j-c-c-62
Well-Known Member
You fired your Chauffeur?
Let's see your cars! 1962 - 1965 ONLY please.
- Thread starter Big Mike
- Start date
68chargerfreak
Active Member
my 62
HemiLane
Well-Known Member
My '64 Polara 500.
- Local time
- 5:45 PM
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2010
- Messages
- 30,844
- Reaction score
- 54,751
- Location
- Hanover, Pennslyvania
If painted black that would look like my first Mopar when I was 18. Cragars and lots of chrome. Tinted windows all around also.
Great car!
I may have posted on
"this thread" before, but here's my '63 from this past w/e...
j-c-c-62
Well-Known Member
Is that stock location of rear axle?
- Local time
- 5:45 PM
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2010
- Messages
- 30,844
- Reaction score
- 54,751
- Location
- Hanover, Pennslyvania
Dave6T4
Well-Known Member
- Local time
- 5:45 PM
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2020
- Messages
- 7,932
- Reaction score
- 18,219
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
I just looked at this again. The rear end is back 1" too far. I suspect the car has M/P Super Stock springs with relocation hangers. These hangers were made to adapt the shorter S/S (basically a-body) spring onto '66-up B-body. '66-up B-body spring has a length from centre locating pin to front spring eye of 22". S/S (A-body) spring equivalent measurement is only 20",so, the hanger kit moves the spring eye mounting hole back the required 2" from the normal frame attachment point, to accommodate the shorter spring. However, the length from centre locating pin to front spring eye on 1962-1965 B-body springs is only 21". Using the M/P Dodge front hanger kit on these cars puts the rear end back 1" too far. There are a couple of solutions for this. One is to redrill the mounting hole in the new brackets back 1". The other is to use the M/P Plymouth relocation hangers, which are 1" shorter than the Dodge pieces. I learned this when putting Super Stock springs under my '64 Polara's. A friend of mine just went through this on a 1965 Satellite he bought.
During 1966-1970, B-body Dodges always had a 1" longer wheelbase than their Plymouth equivalent. Chrysler kinda cheated on this, making the Dodge buyer think he was getting a bigger car for his $$$, over buying a less expensive Plymouth. The subframes were identical between the two cars: the longer wheelbase on the Dodge was achieved by using a 1" longer front spring hanger than the one used on Plymouth, pushing the rear axle back that important 1".
HemiLane
Well-Known Member
No. After I got the car, I found that it had later B-Body leafs, which are longer. I have since corrected with the correct SS leafs and hangers
Your 62 Dodge makes me want to find a nice 62. And I’ve always been more of a Plymouth guy. Thanks
Similar threads
