these hair-brained ideas are never professional mechanics or engineers-a mechanic or an engineer would know better!!  These are always people who have no experience whatsoever working on a car, and they want to take on some huge project that requires a ton of money and or custom fabrication. And when you tell them their plan is not a good idea, or isn't even possible, they get all huffy and indignant. Here's a few that will amaze you. # 1. Home-built induction systems. I talked to two people who actually suggested casting their own intake manifold. The first one had a '64 Olds 442 that he wanted to put tri-power ( 3-2bbls ) on like a GTO. I explained that neither Oldsmobile or Edelbrock or Offenhauser or Weiand have never offered a tri-power manifold for the 330 / 350 / 403 Olds engines. I further explained that the late '50's / early '60's J-2 tri-power setups on the old 394 V8s wouldn't fit the later 400 / 425 / 455 engines because of the difference in deck height and that the '65 and later engines are a 39 degree bank angle which is different than the older ones, which is why the heads and intakes don't interchange. I did say that Oldsmobile did offer tri-power on the modern 400 for one year only-1966-but they were extremely rare, and it would be hard to find one for sale at any price. He wonders if someone would lend him their ultra-rare L69 1966 Olds Tri-power intake so he could take it to a foundry and they could fill it with sand and make a mold to custom cast him a replica. I replied that if you know someone who has an L69 442 and is willing to pull the intake and let you fill it with sand, then more power to you, but none of my friends are that accomodating!!  He then suggest getting a Pontiac tri-power intake, cutting the top off it, getting a 4-bbl Olds intake, cutting the bottom off it, welding the pieces together and taking that to a foundry to cast an aluminum intake. Well, first off-I say either factory or aftermarket Barry Grant Pontiac Tri-power intakes are not cheap, and it would be very hard to cut a cast-iron one in half and even harder to weld it back together, and you can't really weld aluminum because it melts-I know there's very specialized shops that CAN weld aluminum-but are they going to be willing to mess with some guys ill-fated home-built intake manifold project, and how much are they going to charge?  I just don't see how it's feasible in any way shape or form, either mechanically or financially. He calls me a "naysayer". Ok. Had a similar conversation with another genius that had a small-block Chevy. He wanted to know if you could adapt carburators to an '82-84 Cross-Fire Injection manifold. Why? I ask. If you've got a Corvette or Camaro / Firebird that has that induction system-you can use larger 454 truck throttle bodies and with a little tuning that setup can handle 350-400 hp reliably. If you want dual-quads-Edelbrock makes excellent dual-quad intakes for small-block Chevys. He says "Yes, but their inline" "I love the Cross-ram look". I reply that it will probably be pricey-$1,500 or more- but if he's "Gotta Have" a cross-ram setup to check Hemmings and the internet-that occasionally you see someone selling an original Chevy Cross-ram intake and 600 holley setup that was optional on '67-69 Z/28s and that Chevy dealers sold over-the-counter to racers. This guy then wonders if anyone makes adapters to mount carbs where the throttle bodies go on the Cross-Fire intake, or if it would feasible to try to cast your own-if you could find a '69 Z/28 Cross-ram intake that someone is willing to let you pound sand into and around to make the mold!!!  I know marijuana is legal now in most states-but what strain are these guys smoking??  # 2. Mid-engine "Kit Car". This guy had a friend who was selling an old "Manta Ray" kit car. They were popular back in the '70's and '80's. Daniel-Hugh Kelly drove one on the TV show "Hardcastle&McCormack". They looked like a Can-Am racer. A lot were VW based, but they also sold some custom frames that could use a V8. I know three people that built them. One guy used a 327 Chevy mated to a Corvair transaxle. That one worked pretty good. Another guy used the Corvair transaxle, but he'd adapted it to a 215 inch Aluminum Buick V8 out of a '63 Skylark. That worked pretty well too. The third guy used a 455 Olds and a Toronado transaxle. Since the car only weighed about 2,300 lbs it was ungodly fast. I suggested either using the Small-block Chevy / Corvair transaxle setup or the Toronado / Eldorado transaxle with a 400 Pontiac and aluminum heads to keep the weight down. "What about an aluminum 427 Chevy?"  