Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267027)

I have always wondered about that one, BIlly. Does the 1.375" throttle bore front-half-of-a-Quadrajet carb used on the 267 actually flow more than the 1.686" throttle bore conventional Rochester 2-bbl on the 262?

My dime in the pot today may stretch the limit because it is EFI, but it has proven potential.

96-99 Jeep Grand Cherokee 242/190-175/170 MPI
2WD of course! One of the best flowing cylinder heads offered on a pushrod American I6, lots of blueprinted compression, more than adequate camshaft. The offroad guys have developed lots of stuff for this engine and the knowledge base is broad and deep. The throttle body flows over 450 cfm according to Chrysler and there are several "tuneup" controllers available that are affordable. AMC Torqueflites bolt up and some years used Dana 44 or AMC 20 rear ends.

There is a racer in Div 1 (I cannot remember his name) who runs this same engine in a late 80s Comanche pickup and the later engines are even better. Several superceded parts should be listed in the tech bulletins that cover intake systems and the cylinder head that would possibly be even better than the current listings.

This is an R, T, or U car depending on year and model and you could even squeek a 5-speed into the 96 model.

We're up to $.20 in the pot now!

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267027)

96-99 Jeep Grand Cherokee 242/190-175/170 MPI
2WD of course!

Originally Posted by Billy Nees (Post 267044)

You had to bring that one up, didn't you. I'm vaguely familiar with Bob Salemi's truck and although it took him a long time to sort it out, once he did it flew.
That one sent me scrambling back to the guide to check it out! While I was there, if you can, enlighten me on the 96 Dakota with the 153 4 cyl. Is that based on the 242? If it is then that puppy at 115 HP could be a kickass W combo.

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 266850)

Okay, since I have already let the cat out of the bag on the other thread, I will start with my favorite, the '76 or '77 Camaro, '78 Camaro LT or '78 Firebird Formula, or '79 Camaro Berlinetta with a 305 2-bbl for U/SA. The pluses for this combination and the potential makes it a must look at in my opinion.

The engine is basically the same as the one Billy Lynn and Dean Oliver race in their Malibus in K & L. The only difference is the carb and a smaller intake valve (which may be a plus with the smaller carb!). Those Malibus run 11.80s consistently at 3250 lbs, so we can get a guage on the potential of the U combination from that. If you allow that the switch to a 2-bbl will chop a full second off and the added weight for U (3770 lbs. minimum) will slow by another .6 or so, the U combination should run mid 13s in a class with a 15.15 index. I see lots of potential there to be a competitor.

Then, consider that the 200 Metric or 200R4 is available and the car will be equipped with a GM 8.5" ten bolt. The 200 is a transmission of choice in lots of classes and the 8.5 is plenty strong enough with stock parts for this combo. The body has leaf springs so traction is easy and the plethora of available bolt-ons makes used parts easy to find. There have been several racers over the years chase combinations using the Rochester 2-bbl, so even the carb is not exactly an unknown.

I see lots of affordable potential in these combinations. I think the big problem for most people would be resisting the temptation to go overboard with the cosmetics and tricks that are available and applicable for the engine and car.

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267060)

Kevin - Yes I do remember. That was one of the tidbits of info I was using in my analysis.

When are you going to race your beast? It cost a bit more than a dime, didn't it!

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267058)

This may be the 153 in the 96 Dakota:

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/amc-25.html

Originally Posted by Billy Nees (Post 267012)

Good morning! Ready for another "Dime Rocket"launch?
1981-82 Camaro, Malibu, Monte Carlo with 2V 267/150.
I can't believe this one hasn't been done ever! It gives away some cam and valve size to the 262 combo that we all know works but it also gets back 15 HP! Down side would have to be getting cars light enough to run U and it's probably stuck there. It would probably even work with the 7.5 rear (4.56 best ratio) and a short slick which would be lighter and cheaper. Sorry Dwight, this one's auto only. It actually has a bigger carb than the 75 262.
Just one more comparo, there were a couple of good running 229 V6s around so we know that they work, the 267 is rated 2 HP less than the V6!

Originally Posted by K Stubbs (Post 267061)

Yes sir, I stopped counting at 40k lol it was starting to hurt my feelings. My engine is getting dynoed/freshened up for BG and Indy, so hopefully in a few weeks. Great post, I knew you and Billy would be great at doing this and to be honest if I knew this could be done for 5k, I would put up the money just to show everyone it could be done. Might encourage some people to do the same on a limited budget. Great ideas.

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267067)

Thanks!! This is fun for me.

You mentioned something there that makes me think. We ought to do that as a project and document a blow by blow (might even Facebook or Twitter it) just to see if it can be done. Reckon we could get a magazine or website or manufacturer to fund it????

Originally Posted by K Stubbs (Post 267088)

Thats exactly what I was thinking.....I think we should seriously think about it, it would be fun to see if we could find the right "project budget stocker" to build for the least amount of money and be competitive in a lower class. Would definately get attention.

Originally Posted by Billy Nees (Post 267096)

I've always wanted to build a Stocker as completely as I could off of E-Bay!

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 266850)

Okay, since I have already let the cat out of the bag on the other thread, I will start with my favorite, the '76 or '77 Camaro, '78 Camaro LT or '78 Firebird Formula, or '79 Camaro Berlinetta with a 305 2-bbl for U/SA. The pluses for this combination and the potential makes it a must look at in my opinion.
.

