Introducing "Project Odyssey" a 1972 "Super Satellite"

[Dibbons]

The aftermarket side hood bumpers do not match factory equipment.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: Phase #1 now complete: basic "get it back on the road", re-paint, new interior. Phase #2 about to begin: this will entail upgrade to the power train. Replacing the factory 318 (overhauled by a previous owner probably back in the '70's) with a 340 and a 340/305. In the next couple of months the rings and bearings will be replaced in a 340 (040 overbore) which has 1.88 intake valves and flat top pistons. This will be kind of a mule engine. After a road trip the 340 will then be replaced with a more unique de-stroked 340/305 (.030 overbore) with 2.02 intake valves, TRW domed forged pistons, Cunningham connecting rods, and Bryant billet crankshaft (the 340 may be put on the market later, not sure yet). Refer back to post #84 to find photo of connecting rod.

Today, I began the 340 rebuild by sandblasting the exhaust manifolds and spraying a high-temp paint. Unfortunately, not sure what to do with two passenger side 340 manifolds when I will probably still need to find a driver's side exhaust manifold (that's the way the 340 came at purchase time). Going to visit the local "Mr. Mopar" here in Mexico and see what he might have in his stash of parts.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: The 340 block was magnaflux inspected and painted some time ago. Not sure, but one cylinder may have been sleeved sometime in the past.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: The 340 (.040" overbore) I purchased evidently came with a 273/318 forged crankshaft (ground .020" undersize) being the fact there are no holes drilled through the connecting rod journals (see photo for comparison). I purchased a 340 crankshaft (ground .010" undersize) to replace it to avoid any balance issues. I have no idea how the engine would have run with the previous owner using the other 273 crankshaft.

Now I need to have a machine shop inspect the 340 crankshaft to find if it needs a regrind or only a polish. I believe the bearing set I already purchased is for a .020" undersize re-build.

When struck with a metal object, both crankshafts give a very similar "ping" sound. The 273 crankshaft is obviously forged and I am not sure yet whether the 340 crankshaft is forged or cast.

 

[Cranky]

Update: The 340 (.040" overbore) I purchased evidently came with a 273/318 forged crankshaft (ground .020" undersize) being the fact there are no holes drilled through the connecting rod journals (see photo for comparison). I purchased a 340 crankshaft (ground .010" undersize) to replace it to avoid any balance issues. I have no idea how the engine would have run with the previous owner using the other 273 crankshaft.

Now I need to have a machine shop inspect the 340 crankshaft to find if it needs a regrind or only a polish. I believe the bearing set I already purchased is for a .020" undersize re-build.

When struck with a metal object, both crankshafts give a very similar "ping" sound. The 273 crankshaft is obviously forged and I am not sure yet whether the 340 crankshaft is forged or cast.

View attachment 1720838

The bottom crank is forged for sure and the top one looks like a cast crank. The forged cranks have a wide parting line like what's on the counterweight....same on the 'face' of the journal. Cast cranks have a thin parting line.

 

[Dibbons]

The bottom crank is forged for sure and the top one looks like a cast crank. The forged cranks have a wide parting line like what's on the counterweight....same on the 'face' of the journal. Cast cranks have a thin parting line.

I know what you mean, but I am still not positive about the 340 crank. It has signs of a wide parting line in places.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: Dropped both cranks off at the local machine shop and asked 'em to turn the 340 crank to .020 undersize to match the bearing set I have (presently it is .010 under). Left the .020 undersize 273 crank just in case they need it for measuring reference.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: Removed light surface rust from the cylinder bores with ball hone and ATF. Began to do the same to the lifter bores with a brake cylinder hone (pulled it out too soon while spinning and stones flew away-need to purchase a second cylinder hone now).

Then I removed surface rust from the machined/unpainted surfaces using a chrome polish and old toothbrush.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: More parts clean up. I found some pale yellow liquid in an unmarked container I thought was vinegar I use for de-rusting, but it really did not smell like vinegar. Anyway, after degreasing the connecting rods with a soapy solution I dropped the rods into the yellow stuff. Now to see what happens. There is a remote chance the liquid is Evaporust. (photo #1)

I cleaned up the .040 over pistons which are definitely not forged. Must be cast or that thypereutectic aluminum that I never understood. They had some carbon on 'em. With the double eyebrow valve reliefs cut into the crown, the compression ratio would diminish a small amount. On the other hand, an overbore would increase the compression a bit. The pistons do have a notch indicating a forward orientation when installing them. This tells me they probably have the factory pin offset which reportedly helps to limit piston slap. (photo #2)

Cleaned up the crankshaft main caps as well. I noticed the locating pins normally found in the cylinder block to properly situate the cylinder heads in the proper place are missing. I hope I can find them stashed away in a box or bag around here. (photo #3)

 

[Dibbons]

Update: That soak I gave the connecting rods resulted in no improvement in removing the surface rust. Still not sure what that "light yellow liquid" was, maybe used coolant? (photo #1).

