A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

If a guy was goofy enough to try and run something OTHER THAN a 440-6bbl in a 69 Road Runner in Stock or SS, would the glass 6-bbl hood be legal?? The rule book doesn't say about it being original related to the engine combo just as long as it's "as originally produced". I think I've seen a few 70 Cuda shaker hoods on non-Hemi or 6-bbl stockers and I KNOW I have seen a pic of a SS 70 440-bbl Cuda in Div 1 a few years ago with an AAR hood. THAT didn't come that way...

Another question: Rulebook says nothing about SS cars trimming of rear wheelwells (I thought is used to say 2" front and rear...or something like that). My question is would "stretched" (approx 3") openings on a Duster be legal in SS? You HAVE to stretch them in a 66-67 Nova or 68-69 340 or 440 Dart to get a big tire in, right...??

Thanks in advance for your input!

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

On the 70/71 Cuda shaker hoods, you can run a 340 single 4 bbr AVS
with the shaker hood.

It's my understanding that the 69-1/2 6 pkg hood is only legal for the
440-6 bbr.

I'm sure some else will chime in with more correct info for you.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

The way I understand this rule after a long conversation with Bruce Bachelder is that if the hood in question was available from the factory in the year claimed and is "as per OEM" in construction; it's legal. Bruce gave me the impression that he didn't really like this ruling but it came from above. This was almost two years ago but the proliferation in "not really correct" hoods has been obvious since then and I haven't heard of any disqualifications. Remember; the year has to correct. I'd have an L-88 hood on Fred in about ten minutes if that weren't so. TT

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Yea, I thought that If it was "year correct" it might be legal...or at least "not illegal" reading exactly what's in the rule book.

Which explains why a shaker is allowed on a 70 E-body 340, as it's was only available on 440-6bbl and Hemi cars.

Also explains the TA hood on a certain Red 383 Challenger...

Now, with regards to wheel openings, is this legal? They were stretched approx 3" and the lips are as originally produced...




Thanks again guys!

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Nobody's going to measure them, if that's what you really want to know.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Well Mark I didn't think they would, however in the Gen Regs it states that in Stock and SS the forward and rear edges may be trimmed 2", rerolled, blah blah blah...BUT in looking at other Dusters they appear to have done just that, retaining the overall original shape for the most part. These, being stretched in the middle aren't the OEM shape, although nicely done.

I'm going to send the pic to our Div and National Tech Directors and see if I can even get a reply...

Thanks!

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

In 1971 I ordered and raced a new 71 Challenger with a 383 (not a 440-6 pack or Hemi) with a shaker hood direct from the factory . The rules were a lot tighter back then. I dont believe NHRA will allow a 6 pack hood on a non 6 pack engine "road chicken"..

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

You can pick up just about any mopar book and learn which bodies and engines the shakers were available on (code N96 fresh air option). You can find why the T/A hood was not just a T/A engine option and why. If you were really lazy you could contact somebody like Galen Govier (?) and pay him for the information with a break down of production numbers by engine.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Tom,
Are you saying I can run a L-88 hood on my 68 or 69 Vette?

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Answers in order are:

1) No
2) Yes they are allowed
3) See page 272 paragraph 7:3 of the 2009 NHRA rulebook (fenders also mean 1/4 panel)

Travis

PS. No Terry, you do not get the L88 hood on your Corvette unless you put the correct L88 engine beneath it.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

The '70 'Cuda Super Stocker belongs to Allan Dame of southern Maine. At an Epping NH. IHRA National event a few years back I asked him about the AAR hood and he told me that he had talked to NHRA and told them since '70 and '71 Challengers used the fiberglass T/A hood then he should be allowed to use the fiberglass AAR hood. Apparently they OKed it. I think Larry Hill uses an AAR hood on his '71 440-6 'Cuda Stocker as well.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

I'm fairly sure that Dave Hakim got the hoods legalized. I remember chinning him at Indy a few years back about the TA hood in particular. He told me then that Mopar had filed a letter with the NHRA regarding which cars were produced with the hood.

I'm not trying to throw rocks, but I think we have a few more paper cars than we usually talk about. I should mention that my first really competitive race car was a 70 340 Duster I bought new and that I was a diehard Mopar fan back then.

I did spend a few evenings in the Fenton B Body plant on unofficial tours with friends who worked there and have to admit it seemed like the build sheet was only a suggestion at times. I also remember seeing a black 340 Duster in 70 which carried black stripes, the only color available.

I guess I'm saying that sometimes the rules got followed to extremes and sometimes they were disregarded, but I never ever saw a TA hood on any car that didn't have the entire package.

