Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

44 6409 C/S Aubrey Bruneau, Hanna AB, '62 Chevy 11.067 11.65 -0.583
Nice run, Is this the only 409 in stock, Paul.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

It's really refreshing and fun to see the old high-performance cars being brought back. I remember when the 409's were new and just being sorted out with 4.56's and Bucron tires, and guys were struggling to get them into the "good" 12's....

This new example is really flying.... Congratulations to him!!!!


Bill

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Just returned from IHRA division race at Martin. There is a 61 409 4 speed running stock elim.
Gerry Gostenik G/S 11.804.in qualifying.
Great looking car. Black with red guts.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

It is nice to see Aubrey out there dumping the clutch and getting some good runs in! He definately has been paying his dues on this combo. Great Job Aubrey! Hopefully, he has some video on it for us stick guys.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

very nice, no cookie cutter thats for sure.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Congratulations to Aubrey on the fine performance of his 409.That's about 1.60 quicker than my red 62 Impala SS ever went with a wide ratio Muncie, 4.88's, and a very stock 409/409 motor. You've certainly worked hard for it. I'm a 409 guy from 30+ years ago. Back then, that was the cheapest 400+ horsepower motor you could buy.I wish we had some of those parts back!!We sure were ahead of our time, then. Again, our regards on a great effort.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Aubrey ran good. He probably would have been in the tens had he not broke a rear end. The car got a lot of attention including from Bob Frey who was a guest at Mission's track on Saturday. The car is very nostalgic.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Yeah, the cars certainly nostalgic, but how about his tow rig? A 58 or 59 2 ton (I think) Chevy with a 409 as well, manual steering & brakes, towing a 5th wheel open trailer. Aubreys 122 mph indicate that the 62 should dip well into the 10`s once he gets it dialed in. Hopefully he gets the diff problems squared away, and gets the car out again soon. It was nice to meet ya Aubrey.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

I agree Rory,,It was nice to finally meet Aubrey. I spent a little time with him on Friday. He was concerned with jetting now that he was a lot closer to sea level, and getting his tire pressure right. He deffinately blew the tires off it on the first hit Fri. AM,,but improved throughout the day. With his mph over 120 he is certainly a 10 second player if he can get it to the 330.
Bob ,,it was nice to finally meet you also. I didn't know you were running a 327 combo,,and I was surprised to see 10.90s on a 12.10 index. Your car launches very smoothly, and its fun to watch a gear jammer that knows how to row that stick! Take care guys,,,,,,,,,,,,,Danny Durham

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

What would be involved in getting the new Edelbrock 3814690 replica head approved for that combination?

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Not sure that I know where to start here, guys...

oh yes I do !

The people !!!
It really WAS all the people that came by !
The support I received from so many. As I had mentioned on the 348-409 forum... I learned more in each hour there, from fellow Stock / Super Stock guys ( a privilage to say that, by the way ), than I learned in 4 years of high school !
It was simply overwhelming.

and yes, I broke a crown and pinion on the line, in the first round of eliminations
ISN'T THAT GREAT ? ! ! ! !
HAAAA HAAAA HEEEE !!!!
it broke because after all this time, the engine makes power, and the car works.
doesn't get better than that

I was stunned by the trap speed actually. At first, I spent a half hour, tracking down the timing people, to verify that there was no error.
122.74

Now, a little more first gear in the Jerico ( has 2.83 now ), soften the current clutch setting JUST A TOUCH, and get used to the car. Hopefully 10.80's.

in the mean time, got some catching up to do !

THANK YOU to all the people who helped ( probably didn't even realize how much you did )... Rory, Danny, and of course Bob, for stopping by. I personally didn't get much opportunity to mingle, because people kept coming by !
DAMN it was fun !!!!!

hey... and guess what ?
there will be a real video of the old car... on an actual race track
knew that would make you happy !

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Way cool Aubrey! By the tenor of your post, it sounds like it was all worth while and that you really enjoyed yourself. Pretty darn good debut, I'd say. Sorry about the parts breakage though. Ain't much sweeter ( or finer) than an '09. My second car was a black '61 Bel Air 348/305 stick bubbletop.

