Let the rude comments commence

[eldubb440]

double hump heads for the win!

 

[33 IMP]

I agree. But the 307 has a bigger bore and can take bigger valve heads. It's like a 283 with a 327 crank.

And a 305 has a less-than a 265 bore, and a 350 crank. Such a crummy bore/stroke they have to make special aftermarket heads, JUST for the 305.

 

[440 PHIXX]

And a 305 has a less-than a 265 bore, and a 350 crank. Such a crummy bore/stroke they have to make special aftermarket heads, JUST for the 305.

I wasn’t sticking up for a little 305… just that the L69 was better than any stock 307, that only came with a 2bbl. And… in 1985, that package to me was a “muscle car”. V8, rear drive, 2 door intermediate body. To me what Chrysler was offering that year was embarrassing. A “Charger”, that had the same engine, and looked just like my Mom’s TC3? A joke.

 

[eldubb440]

a few years after the aforementioned "plowing"; I had another buddy with a 6 cyl nova with a 3 speed manual and a hacked floor shift.......

the shifter would sometimes get the trans locked up in reverse and a forward gear; and it always seem to happen at the worst times..... the car would neither roll forward or back, the only cure was to shimmy under on your back and "unlock" the trans...... usually in traffic

good times

 

[Cranky]

How do you get both cars under one car cover?

 

[33 IMP]

I wasn’t sticking up for a little 305… just that the L69 was better than any stock 307, that only came with a 2bbl. And… in 1985, that package to me was a “muscle car”. V8, rear drive, 2 door intermediate body. To me what Chrysler was offering that year was embarrassing. A “Charger”, that had the same engine, and looked just like my Mom’s TC3? A joke.

True, there were no high performance versions of the 307, like there were of the 305. But the 305 camaro would get smoked badly by a 302 mustang. And there were ways of making those chargers fast.

 

[Cranky]

a few years after the aforementioned "plowing"; I had another buddy with a 6 cyl nova with a 3 speed manual and a hacked floor shift.......

the shifter would sometimes get the trans locked up in reverse and a forward gear; and it always seem to happen at the worst times..... the car would neither roll forward or back, the only cure was to shimmy under on your back and "unlock" the trans...... usually in traffic

good times

My dad had a mid-60s Chevy pickup back then with 3 on the tree and if you tried to shift it too fast the shifter would hang up. At least the jam was the linkage coming out of the column and only had to open the hood to fix the jam. Yeah tried to speed shift anything that was a stick....and power shift if it was a successful speed shift.

 

[440 PHIXX]

True, there were no high performance versions of the 307, like there were of the 305. But the 305 camaro would get smoked badly by a 302 mustang. And there were ways of making those chargers fast.

And why GM put the 350 back in the F bodies. I think the Formula 350 was the “fast” one. I do remember MoPerformance? Magazine surmising that Chrysler could build a muscle car to go against the GM G bodies. They drew a rendition of an ‘85 road runner, that hilariously had the same dumb flat rear window of the GM cars. They really could have built that, the J bodies were produced up until ‘83. But that “k car” idiot Iacocca insisted on his front drive four cylinder crap.

 

[Cranky]

And why GM put the 350 back in the F bodies. I think the Formula 350 was the “fast” one. I do remember MoPerformance? Magazine surmising that Chrysler could build a muscle car to go against the GM G bodies. They drew a rendition of an ‘85 road runner, that hilariously had the same dumb flat rear window of the GM cars. They really could have built that, the J bodies were produced up until ‘83. But that “k car” idiot Iacocca insisted on his front drive four cylinder crap.

The K car is what brought Chrysler back from the brink though.... and I remember seeing several of them at the track with some putting down pretty good numbers. And no, I wasn't a big fan of them either.

 

[33 IMP]

And why GM put the 350 back in the F bodies. I think the Formula 350 was the “fast” one. I do remember MoPerformance? Magazine surmising that Chrysler could build a muscle car to go against the GM G bodies. They drew a rendition of an ‘85 road runner, that hilariously had the same dumb flat rear window of the GM cars. They really could have built that, the J bodies were produced up until ‘83. But that “k car” idiot Iacocca insisted on his front drive four cylinder crap.

The fast Pontiac trans am was the one with the turbo Buick 3.8 V6 in it.
I have a street racer buddy with a sleeper. His dirt brown 4dr Omni with a turbo2.5 runs mid-high 7s 1/8.

 

[WileE]

All I can say is...I've had 3 Daytona Shelby's.... my 87 Daytona Shelby & my 89 Daytona Shelby would blow the doors off most near-stock cars on this site. And both of them were among the most reliable cars I've ever owned. And get 30 mpg, by the way. Ride, quiet, and handling were better than most 60's Mopars.

 

[440 PHIXX]

The K car is what brought Chrysler back from the brink though.... and I remember seeing several of them at the track with some putting down pretty good numbers. And no, I wasn't a big fan of them either.

True. But I think it was a mistake to stop all 2 door rear drive models. In ‘84 and ‘85, Oldsmobile made hundreds of thousands of the Cutlass G body. And that’s not including all the Regals, Gran Prixs, and Monte Carlos. I’ve seen more than a few also say Chrysler missed the boat by discontinuing the R bodies. By 1983 gas prices had come down and GM was moving tons, literally, of full size B bodies. I never liked Iacocca. A neighbor of mine told me in ‘83 when I got my ‘70 ‘Cuda that one of the first things Iacocca did was empty the Delaware warehouse that had many quarter panels and trim. He worked there and said train car loads of E body fenders and quarter panels went to scrap. He also foolishly cancelled the 400 and 440, basically taking Dodge out of the heavy duty, towing, truck business. Ford kept the 460, and Chevy the 454.