he asks. Ugh!!  "Well, I know GMPP is selling 427s with aluminum blocks and heads, but they cost about 20 grand." Plus-a Corvair transaxle is barely strong enough to stand up to a mild 350-a 427 would break it the first time you got on it."  "The Toronado transaxle is tough enough to stand up to a 455 Olds, or Pontiac-but the bellhousing bolt pattern on Chevy engines is totally different from BOPC ( Buick, Olds, Pontiac, and Cadillac ) engines." "The Chevy won't bolt up." "Trust me, even an 8:1 bone-stock '77 400 Pontiac would run 12s in that ultra light car." "Does anyone make an adapter kit?"  "To mate Chevy engines to BOP bellhousings or vice-versa?" "No!!"  With millions of factory and Lakewood bellhousings and millions of TH350 / 400s  out there why would they??!!  I then suggest if he wants to save money and be cool that he go to a junkyard and get a Supercharged 3.8 V6 and the wiring harness and the transaxle out of a Buick Riviera or Pontiac Bonneville SSEI. 240 hp would make the 2,300 lb fiberglass wonder a rocket, and get 25 mpg. "But Can-Am cars didn't have Buick V6s or Pontiac V8s, they had big-block Chevys!" He sneers. "But your not restoring a Can-Am racer-it's a kit car." "It's a replica anyway." "I'll find a way to run the Rat motor." "I'm not trying to be rude-never mind cost-I don't see how you can." "Nobody makes a transaxle."  "You just don't understand." He's right, I don't.  Mastermind      

The path of most resistance...Again...

For some unknown reason, gearheads seem to think that some things are somehow better if their hard to do. Not true. I went to the school of  "Take the path of least resistance" and "Work smart, not hard". I bring this up because of a couple conversations I had this past week. A guy had bought a '65 Olds Cutlass ( not a 442 ) and wanted to trick it out. He had a bunch of ideas he'd pulled out of magazines, and they were all bad. When I say bad-I mean they'd be hard to do, very expensive, and might not deliver the "Bang for the Buck" he was looking for. The first was the powertrain. The car was a 330 V8 / ST 300 model. He had this article where someone had gotten a 350 Olds Diesel Block and bored it out and used a cut-down 425 olds crank, and 455 Buick rods, a ton of custom machine work, and custom pistons, etc, etc and got 440 inches. I suggested instead of trying that-he just buy a 455. The 455 was used in practically every Olds model from 1968-76, and in many medium-duty GM motorhomes in the late '70's and early '80's. There are literally millions of them out there. If you can't find a '73 Olds Delta 88 or a '76 Toronado  with a 455 in a junkyard or someones garage-you aren't looking past the end of your nose. Instead of spending all that money on machine work boring and stroking a Diesel block-a 455 with some Edelbrock Heads, a Torker Intake, and W30 cam would kick ass for less than half of what he'd spend on the stroker 440 and probably be more reliable. Or if he wanted to go really low-budget I told him to get a 403. They were used in millions of GM "big" cars-in the late '70's-Olds 88's and 98's, wagons,Buick Rivieras, Electras, and Park Avenues, Pontiac Catalinas and Bonnevilles,and Trans-Am and Formula Firebirds. And they are a direct bolt-in swap for a 330 / 350. A set of headers, an Edelbrock Performer intake and maybe a mild cam would really "wake up" a 403. 