|
![]() |
#181 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
![]()
Dragway 42 is still there too....I sometimes forget that it was once a top notch track. Still has nice folks working it, and we do test and tunes and run my grandsons junior dragtster there still.
And I remember that car too! Fastest lump of coal I ever saw. David The New Hemi Guy |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#182 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
Dave New Hemi,
I think the whole town of Mansfield used to head NE for a little Sunday picnic in West Salem, back in the mid-late 60's. Big Dodge dealer in that town,,,"Dependable Dodge" ODD-BALL thread, don't think Ms. Foss' 58' Pontiac 370 ci car fits the Odd-Ball category. PC |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#183 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Dunnellon,FL
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Bill, I've done a fair amount of research on the engine combinations and there is conflicting data everywhere. First, there are two 2 bbl engines listed in some of the sites, three 4bbl engines, two 3-2bbl engines and either one or two fuellies. Here's the breakdown ( note, this is internet info from several sites ): 370ci 255hp 8.6:1 ratio with a 2bbl carb 370ci 265hp 8.6:1 ratio with a 4bbl carb 370ci 270hp 10:1 ratio with a 2bbl carb * 370ci 285hp 10:1 ratio with a 4bbl carb 370ci 300hp 10.5 ratio with tripower 370ci 310hp 10.5 ratio with fuel injection 370ci 315hp 10.5 ratio with a 4 bbl carb (PK code)# 370ci 330hp 10.5 ratio with tripower (PM code)# 370ci 338hp 10.5 ratio with fuel injection * * these two engines are noted on two non-Pontiac sites # these two engines were built for NASCAR racing but were also released for street driving. I couldn't find any info on the camshafts for these two motors but I'm very sure that they are solid lifter engines. If someone out there knows any more about these engines I would be happy to hear from them. JimR
__________________
Jim Rountree |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#184 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Dunnellon,FL
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Paul, Maybe not oddball but certainly rare but then there are many cars mentioned here that were just everyday driver cars back in the day and I'll bet you can find more Sunbeam Tigers for sale that the Pontiac with tripower or for that matter the fuelie version. JimR
__________________
Jim Rountree |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#185 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,734
Likes: 1,599
Liked 460 Times in 91 Posts
|
![]()
My car with the 427 in it.
__________________
Bob Bender 144 O/SA 2010-2012 National Record Holder |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#186 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
Jim R,
I would agree...The 58' Pontiac 370 with Tri-Power or Fuel Injection, very rare,,and a runner too!. A couple of runners in 1966. Mary Ann Foss; D/SA Jay Hamilton; F/SA Just what did those Chieftans weigh anyway?? Jim,, I think you could put one of those Sunbeams in the trunk of a 58' Pontiac..God knows, you couldn't drive a Sunbeam, with split shock towers!! Paul |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#187 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
Jim R,
Great list for 58' Pontiac 370 c.i. information. The hot ticket back then, the "886" camshaft Pontiac part #524886 Hydraulic Lifter w/H.D. valve springs .411/.411 lift 283/293 duration, 60 degree overlap For the 370/310hp w/fuel Injection.. The higher HP engines had other special options. PC Last edited by Paul Ceasrine; 04-01-2010 at 08:42 AM. Reason: addition |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#188 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Conway, AR
Posts: 1,739
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts
|
![]()
Thanks for the great info, Jim!
The amazing thing was that any of those ('57-up cars {Pontiacs}) would even get out of its own way with that miserable Jetaway/Strato-Flight, dual-coupling transmission. If they'd just left a Dual Range Hydro in those cars for three or four more years, you'd have SEEN some "runners"!!! Oh well, at least it didn't have a torque converter... To its credit, it did have marginally better ratios than the Dual Range units (3.95; 2.55; 1.55; 1;1 vs.. early Dual Range's 3.81; 2.63; 1.45; 1:1.) In '56, G.M. engineering gave the Pontiac's Dual Range Hydros a 1.55 third gear which resulted in ratios of 4.08; 2.55; 1.55 and 1:1, a big improvement over that huge 2nd-to-3rd gap in the earlier transmissions.
__________________
Bill Last edited by bill dedman; 04-01-2010 at 09:46 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#189 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
Bill,
Any information on the exact/approximate weight of those 58's. General info; Bonneville around #3800, and the Chieftain #3700. Is that in the 'range'? That seems a little light, for all that chrome and steel. Pontiac Paul,,, |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#190 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Dunnellon,FL
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Paul, I went to one site that said a Chieftain weighed 3070lbs......that must have been the hood only! Here's the weights from a reliable site: 2dr Chieftain shipping weight, 3640lbs; Bonneville coupe, 3785lbs and the Convertible, 1 million lbs. (couldn't find it). We all know that the shipping weight is always soft, probably by at least 200lbs. JimR
__________________
Jim Rountree |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|