Crown and pinion? Oh, I get it. Put the ring gear on your head, and it looks like a crown.
Canada-speak, eh?

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Well Ken, maybe only half a crown in there now.
Crown ? Ring ?
it all costs like jewlery anyhow

I think that may be "speak" from my flathead Ford books ?
I dunno ?

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Congrat's on taking a revered muscle car from the '60's and making it competitive and fun.

In the day I had a black '64 Biscayne 425 horse car. Raced it at the track (Atco) a few times but raced it "elsewhere" a lot more!!!

My current race car is a '64 Plymouth Savoy 426/415 hp.

Hope you can get her in the 10's soon.

Good luck!

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Thanks again, guys

Here's a photo taken from one of the videos:

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Cool ride Aubrey, good to see it coming around. Ever think about underdriving high gear in the Jerico? - you could put in a taller (read stronger) ring & pinion and get the same total ratio.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

I have to wonder. If it is legal and acceptable to put a 12 bolt in place of a 10 bolt, even when the 12 bolt was never an option, would it not be legal to put a 12 bolt in an older big car?

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

That's a REALLY good question....

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Sure it would be. Chevy passenger car rear in a Chevy passenger car. I'm sure the 66 Impala 12 bolt is already wide enough.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Yes, I could run a 12 bolt. The 65-up unit is a couple inches wider, so it would have to be shortened some.
I really never thought this thing would make this much power, or hook the way it did. I went through considerable effort and expense, to retain the original rear ( been doing and marketing this package for almost 20 years... never broke one ). Being a coil spring car, with very unique brackets, it concerns me that the geometry for the mounting hardware on the housing, would be virtually impossible to locate as accurately as that on the original housing.

A transmission with a "reduction" top gear, could help me get into a 4.56 rear gear, which is far more available, and a bit stronger. However, to my knowledge, there never has been a "pro gear" ( 9310 ) material for these rear ends.
Which is why I contacted Richmond today !
I'll be &$#ed.... they'll do me some 5.13's in a 9310 material !
one catch
I have to buy 25 sets !
I'd buy 5 sets maybe

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

It would not be hard at all to put the brackets on a 12 bolt correctly, honestly, the geometry is not all that complicated. The 12 bolt would be cheaper, faster, and more reliable. It just would not be as cool.

I seriously doubt there is a cost effective way to keep the original rear end in the car and have it be reliable. Much as I'd like to see it work, it would be pretty cool.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

I agree with Alan.

Any chassis shop can set up the correct angles for the 12 bolt in your car.

You might get in contact with some of the rear end builders...strange, moser, dts, or Randy at www.ringandpinion.com, perhaps one of them can help you.

Keep her running.

Jim

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

As usual... excellent points and suggestions.

There is apparently, a simple 12 bolt conversion available. I just don't like conventional 10/12 bolts, what with their need for "c clip eliminators", ect. A person still needs a spool, axles, cap supports... and those elusive ( to me ) 9310 "pro gears".
My beautiful disc brake adaptors turned out so nice, that I just can't abandon them yet !

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

You do not have to run c-clip crap, just change the ends on the housing when you order axles, 12 bolt will come no matter what. Its like 8 .75 mopar rears, your going to get a dana no matter what you do.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

I swapped in a 12 bolt into my red 62 Impala SS back in 1976 with no problems. It originally was from a 69 El Camino, so ALL 68-72 A body 12 bolts will work.As I recall, the back spacing was not an issue,backing plate to backing plate,I used 4.56 gears,nothing trick here, a 4 series posi unit and stock axles.The 65-70 Impala unit was about three inches wider and would have to be narrowed.The 65-up lower control arm brackets could be removed from the 62 housing and welded to the 12 bolt axle tubes. I think that the brake backing plates might interchange from the 62 rear end to the 65,therefore your disc brake stuff would carry over to it. The upper arm attachment points on the 65 impala 12 bolt might have to be moved a bit to line things up, and some kind of custom length Panhard rod would have to be built-no big deal. In order to put the stock width Chevelle A body rear end in, the 62 lower arm brackets would have to be swapped for the Chevelle arm brackets then some kind of custom upper trailing arms would have to be made to connect the upper arm front mounting point to the Chevelle upper bushings. NHRA rulebook says that the rear upper arm mounting point CAN be relocated. Wonder if they thought of these cars when they made that rule!One thing,though- A body cars had 9 1/2" dia.rear brakes-also,the flange for the backing plate was smaller as they had a smaller diameter axle than the big car 12 bolts.One thing for certain-the 12 bolt is the way to go with these cars,there's no shortage of good parts out there for them.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