73 extra inches would certainly add a lot of power and torque for very low bucks. I also suggested swapping the ST300 for a TH350. TH350's are the exact same length as an ST300 / Powerglide and use the same rear trans mount and driveshaft yoke. It, too would literally be a bolt-in, and the 3-speed, 2.52 low geared TH350 would offer a stunning improvement in performance over the 2-speed, 1.76 low-geared ST300. I suggested that the 403 / TH350 swap would be easy, cheap and offer a huge improvement in performance. Like talking  to the wall. He continues trying to sell me on the stroked-out 350 diesel block, and asks how much trouble it would be to put a Tremec 5-speed in it!! More than it's worth I say-you'd have to chase down clutch linkage, pedals,get a  different crossmember and rear trans mount, a bellhousing, cut a whole in the floorboard to mount the shifter, etc. And since 350 Diesels were never offered with a stick in any GM car or truck-where are you going to get a flywheel? You might be able to use a gas 350 Olds flywheel-but Olds hasn't sold a car with a 350 and a manual trans since 1974. Where are you going to find a usable 44 year old flywheel?  I don't think Schiefer or Ram or anyone makes aftermarket 350 Olds flywheels!!  I implored him to take my advice and do the 403 / TH350 swap or even a 455 / TH350 swap. Then he starts talking about upgrading the suspension and brakes. He's bringing up Global West this, and Detroit Speed and Engineering that and rack&pinion steering and Brembo and Wildwood, blah, blah. Stop I say. Go to a junkyard and get '70's Camaro / Firebird spindles and the 11 inch rotors. They are literally a bolt-on. Also get the calipers, hoses, and master cylinder and booster. For very low bucks, you'll have front disc brakes that perform flawlessly. I also suggested getting the steering box from a mid-'80's WS6 Trans-Am. I even looked up the part number. This box has a 12.7:1 ratio, and will fit all GM "A" "F" and "G" bodies from 1964-87. I also suggested getting the sway bars from a '70's T/A-they will bolt onto the "A" bodies, and give a stunning improvement in handling. I also suggest getting the sway bars from a '70's Gran Prix or Monte Carlo-they too would be a direct bolt-on and improve handling immensely. Nope. He's determined to take on this project that will suck the life out of him, drain his bank account, and probably cause him to sell the car unfinished. Why?  Just because something is possible, doesn't mean you should attempt it. We know manned space flight is possible, but it isn't cheap or easy!!  The other was with a guy who had bought a '70 Javelin and wanted to do it in Trans-Am style like Mark Donohue's racer. Minilite wheels are still available, and the red,white and blue paint job is easy enough. Now the problem. Again-the powertrain. The car is a 304 / Automatic. I suggest going to a junkyard and getting a 360 out of a Jeep Grand Waggoneer. There's millions of them. I point out that the 360 will be a direct bolt-in, and have substantially more power and torque than a 304-that I read at the engine masters challenge some guy had a 360 AMC with Edelbrock Heads and a hot cam that made something like 430 hp and 450 lbs of torque. First he asks if I'm recommending an engine swap why didn't I suggest a 401?  UGH! Because, I gently say the 401 has been out of production since 1978-that's 40 years-and they were pretty rare back then. By contrast-the 360 was used in millions of Grand Waggoneers up until 1993, and are still plentiful in boneyards. What about hopping up the 304? he asks. "Why?" I say-your not running in a racing class where the limit is 5 liters-and a 304 will cost just as much to build as the 360, but won't have nearly as much power." Then he asks about converting it to a 4 or 5-speed. UGH. "Just sell the car, and find another Javelin / AMX that has a 343 / 360 / 390 / 401 and a 4-speed from the factory." "No really." "No, REALLY." I say. "Converting any automatic car to a stick is a sonofabitch-you have to buy the clutch, the transmission, the bellhousing, the clutch linkage, the pedals, the crossmember, the rear trans mount, the shifter, etc etc." "And that's if it's something popular-you know like a '70's Camaro or Chevelle, or Mustang or Dodge Challenger-where all that stuff is readily available." "Where in the hell are you going to find all that shit for a Javelin?" "Chances are you won't, and even if you do it's going to be major-league expensive, and a pain in the ass to do." "Trust me, you'll go plenty fast with the 360 / Automatic combo."  "What about fabricating a hydraulic linkage?"  Arrrrgggghhhh!!!!  I feel like the dictator from "Team America". "Why is everybody so fu$%*ing stupid??"  Why can't they embrace the KISS principle-"Keep It Simple, Stupid".  Mastermind        

Clarification on some old hot rod axioms....

