CLASS RACER FORUM
Page 51 of 59 « First 414950 51 5253 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

CLASS RACER FORUM (https://classracer.com/classforum/index.php)
-   Stock and Super Stock (https://classracer.com/classforum/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH! (https://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=34410)

Jim Caughlin 12-09-2022 04:33 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmantle (Post 672071)
Curious if anyone knows the history of the C5 head being approved for use on a 64 production engine. Many years ago I worked for a Ford rebuilder, only saw C5 heads used on 6 bolt blocks which didn't come out until 65.

Jim Mantle V/SA 6632
I know how it happened but had to swear not give out the details...

Dyno 12-09-2022 04:38 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
I found the nicest low mileage 1982 Camaro, however it has the 2.5 Iron Duke/Turbo200 combination. I think it fits in W/SA. Has anyone ever tried this combination before? Thanks! Dyno

Doug Hoven 12-09-2022 04:39 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henrys Toy (Post 672060)
Good morning Doug and to all,
I'm in the middle classes today and I noticed your reply, I always liked those Ford bodies but what would be the "natural" class weight of that car work out to be?
I have to agree with Joe that finding a suitable body at a somewhat reasonable cost is going to be a little tuff these days. As I remember those cars were pretty "tinny" - meaning light. What does that combination have to weight?
Have a Good Day and a Nice Weekend.

Respectfully,
Henry Kunz 1534 H/SA
The car would have to weigh 2896 with driver in it's natural class of N/SA. Add or take away 94 pounds to make M or O.

Tom P 12-09-2022 05:08 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
That weight would be doable and 65-66 Mustang hardtops are sometimes not too expensive. Lots out there and easy to get parts for.

Since a 64 1/2 Mustang is called a 1965 model maybe that's why the heads are allowed.

Marty Knox 12-10-2022 09:24 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyno (Post 672076)
I found the nicest low mileage 1982 Camaro, however it has the 2.5 Iron Duke/Turbo200 combination. I think it fits in W/SA. Has anyone ever tried this combination before? Thanks! Dyno
I have always wanted a 4 cylinder Camaro. Twice I thought I had a deal to buy one, but they both fell through. But I don't think 1982 4 cyl. Camaro is in the guide.

Dyno 12-10-2022 09:45 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty Knox (Post 672146)
I have always wanted a 4 cylinder Camaro. Twice I thought I had a deal to buy one, but they both fell through. But I don't think 1982 4 cyl. Camaro is in the guide.
Fits U, V or W/SA. First year of the TB fuel injection.

mike britt 12-10-2022 10:10 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
The throttle body on it probably isn't much smaller than the one on the 305 and 350 TPI motors.

brian schuetta 12-12-2022 07:20 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
Curious as to how much a nice 82' Camaro 4 cylinder costs?

Billy Nees 12-12-2022 07:37 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian schuetta (Post 672224)
Curious as to how much a nice 82' Camaro 4 cylinder costs?
It won't be the price, it will be the finding one.

Billy Nees 12-12-2022 07:41 PM
Re: Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom P (Post 672080)
Since a 64 1/2 Mustang is called a 1965 model maybe that's why the heads are allowed.
I'd like to see you explain that comment to someone who restores/collects 64 1/2 Mustangs! It would probably be like explaining to a restorer that your AMX or 273 Valiant cane with an Edelbrock intake.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:57 AM.
Page 51 of 59 « First 414950 51 5253 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Class Racer.com. All Rights Reserved. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.