Re: stupid ?
 

If I still had some W motor stuff, I'd be keeping it to myself. I was a fool for letting it get away. It's too damned expensive and too damned hard to find now. I'd probably be too scared to race it, unless I'd gathered up more stuff.

Re: stupid ?
 

In the mid 60's. My brothers 63 Super Sport 327/300 with a 4 speed and 4:88 gear, 7" recap slicks, no headers but a nicely done set of fenderwell cutouts driven to the track (PID) ran 14.22's. No competition for the Jenkins preped Vette running the same class. A friend's 62 or 63 Catilina factory 389 tri-power 4 speed car also ran 14.20's.

Re: stupid ?
 

Maybe I am stupid, however I am building a 61 Impala 2dr hardtop for super stock.

Car is allmost done. One peice drive shaft, 4 link Ford 9". G Force trans.

Jim Davis

Re: stupid ?
 

Doesn't sound stupid to me. All of the hi po 409's ran a 4 speed. The 348 might work pretty well with an automatic,with the available torque, a powerglide might be the hot set up. Could you imagine what a nasty legal 348 would do to a metric 200?If that set up gets approved as a turboglide replacement, it might just work pretty well.Also,check if the 340 horse 409 heads and intake are legally allowable updated replacement parts for the earlier 348 stuff. Also, I knew of someone who tried a 348 and the factory aluminum intake for the hi po motor was allowed. Now,good luck finding it.

Re: stupid ?
 

I am going to start out with a big block to sort out me and the car.

Once I get that done then I am going to try either 360 HP (single 4 Bl) or

409 HP (dual 4 Bl) depending on the HP they make. If that don't work out I can

go to small blocks or GT and run lots of combinations.

First thing I have to do is make the car work, which is next.

Jim Davis

Re: stupid ?
 

Jim, I would definitely be looking at a 348 for SS more so that Stock.

Re: stupid ?
 

Seems to me that Herman Chapman did this years ago.I remember a Super Stock and Drag Illustrated issue in about 1976 where he did that with a 348 250 horse combo.It was pretty wild for its time. Now, who has a stack of old Super Stock magazines?

Re: stupid ?
 

I see a lot of these X frame cars in the old magazines. What did they use for rear suspension? Did anyone make a bolt on traction device?

Re: stupid ?
 

This is from memory, haven't had one of those cars in years, but I think this is correct: They had a three link, one upper and two lowers. Think of the later model cars, A and B body, with one upper control arm left off. Back in the day, a lot of people went to a salvage yard, and cut the control arm bracket off the frame and rearend housing of a wreck, and put the second upper control arm on. Don't think NHRA would really like that. Off hand, I do not know what the aftermarket offers for it.

Re: stupid ?
 

I flowed some 256 casting number heads years ago researching a '61 305 hp 348 and the numbers showed them to be competitive against a 461 small block head. The question was always what the 75 degree block surface would do to the flow.