So my next alternative was to coat the rods in Naval Jelly and rinse (photo #2).

 

[Dibbons]

Update: I cleaned the pistons up one more time after making sure the piston pins slid into each and every one. On three pistons, the pin only slid in from one side. Evidently, the snap ring retainer groove has a very small imperfection on one side, but it is on the outside of the groove so the pins still rotate freely.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: More work on the 340 Mule motor. Finished shimming (on one cylinder head) the new 340 factory style valve springs to the proper installed height by removing the springs and adding whatever mix of .015", .030", .060" shims would satisfy the spec for each individual valve. I cut a very small piece of tubing to the length of 1.650" (42 mm) and used that for a guide rule. Valves are new stainless steel 1.88/1.60.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: Shimmed the other cylinder head springs today. Added light-tension check springs so when I degree the basically stock camshaft I can check piston to valve clearance (pistons are aftermarket flat top with four valve notches).

 

[Dibbons]

When I built my 273 bracket racer back in the 1970's with dual Iskenderian valve springs and aluminum retainers for a solid lifter camshaft the factory stock adjustable iron ductile 273 rockers did not have any rubbing at all on the valve springs.

However, my plan to use the same original style factory adjustable 273 rocker arms (this time refurbished with bushings) on this 340 Mule is running into a snag whereby most (not all) of the rocker arms rub a little on the top of the stock factory 340 single valve springs with dampers. I am going to paint the area in conflict white, install them, and then move them up and down by hand to find where the spring scratches the paint. Then with a Dremel tool I will clearance the appropriate areas. It seems each individual rocker arm has its own little profile due to manufacturing tolerances.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: Installed the oil pump drive bushing into the block today. I used the special tool I had on hand C-3053 to drive it in. However, the instructions in the official 1965 Plymouth Service Technical Manual on page 9-42 describe how same tool will size and burnish the bushing to the correct fit in the block and the correct inside diameter. However, after installation the tool shank was already/still loose inside the bushing so turning the tool nut had no effect or purpose. I test fit both of the new oil pump drives on hand and they dropped in OK (not too loose nor too tight).

 

[Dibbons]

Update: Began the process of installing the core plugs using Indian Head Shellac as a sealer. (setting sun providing light for 2nd foto)

 

[Dibbons]

Update: The black valve spring retainers I have are slightly smaller than the 340 factory springs (don't remember the manufacureer). So far only one of the 273 rocker arms is contacting a valve spring as soon as the rocker shaft is snugged down (@ 5 ft./lbs for testing). I used a Dremel tool to grind off some material where the rub mark was evident on the white paint I used for a guide (refer to post #114).

Another 9 rocker arms apparently have no clearance issues. The other 8 have less clearance but are not rubbing on the springs when the shaft is attached as far as I can see. To forestall any worries/problems in the future I will have to find a way to observe that space more accurately or to in fact measure the space in there.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: I performed what I believed would be a final cylinder block cleansing before assembly using a powder laundry detergent mixed with hot water and various diameter cleaning brushes. Then blew partially dry before spraying all surfaces with WD40 and then blow drying again, followed by 10W-30 motor oil in the cylinders, lifter bores, and machined surfaces.

The glitch is what I found with the installation of the camshaft bearings. They still appear to be just a tad short of being located entirely in their bore spot. On one bank, the oil hole to the rocker shaft is "blocked" just by a smidgen. Don't know if it's worth the trouble to haul the block back downtown to the machine shop who did the work or maybe to a Mopar buddy who I know has a well-used camshaft bearing installation tool?

I don't think the motor would oil starve in any case, but seems things are not "perfect" yet.

 

[Dibbons]

Update: Checked main bearing clearance with plastigage. Unfortunately, in my haste I placed the clay on the bearing and placed the crankshaft on top, then the caps, then torqued the caps. i should have placed the crankshaft first and then put the plastigage on the crank journal, followed by the caps and torquing 'em down.

Anyhow, the way I performed the measurements, it looks like .0015" an all journals (only torqued the mains to 80 ft.lbs which is the max setting on my 3/8" wrench).