Many self-proclaimed "experts" spout stuff they've read in the buff magazines or on the internet, but they have no practical experience. They've never built or rebuilt an engine, never built and maintained a race car or swapped engines or trannys or gear ratios. They don't know what their talking about, and they often give people terrible advice. It's funny, how some people will listen to some idiot, but disregard the advice of someone with many years of experience. Anyhow I want to dispel some misconceptions that are perpetuated and help people with potential projects save time and money, and get the most value for the money they do invest.  # 1. "Always build the biggest engine you can afford". This is generally good advice, but the key word is "Afford". For example-a 350 Chevy costs no more to buy or build than a 305, yet makes substantially more power and torque with the same equipment. Anyone with common sense would go with a 350. Now let's say the 350 you have in the car or have just bought from a buddy or a junkyard has a spun crank bearing and needs to be rebuilt. Since your going to have to buy a new crank anyway, and probably have to have the block bored .030 over anyway, and since 383 stroker crank rod and piston kits with rings and bearings and oil pump are as low as $399 in PAW or Summitt-The wise man would build a 383-which is going to have even more power and torque than the 350.  Now-for argument's sake let say you've got a 400 Pontiac. You should buy a stroker crank kit and make it a 461, right?  Wrong!!  Here's why. Here's why-the stroker crank, rod and piston kits for Pontiacs that are sold by Kauffman and Butler Performance start at $1699. $1700 will buy you an Edelbrock carb and intake a cam kit, a set of headers, a set of gears for the rear end and still leave about $400 for any minor machine work-like having the crank turned .010 under or grinding the valves in the heads. You could build your whole engine for that and with the right combination of parts easily have 400 hp and 450 lbs of torque. I know-the 400 in my brother's GTO cost $1900 to build and dyno'd at 381 hp and 430 lbs of torque, and he has a cam that idles glass-smooth and makes 15 inches of vacuum at idle. If he went with a slightly hotter cam-he'd have easily been over the 400 hp mark, and not really lost any drivability. A magazine re-built a junkyard 455 Pontiac that made 440 hp and they bragged that it cost "only" $4,400 to build. So you can see-in this case-the larger engine isn't really a bargain. It would double the cost to build a 455 / 461 from a 400, and the slight power gain wouldn't be worth the dollar outlay. Here's a couple more examples showing both ways. Let's say you have a '70's Duster / Dart or  Challenger / Barracuda with a dying 318. You know your going to have to rebuild or replace it. You'd like to have some serious power, but don't have the time or money to invest in a 440 or a Crate Hemi, and swap the crossmember, transmission,radiator, torsion bars etc that a big-block swap would entail. What to do? Go to a junkyard and get a 360 Magnum out of late-model Dodge truck or van or Jeep Grand Cherokee. There's millions of them. But get the 360-not the 318. In modern speak a 318 is a 5.2 liter V8, a 360 is a 5.9 liter V8. I know-I priced them when my mom blew the engine in her Cherokee. The "Magnum" engines are all about the same price in boneyards regardless of size. And parts to rebuild them if necessary-i.e.-rings, bearings, cam and lifters etc-are the same price for either engine. But the 360's make way more power. You'll need a "Magnum" compatible intake but Edelbrock sells them for about $200. In this case-like with the small-block Chevys-the bigger engine makes substantially more power,but costs no more to buy or build than the smaller one. Now let's say you have a late 60's or early '70's Mustang or Cougar with a 302. Everyone tells you how "easy" it would be to swap in a  351C. Not true. 1st off-you'd have to buy the 351, and Fords are all different-the oil pans don't interchange,the accesories-power steering pump,water pump, alternator, and the attending brackets are all different. The bellhousing bolt-pattern is different on 302 and 351C Ford engines so you'd need a new tranny as well. Especially since there's more speed equipment for a small-block Ford than anything else on the planet except a Small-block Chevy-you can see that the easiest and most cost-effective way to increasing power would be to hop up the 302. See what I'm saying? Here's yet another scenario. Don't throw away a perfectly good 396 Chevy or 383 Mopar and spend thousands you don't need to buying a building a 440 or 454!!   