|
|
![]() |
#1 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
Charley A,
Check out those 'tubes' In 1965, try finding a Header Company that made a good set of tubular headers for the 273 A-Body...... ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mississippi Gulf Coast
Posts: 2,483
Likes: 68
Liked 87 Times in 63 Posts
|
![]()
Guessing they were trying to stay"equal length" and just could not fit it all under the hood. Funny now....way cool then!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
October 1965
NHRA 'F/S' National Record Holder 13.44 @ 103.68 MPH ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Rogers, AR
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]()
That 13.62 record was an altitude adjusted record. The actual time the car ran was 13.98 at Bristol. Fred and Doug had a fast little cuda but there was no way those cars would in the 13.60's in 1965. That record was what forced us to move to a 180 hp -273 and run I/SA, and later N/SA. Our first set of headers actually exited in front of the front tires. The small engine compartment forced you to be a little creative with header technology. Then Dougs and Stahl came up with nice designs for the little cars. A pain to install, but nothing was easy with those little cars.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
Rob,
Weren't they protested because of the use of the controversial Carter #3447 AFB Carburetor, which was permitted by the NHRA. The 600 CFM rated unit, that was used on the 1963 '426 Max-Wedge' engine. The #3447 had a 1 7/16" Primary and 1 11/16" Secondary, and the 273 Cast Iron Intake required the 'secondary' bore hole to be opened up. That 600 CFM AFB did make a big difference over the 'stock' 500 CFM AFB. ![]() Last edited by Paul Ceasrine; 08-08-2013 at 12:12 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Rogers, AR
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Liked 31 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]()
I don't remember anything about that. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen. I agree, going to a 600 cfm carb would have helped the little cars a bunch.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,546
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 10 Posts
|
![]()
Rob,
Weren't the 1965 - 273/235 HP - Barracuda's listed at #2930 lbs. {Shipping Weight}, which put them a 'hair' under the 12.50 Wt/Hp. Yet, the NHRA permitted them into the {12.50 to 13.99 Wt/Hp} F/S and F/SA Stock Class in 1965. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|