I did try to run bigger tires on the back like a TA but never found a single tech guy who would buy it.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

It is my understanding that there was a letter from Chrysler having to
do with a shortage of parts (shaker hoods/scoops) and the AAR hoods
were substatuted in place for some short time period on the assy line.

It is that letter or rule that allows said red 383 challenger to run
the AAR fiberglass hood/scoop instead of the shaker hood/scoop.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

The 440-6 only had the 6 pack hood, the 440-4 had two functional scoops, the e bodies came with shaker hoods 383/440. Sold a few. The trans am hood could have been because of a shortage. The shaker cars were hard to get. And the build sheets were only a suggestion, although the purist don't want to hear that. How about a 69 b body cop car, blue w/red interior. Nice.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Hey Teuton how about Bucket seats in a wagon were they a special order item.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Jeff Teuton, what is this worth, I saw this for sale in omaha, ne. 6 pack intake and carbs, air cleaner stock linkage; 10 month. 69 date code ,been in storage the last 25 years, he was asking $2500.00 Tom

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

you'll pay him for the informtion, but you'll wait and wait for a long while to get the information...

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

What I know about the shaker vs. TA hood deal was that there was a shaker shortage in 71. For a certain period of time, any 71 Chally that was ordered with a shaker, (which UNLIKE 1970 was available on the 340/383/440-4bbl/440-6-bbl or Hemi) it was subbed with a TA hood. Plymouth on the other had didn't seem to suffer the same shortage...

But that was 1971. In 1970, the shaker wasn't available on anything but the 440-6bbl and Hemi cars, so where is the justification that a 70 'Cuda with a shaker-ed 340 or 383 is legal? Or a TA hood on a 70 383 Chally?? Because it was available for the MODEL and YEAR?? Regardless of the motor? So if that logic is applied accross the board, the 6-bbl glass hood should be "legal" on a 69 383 Roadrunner, as it was available for the MODEL and YEAR.

The same argument could be had for the glass hood on a 390 Fairlane I would guess...or for that matter the Dart Hemi hood should be legal on a 340 or 383 68 Dart...

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Tom, that might be high. Every piece is still available. As far as the 68 with the Hemi scoop, the 383 we run (and everyone else) was available with fresh air pkg in b and e bodies. So whats the problem? If we didn't have to change the fenders and hood back to metal, we would probably do away with the scoop anyway.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

If what you say is true about shakers then explain the 1970 Cuda that I ordered and received with a 340, shaker and 4-speed. According to the dealer order form at the time the shaker was available for the 340 and up.

PS never should have gotten rid of it.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

You are correct.

Reportedly there was another issue with the Challenger Shaker. Not only was there a shortage from the supplier on Challenger shaker assemblies but the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). The Challenger hood is a full length hood (regardless of application); from front edge to wiper / cowl assembly. The Barracuda or 'Cuda does not extend as far forward as it has a front header panel. In a frontal impact the Barracuda hood has some protection offered by the header panel, the Challenger hood is not protected. On a Challenger hood with a shaker opening there is less material and the hood easily buckles. This can cause the rear of the hood to raise, go through the front windshield and possibly decapitate the front occupants.
For that reason the shaker shortage was directed to the Barracuda when ordered and the T/A hood was used as a fresh air hood when ordered on the Challenger (if Shaker was not available for installation).
Thaqt's my story...I'm stickin' too it! :p

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Well, I love the internet. A little research turned up this gem:

Beginning on July 29, 1969, the Shaker Hood became available with the 340-ci, 383-ci (335 horse power), and the 440-ci four-barrel engines, including the ...

I guess I should change my handle from cudadoug to "I don't know everything like I thought I did-doug" Or "don't believe everything you're told by the so-called experts-doug".

You sir, seem to be correct. And you are also correct in that you never should have gotten rid of it...

Since a hood post generated so much chatter, I better start another one about bogus heads...JUST KIDDING!

Thanks again guys!

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

One also has to consider that on a lot of the Shaker cars the scoop package was dealer installed, not factory.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Jeff,

Sorry, but I have little faith in these 40 years after the fact revelations. Many years ago the Mustang books were full of rumored 1972 "Boss" (Low compression, High Output, 351C 4 speed cars) and the Mustang Guru at the time said they did not exist. Yet there were two of them at the high school near us in Illinois. And they were pretty quick in local competition if you understand it. Many years later they were "discovered". What I have never, ever seen is the 780 Holley and aluminum intake 351C model which we can race.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Jeff,

Please give us your AMX since the NHTSA feels the hood makes it unsafe for you. We'll take goo care of it, really.