 

[440 PHIXX]

The fast Pontiac trans am was the one with the turbo Buick 3.8 V6 in it.
I have a street racer buddy with a sleeper. His dirt brown 4dr Omni with a turbo2.5 runs mid-high 7s 1/8.

I cruised Philly, Pottstown, and Lansdale back in ‘88-‘89 when they were made. Like the GNX, I never saw them. Lots of GN’s, GTA’s, and IROC Z’s. A lot of them have shown up on BAT with less than 500 miles and plastic still on the seats.

 

[eldubb440]

back in the day I bought an 85 iroc z hit in the *** to repair and sell......305 H.O. 5 speed I believe, LMAO that pos was a slug!

 

[Cranky]

True. But I think it was a mistake to stop all 2 door rear drive models. In ‘84 and ‘85, Oldsmobile made hundreds of thousands of the Cutlass G body. And that’s not including all the Regals, Gran Prixs, and Monte Carlos. I’ve seen more than a few also say Chrysler missed the boat by discontinuing the R bodies. By 1983 gas prices had come down and GM was moving tons, literally, of full size B bodies. I never liked Iacocca. A neighbor of mine told me in ‘83 when I got my ‘70 ‘Cuda that one of the first things Iacocca did was empty the Delaware warehouse that had many quarter panels and trim. He worked there and said train car loads of E body fenders and quarter panels went to scrap. He also foolishly cancelled the 400 and 440, basically taking Dodge out of the heavy duty, towing, truck business. Ford kept the 460, and Chevy the 454.

Well they were on a thin shoestring back then and GM was the gorilla in the room. Ford had more flexibility and cash than Chrysler...heck I think every car company back then had more lol and when Lee dumped all those parts they weren't moving and just taking up space.....that's why they got dumped.

 

[1STMP]

That’s the plow from our ATV we store in the barn. When I moved the Nova yesterday it resulted in this scene.

Let the crude comments begin. Especially from all you anti-Chevy guys. Let’s hear it!
Whatchu got?



View attachment 1520379

Nova translates to no go in Spanish.

 

[440 PHIXX]

Well they were on a thin shoestring back then and GM was the gorilla in the room. Ford had more flexibility and cash than Chrysler...heck I think every car company back then had more lol and when Lee dumped all those parts they weren't moving and just taking up space.....that's why they got dumped.

Ford was on thin ice as well… the ‘80 T-Bird was a complete flop. As was the Mark VI. But, they still hung on to all the Mustang sheet metal they had. A neighbor was restoring his ‘65 2+2 in 1984 and ordered fenders and quarter panels from Yocum Ford right in town. I remember him complaining about a couple of dings on what would have been NS1 for any Mopar built before 1974.

 

[eldubb440]

Nova translates to no go in Spanish.

in 1986 I think it translated to Corolla in Japanese

 

[Cranky]

Ford was on thin ice as well… the ‘80 T-Bird was a complete flop. As was the Mark VI. But, they still hung on to all the Mustang sheet metal they had. A neighbor was restoring his ‘65 2+2 in 1984 and ordered fenders and quarter panels from Yocum Ford right in town. I remember him complaining about a couple of dings on what would have been NS1 for any Mopar built before 1974.

Fords were selling a lot of mustang sheet metal parts because they rusted out much faster than Mopars. I don't remember the exact production numbers anymore but they produced a whole bunch of Mustangs.... how many cars all together did Chrysler produce say within a span of 10 years between 65 and 75 compared to Ford? Chrysler was a pretty small car company. I had five mustangs in the mid 70s and all of them had rust issues with a couple of them being pretty bad and they were all Texas cars....didn't have that problem with my Mopars. Yeah the Mopars usually had some rest issues but not like the Fords did. Maybe Ford did that on purpose? Naw....they wouldn't do that would they lol

 

[440 PHIXX]

Fords were selling a lot of mustang sheet metal parts because they rusted out much faster than Mopars. I don't remember the exact production numbers anymore but they produced a whole bunch of Mustangs.... how many cars all together did Chrysler produce say within a span of 10 years between 65 and 75 compared to Ford? Chrysler was a pretty small car company. I had five mustangs in the mid 70s and all of them had rust issues with a couple of them being pretty bad and they were all Texas cars....didn't have that problem with my Mopars. Yeah the Mopars usually had some rest issues but not like the Fords did. Maybe Ford did that on purpose? Naw....they wouldn't do that would they lol

I think all them cars rusted away here in the north east. Our Tor Red ‘70 Duster was rusted badly, lower quarters and rockers by ‘77 when we unloaded it. And in ‘88 I bought a ‘79 W200 Club Cab Power Wagon that had the floor already patched and rust around the rear wheel openings on the bed. The salt here is brutal. But you make a great point about Chrysler not anywhere near Ford or GM in production. I’ve brought it up before but… in 1979 alone, GM built 116,000 Trans Am’s. That is greater than the 5 year span of the E body Barracuda, all models. And that is just the Trans Am. The Camaro sold very well in ‘79 too.