I think Aubrey's trying to get the Bubbletop into the 10's WITH the 10-bolt if he can. Wonder if dropping down to 4.88 would give you any strength and not affect the tune-up too much? 12-bolt is probably the way to go long-term...I think it's legal now...didn't that '62 Vette Stocker in Div.1 have one aboard a few years ago when it came out? But the Bel-Air would loose some of it's coolness if the rear was swapped, LOL!!! I'd check the 10-bolt banjo housing when doing repairs to make sure it's not distorted any...isn't it basically sheet-metal? Wonder if a little more clutch work would allow the 10-bolt to "live" a bit longer? While we're on the subject, would anybody know how many '62 Bel-Air Bubbletops were built...do I understand about 5900....and about how many were ACTUALLY 409 factory-equipped??? I've heard some of the stories about the '62 Indy Nats, and the late(in the model year) release of the aluminum front-ends and Z-11 parts upgrade and some of the racers 'borrowing' Bubbletop pieces (or cars) from rental car agencies...or so forth...All I can say is WISH I were there! Must have been a wild time!!!!

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

The 10 bolt drop out is a waste of time if he is serious. It will break almost every time he goes to an event. 12 bolt 35 spline spool and axles next step.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Aubry,

Your car makes me smile! I'm glad to see that you’re getting it there. Don't listen to the naysayers, you've got a plan that is working stick with it!

Jackie McCracken

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Aubrey, your BelAir was undoubtedly the crowd favorite at Mission. And I'd bet those fans were plenty disappointed when the rear let go. But, not nearly as much as you were! I don't think Tony Janes is being a naysayer. I think that he is giving very good advice. As far as 'cool' goes, the only people that will know there's a 12 bolt under there are you and whoever wants to get down on the ground and look. IMO, cool is those disc brake mounts you made. Those were an upgrade, and a smart one at that. I understand the reluctance to give up on the original 'chunks'. But, you're making good power, you've got a fairly deep first gear, and using a clutch. Recent history proves Tony's point don't you think? When you stage at the next race you go to, you're going to have that nagging little voice saying "is it going to break again?" With a 12 bolt there's more ratio selection, parts availability, and the strength factor. Just another smart upgrade.

Personally, I want to see that car go rounds, not be towed off the starting line. No rear is bulletproof, but you would really improve your odds. Best of Luck.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Ken is exactly right. Also,the collector/restorer's demand on the early rear end's parts availability has the cost of those units up to where a good 12 bolt isn't that costly by compatison.We all want to see that car go rounds,this would help it immensely. Bring it down for Winternationals some year!

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Aubrey,,,,sell off one of your other "hotrods" and slap a good unit like a Moser 12 bolt under there with the spool/axle/ gear ratio package you want.You can even get them with disc brakes. I had one question I forgot to ask you last weekend,,,are you running a 2 piece driveshaft? I think those cars came that way did'nt they? I'm curious how they make them live under a heavy car with a lot of power and a manual transmission,, and if you have to beef up the carrier bearing.
Good luck,,,I hope to see you again out there somewhere,,,,,,,,Danny Durham