So weigh the options carefully-and remember the "Afford" part of the saying.  # 2. "A single 4bbl on a dual-plane intake is the only way to fly". This is magazine writers trying to protect idiots from themselves. Whether it's 3-2bbls or dual quads-on a 283 or 409 Chevy or 389 / 421 Pontiac or a 440 / Hemi Mopar or 427 Ford whatever-multiple carb setups can really rock if their set up right. For years-import sports cars like Datsun 240Z's, Porsche 911s, Jaguar XKEs, Triumph TR6s, and  Ferarris and Lamborginis all used multi-carb setups. The manufacturers both foriegn and domestic started switching to single carbs and later fuel-injection because of ever-tightening emission standards, not lack of  performance!!  I've said it before-but I see it all the time with Six-Pack Mopars, 427 'Vettes, Tri-power GTOs etc. They drive the car like grandma on prozac and the second it fouls a spark plug, they start screwing around with the carbs. Pretty soon it won't even start, much less run properly. It would be better to go a range or two hotter on the plugs if your going to idle around, and then change to the standard heat range if you decide to go to the drags or take a road trip! And the dual-plane vs single-plane argument is again magazine writers and parts suppliers trying to protect idiots from themselves. Here's why. Moron reads an intake manifold "shootout" in a magazine. The test mule is a small-block Chevy. The "winner" that makes the most hp and torque is a 750 Double-pumper Holley carb mounted on a Holley / Keith Dorton single-plane that barely edged the Edelbrock Victor Jr. Said moron races down to local speed shop and buys this combo and puts it on his '78 Camaro. He's aghast. It runs like shit, stumbles, and doesn't even have the power it did stock. That's because the Dorton / Victor Jr intakes are designed for NASCAR racing and make power from 4,000-8,500 rpm. And he forgot or didn't read that the test mule was an 11.4:1 406 with 215cc Dart Heads and a .600 lift cam that made 500 hp and 460 lbs of torque!!!  So putting this NASCAR induction on his stock 8.5:1 350 that has stock 153cc heads, a .390 lift cam, makes 170 hp and 280 lbs of torque at the PEAK, has a TH350 and 2.73:1 gears and is all done in by 5,000 rpm is  just killed by it!!  He'd have been way better off with an Edelbrock Performer and a vacuum-secondary 600 cfm carb. Now if he'd had an L82 Corvette with a 4-speed and 3.70:1 gears he would really rock from about 2,500 rpm on up with a single-plane Torker II and a 750 double-pumper, or even the Victor Jr because it has the heads and the cam and the valve springs and the gearing to rev to 6.500 and beyond. My 442 really rocked with an original Torker, as did my brother's GTO and a buddy's SS396 Chevelle. The reason was the 396, the 400 and the 455 had massive torque to start with, so losing a little on the bottom-end actually helped the cars launch better by reducing wheelspin, and the powerband "hit" like "gangbusters" at 2,800 and pulled hard to 6,000+. Even my 8:1, 2.56:1 geared 403 Olds powered '77 T/A showed a noticeable increase in performance with a single-plane Holley Street Dominator. It made 325 lbs of torque at 1,600 rpm-right off idle-and I din't notice any low-speed loss. I did notice a HUGE diference from 3,000-5,400!! I personally love single-planes, on the right combo. But the mags are trying to protect idiots like the one mentioned.  # 3. Gears Make it Go. To an extent. If you have a disco era T/A with 2.56:1 gears switching to 3.23:1 or 3.42:1 gears will cut 1/2 a second or more off your 0-60 and 1/4 mile time and not hurt drivability too much. If 3.42:1s are great, wouldn't 4.33:1s be totally awesome? No! Because the engine-that's all done in by 5,200-5,500 rpm would run out of rpm before the end of the 1/4 and the engine buzzing at 4,000 rpm on the freeway wouldn't make for a pleasant driving experience!! See what I'm saying? Remember the 454 Chevelle I talked about that ran 12.80's with 2.73:1 gears and only 12.40's with 4.10:1s? The gearing has to be matched to the engine's powerband. A Boss 302 runs great with 3,91:1 or 4.30:1 gears, because the motor has the ability to rev to 7,000+ rpm!  A 351W would run out of rpm with those gears, and probably do better with 3.25:1 or 3.50:1 gears. Hope this helps people build the right combinations. Mastermind