Originally Posted by Tod Lane (Post 267145)

If I read this right, a 79 Firebird with a shipping weight of 3358 LBS would have a weight break of 18.66 and fall into R/SA. The index is 14.05 ?

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone (Post 266859)

How about using a std bore cast rebuilder second ring in a .030 over application? Goes along for the ride and makes you legal.. Guilty!

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267027)

.

96-99 Jeep Grand Cherokee 242/190-175/170 MPI
2WD of course! bulletins that cover intake systems and the cylinder head that would possibly be even better than the current listings.

This is an R, T, or U car depending on year and model and you could even squeek a 5-speed into the 96 model.

Originally Posted by The Hawk (Post 267188)

Isn`t there a trick similar to this with the oil ring?

Originally Posted by Chris DeGidio (Post 267197)

What about the regular 4dr late 90's Cherokee?? Does it fit??

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267202)

Cherokees are not in the Class Guide. Grand Cherokees are starting in 1996. The 1999 Grand Cherokee and the 2001 and up Dakotas with the 287 (4.7 V8) are also a good choice, just don't believe that motor can be raced for cheap.

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland (Post 267154)

'78 Firebird Formula has a 19.18 break, so it is a natural T car and will fit U with weight.

Originally Posted by Robert Swartz (Post 267213)

Late 70's 305 2bbl SBC?

I'd need to know the correct the correct carbuerator. What about head numbers, correct intake(s). Would this combo be a flat top or dish piston motor. With the 2bbl and small cam, this thing would be real limited on rpm, what 6000-6200 max? Scarey thought but, you could almost get away with stock press fit pistons with this.

Neat thing is, all I'd need to do is tie the sub frames, do the front end, take the 10 bolt to Moser. I wouldn't even need to put the roll bar in for this low a class! Better yet, I could run the Indy Points meet, less than an hour from my house!

You guys serious, I'd offer the car for a corroboration effort. I already have the Hooker super comp headers, Moroso springs, sub frame connectors, Cal-tracs and mono leaf springs, a torque converter and wheels. Just tossing something out there.

Originally Posted by Billy Nees (Post 267133)

Dwight, you beat me to the keyboard this morning! I wanted to do the 304 (think spoiled brat stamping his feet)!
I'm going to guess that my next one could be done within our budget but I will probably have to go to Mark for a final thumbs up.
Lew Becker and I ran across one of these cars at an auction and I actually had Lew bidding on it. It was very clean and didn't go for any real money.
76 Buick Century with 2V 350/205 or put the 4V on it. It makes Q/R/T with 2V or swap intake and make O/P/Q.
1.250 Venturi 2g flows around 350 cfm, great heads, small cam, medium valves but at 205 HP it's 25 HP less than a 350 2V Chevy that does work.
Only real down side that I could see is the big, heavy body that it has to go in unless it were in a Skylark for P. But it is a 6 class car with an intake change!
Marky Mark, can it be under the index on our budget?

Originally Posted by Robert Swartz (Post 267213)

Late 70's 305 2bbl SBC? I had really overlooked this as a viable combination.

My 79 Firebird body is setting in the corner of the garage with the nose off. If there is no real difference in the tail lights, I need to replace the fenders and hood anyway. Finding a complete front clip for a 78 Formula might be a tall order?

I'd need to know the correct the correct carbuerator. What about head numbers, correct intake(s). Would this combo be a flat top or dish piston motor. With the 2bbl and small cam, this thing would be real limited on rpm, what 6000-6200 max? Scarey thought but, you could almost get away with stock press fit pistons with this.

Neat thing is, all I'd need to do is tie the sub frames, do the front end, take the 10 bolt to Moser. I wouldn't even need to put the roll bar in for this low a class! Better yet, I could run the Indy Points meet, less than an hour from my house!

You guys serious, I'd offer the car for a corroboration effort. I already have the Hooker super comp headers, Moroso springs, sub frame connectors, Cal-tracs and mono leaf springs, a torque converter and wheels. Just tossing something out there. It could be the first Class Racer special?

Originally Posted by goinbroke2 (Post 267264)

Oh, can I add one please? 91 ranger 2.3 4cyl auto.
Not a killer as it's heavy for JT/SA but....
2.3 @ 105hp
10:1 comp 57cc head
1.73/1.5 valves
.254 lift (ohc)
25.86 factor making it 2715 lb's where JT/SA is 22.0 and over.
The 2.3 ford has a HUGE fan base/knowledge in roundy round and rally trucks and 4cyl rangers are given away with a box of strawberries around here.
Index of 16.75...thoughts?

Originally Posted by Billy Nees (Post 267265)

Happy July 4th! One more "popper"!
77-83 Mopar 2V 225/140
This is probably the "Dime Rocket" with the most pop for the dime but you gotta like slow, not pretty (IMHO) cars.
Small Carter 2V carb beats any other inline 6 (except AMCs).
.410/.419 cam
6 real intake ports (that ain't bad) and the manifold is better than it looks.
Valves are small but not too small for the cylinder.
Long stroke and not alot of compression but hey, 140 HP with 2v carb.
Bodies are still plentiful as are rears and engines for not alot of $$$.
Low gear 6 cyl case 904s can be found.
Early no frills Volare could be made light enough to fit U. It seems like all of the other bodies would have to lose wt. to fit V.
Might have to "copple up" some truck headers but they're around.
Good scrounge could do this one really cheap!