Has anyone ever seen the factory air cleaner housing for one of these non 6 pack glass hood cars? It would have to be one of the rarest production pieces ever made right? And what about all the Mustangs which have hoods that go to the very front of the car?

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Party pooper

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Herb, bucket seats in a wagon? If they were, it was in the preminum wagon. I assume you are talking about the mid size barge (b body) and not the aircraft carrier (c) body. I do have all the part books back to l960 and I will investigate. Now I'm curious. Anybody anything else while I'm looking? Hemi in a station wagon? In the body illustrations for b bodies in l966, the wagon is a Hemi. But it is not an actual photo.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Jeff Teuton, since you asked if anybody else had questions i thought i would ask you, I was looking at some old pictures of John Hagan and Judy Lilly's SS/AA cars in 1970, both cars do not have hood scoops, i assume they were top of the line cars for the day, any idea why no hood scoops in 1970, just wondering what the reason may have been.

Thanks Neal

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Jeff a 66 or 67 383 wagon. And yes it did show a Hemi wagon. Lee Smith drove one in super stock in 68. SS/G

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Jeff Teuton said, "Anybody anything else while I'm looking?"

Yes.... I have two reference books that specifically state that for the model year, 1972, the 340 could be special-ordered in ANY mopar. Just that one year, only.

I have a '72 Valiant 4 door sedan and wondered if what those books say is true. I've never seen a 340 in a sedan, but then, I haven't seen EVERYTHING.

Is there anything you have that goes baxck to 1972 to see if there's any truth to what these books say?

Shipping weight on a 318 Duster is 2875; 2900 on the 4-door Valiant. The 340 Duster is 3100, so a 340 Valiant 4-door might reasonably assumed to be 3125 (since there is a 25-pound difference in the 318 cars.)

Just some food for thought; my sedan already has a lot of the equipment (8.75" rear, "built" T-flite, good headers, fuel cell, etc.) that a Stocker would need.... all I'd have to do, basically, is drop a '72 "built" 340 Stocker engine in it and go racing... but, it's not in the Classification Guide, so I'd have that hurdle... IF they ever built any.

Guess the next stop would be the Chrysler Historical outfit, IF it's still in existence, with the bankruptcy business...

Just daydreaming, here...

Thanks for any information.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

1970 Hemi orange 6 pak B body with bright red interior!

The wagon question is a bit vague, both Hemi and Max Wedge SW's were raced but did anyone ever actually order one from the factory? The word going around even back in the day is that these cars along with the '62 383/343 were all over the parts counter cars...not assembly line produced.

You have to remember just because it's in the classification guide doesn't mean it's correct.

Jim R

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Jim.....I believe the B/SA wagon that Dom Rinaldi is an honest to goodness real Max Wedge Wagon. It was bought new and raced on the street by a good friend of his and then sold to Dom around late 1964 or 1965 because the friend and original owner racked up to many "Speed contest awards" on the street with it as the story was told to me. You can check with Dom as he reads and posts on the H.A.M.B. site on the Jr stock section. Look on page # 157 for his last post listed under "ITS DYNOMITE" and you can send him a PM.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Dom Rinaldi's '64 Max Wedge wagon is the real deal. As stated in an earlier post Dom bought it from a close friend. I raced with Dom's son many years ago when he raced the wagon at our local track. Dom Sr. recently brought the car back out 2 yrs ago with a fresh engine. It's a beautiful car. According to the books I have there were three max wedge wagons built in '64, two six passenger and one nine passenger wagon. I believe Dom has one of the six passenger cars (but dont' hold me to it). LOL Jerry.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

This is the first solid info I've gotten on Max Wedge wagons, thanks. I still wonder about the tritak/morgan and the Dvorak wagons?

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Ron Mandella's 63 plymouth wagon was a real car. It was at indy in 64.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

For more weirdness, wasn't there 1 66 Coronet and 1 Belevedere FOUR DOOR's with Hemis...think a Mopar Mag several years ago featured them. Geezzzzz, what are they worth??

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Dick Maxwell from Chrysler had and drove a Hemi station wagon.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

One of the cars is in Sweden or Finland in need of restoration.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

Wow, that makes me proud to say I'm part Swedish. I hear my grandmothers home she grew up in, in the late 1800s is still standing. I hope to get there someday, Paul.

Re: A couple of Mopar "legality" questions...??
 

According to a couple of magazine articles I have, there were two '66 Hemi Coronet 4-doors, one white and one red, both now restored. The white one may be in Garlits' Museum. I do think I heard of a Hemi Belvedere 4-door overseas.