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Congratulations, Aubrey, great meeting you at Mission and seeing your car run! I raced 409 Chevys in the '60's when we were lucky to get into the 12's with the track prep and tires of the day. We broke dozens of those old rear ends, as well as the axles, driveshaft centre bearing supports, u-joints, clutch linkages and of course the old Muncie transmissions. With todays tires and traction I can't imagine attempting to use that rear end. We even broke the pinion right out of the carrier on one pass, hanging off the end of the driveshaft with half the casting, the rest still bolted into the car! The chevs were bad for not upgrading the rest of the driveline to handle the bigger motors, this was essentially the same rear end found in six cylinder cars, They bolt right into the early 4 cylinder Novas even! We did improve the situation by heat treating gear sets to soften them, as I recall from 40 years ago they were about Rockwell 62-64 and we drew them down to about 52-54 from ancient memory. That made them wear out faster, but less likely to break. We'd also set the gear pattern on the drive side well towards the inside of the tooth and use as close to zero lash as we dared. The case and carrier deflect substantially and the pattern shifts out on the tooth, so if you start centered you'll move out and break the teeth off on the outside of the ring gear. I recall guys using steel straps machined to fit on the main caps to strengthen them and longer bolts. I even seem to recall some guys brazing up the end of a bolt and threading it in through the side of the case so it would contact the back of the ring gear somehow to help stop the case from spreading, not sure of exactly how this was positioned or if it was effective. The point is exactly as Tony Janes said, it's junk and a waste of your time and money to attempt to keep it in one piece. Even if it were an automatic, it would be highly doubtful that it could be reliable. As others have posted, the 12 bolt should be no problem to rework with suitable mounts, etc and you'll be saving yourself endless problems with the old 10 bolt. Anyway, best of luck! It's a cool ride!
Grant Eldridge
E/SA 6650

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Very cool. I bought/sold/traded a lot of 409 cars and parts some years back...love those W motors and the cars.

The rear ends in the 58-64 full size cars aren't as wide as the body style would lead you to think they are....a '67-69 Camaro/Nova or '64-67 Chevelle rear end are perfect replacements in drum-to-drum dimension. I did a 12 bolt swap into a '62 Biscayne some years ago that worked out really slick....used a Camaro 12 bolt and welded the brackets from the original '62 read end onto it. Using the back surface of the 12 bolt (where the cover bolts on) and the the front surface of the '62 rear end (where the 3rd member bolts in) as reference points, it was easy to duplicate the correct geometry of the lower control arms and the upper control arm. The control arms were reinforced and I did some old school stuff on the control arm bushings....sheetrock screws screwed into the bushings (3 per side) to stiffen them up.

For brakes, we used a setup from '65-'70 big car (Impala) to replace the 9" brakes from the Camaro. The housing ends/bearings on the '65-up cars are bigger than the Camaro/Nova/Chevelle rears and the bolt spacing of the backing plates to the flange is also wider. I welded up the backing plate mounting holes, redrilled them to the correct location and made up a small steel spacer ring to take up the clearance between the '65-up backing plate and bearing housing o.d. of the Camaro rear. Worked slick. A disc setup would be the way to do it today, of course.

The two-piece driveshaft was replaced with a one piece unit. The notch where the rear portion of the original 'shaft comes out of the frame tunnel was opened up foward to allow for the greater angle....since the driveshafts pivot point was now at the front u-joint instead of at the carrier bearning in the middle of the tunnel.

Congrats Aubrey on a 'way cool stocker. -Al

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Thank YOU, Grant, Alan...

It's just that easy to give up the old thing !

Here's what I've done:
webbed housing
bearing caps
spool
30 spline
larger outer bearing

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Aubrey,

Back in the day I seem to remember the chevy guy's putting the Olds or Pontiac rear ends in their cars.....don't know if this is a viable option anymore, I'm sure no one makes the gears and parts.

My tri-power '58 Pontiac has one beefy rearend in it!

Jim

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Jim,

I know the '57-up Olds/Pontiac rear ends were really strong units. I just wonder what the diameter is of the ring gear.

Anybody remember that dimension?

Just curious....
Bill

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Bill,

I don't remember either but those rear ends went into a lot of gassers at the time. There are probably gear sets floating around at swap meets.

Jim

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Until recently, Strange, and even Mark Williams had stuff for the Olds/Pontiac rear end. However, if you are going to the trouble to change, change to the 12 bolt Chevy. I want to see that car go fast and go rounds. You've suffered enough, for a long time, to make it work, just get a 12 bolt in it and enjoy the car. You've earned it.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Dittos and mega dittos.

Re: Aubrey's 62 409 goes 11.067 in C/S
 

Pretty sure the 'late' Olds/Pontiac's are 9 3/8ths. Not too many ratio's to choose from.

Sure wish you were going to be at Spokane, Aubrey. I'd really like to see your '62 in person. Any chance of that?