RE: [Chrysler300] Carbs and clay

[christopher beilby <thelastbestgenius@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Regards certain people trying to claim the 57 300C was only practice for the subsequent wedge engined 300F and G, and that the C was not up to them, or the ram manifolding 413s, may I from afar pose a couple of questions for those who I suggest, perhaps not to take the whole issue too seriously anyway?!
 
1) how many wedge engined 413s were used in late 50s early 60s rails/dragsters that ran (and still run in nostalgia classes?) just under, or just over 200mph, as did very many 'not to altered' blown 392s??!! (by not too altered, I mean used stock/factory build, heads, crank, rods, etc?!)
2) why, if the 392 was 'not so good' an engine, do you so very rarely find 392 engined cars that have lost their original 392 motors due to blowups, failures, yet it is 'so so so so' common that the later 426 hemi cars seem to 'never rarely' have their original 426 hemis still in them, and when one asks why, one is told they had blown years ago?!(A farmer friend of mine bought a '67 or 68 426 hemi Plymouth Coupe to replace his Ford 289 engined drag street car that he had won national Modified Class Titles in for near 3 years running - the weekend he bought the 426 engined car, just as getting to know the car, he blew the hemi, this despite him never harming his 289 hipo Ford engine that still ran stock conrods that are known not to be real good for competition. In other words, he was not a trasher, nor silly re high revs. )
 
Hemis of 392 design, and the later racing based alloy 426 design hemis, have ruled world dragstrips in severest forms of highest/hardest competition for now near 50 years - 5 (five) DECADES - the ram manifolded 413 wedges were in 300s for was it 5 (five approx) years ?!!
AND, am I not correct that it was ONLY in response to complaints about LOSS OF FORMER hemi top end power, that the 300E '58 wedge was ram manifolded for subsequent 300 years!!??
 
Truth is no motor manufacturer was going to sell a slower performance car in the early 60s, than their '57 models - that is why 300F and G had ram manifolding, not that the 392 was the weak/lessor one?!
 
Finally - isn't it correct if you put Weind's early 60s alloy 2 4bbl AFB manifold, slightly better springs and exhaust, and 58 higher comp pistons in your 57/58 300s, that you get near 550 bhp at the higher revs that the mechanical cam and 300C valvetrain was designed for?!  And how many horsepower was the such modified original 413 '58 E 300 motor that went into the F and G - nowhere near that output  ??! 
 
Do not forget come 1957 and the 392, Chrysler were aware many competitor Manufacturers wanted the 300 banned from racing  - so do you think Chrysler was going to be dumb enough to release any 300C with even 450 bhp just weeks before the new race season began.  And then even without any 450 bhp, with just 375/390 hp models, they were still banned anyway!
 
All the above is how I see it - others correct me if/where wrong. No 300C/D/E has the later unibody positives, nor the handicap of the 300Cs bad areo shape, but taking these two things as fact, should not mean it is fair game to take 'cheap shots' at the 'Mighty C'  !!??  What other cars in 1957 were so far ahead of the rest in so many ways - however come 1960/61, the 300s of then had I think some pretty capable competion? Maybe not in one car like the 300 offered, but certainly re acceleration, other performance issues?
'devil's advocate' Christopher
 
and ps - clarification needed now re just which screws are maybe 'extra', not on all cars  ???!!
All 300Cs have 2 screws on end of centre stainless roof moulds, hidden by/when adding two outer short moulds. I do not think we are talking about whether 300Cs had these two screws, rather what I think we are talking/asking about, is how many 300s have additional (to these two hidden factory screws) screws visible on (outer) ends of the 2 outer short front 300C roof moulds that go with the long centre 300 front roof mould?!!
 


To: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxx; paulholm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: moparpjf@xxxxxxx; robkern@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; TFM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: c300@xxxxxxxxxxx: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:48:30 -0700Subject: [Chrysler300] Carbs and clay




Now how much air can an engine pull in? My calculations show a 392 cubicinch, four stroke cycle engine displaces a total of 590 cfm at 5,200 RPM. A413 at 5,000 RPM requires 597 cfm. All at an unlikely 100% volumetricefficiency. A couple of 385 cfm carbs seems and was plenty enough. Two500's seems like a little overkill. I've not read or recalled howcarburetors are rated and sized now or then. Anyone with carb ratinginsights might elucidate. Also quantify the pulse effect of tuned ramsinsofar as FAC (free air capacity) is concerned. 10% more air from a 1.4psi pulse at the intake valves?It does not appear that undersized carbs ever limited any letter car engine.Regards trim: From: http://www.allpar.com/mopar/hemi/chrysler-hemi.htmlWith the 300C, Chrysler again lead the way at the Daytona Speed Week.However, the performance was off, with the fastest 300 making a one way runof 138 miles an hour. At first the Chrysler engineers thought that the beachsurface, which varied from year to year, was the culprit. Certain that theyhad a 145 mile an hour car, they took the same car to the Chelsea ProvingGrounds outside the Chrysler Headquarters. Opened up on the 5 mile track,the 300C only made about 140 miles an hour. The driver reported a heavy windwhistle at high speed. Finally, it was recognized that the windshield trimfor the front of the roof stuck out nearly an inch, making it a veryeffective air brake. Using clay they formed the top of the windshield into asmooth, clean shape with no edges. The same car went out and ran 146 milesan hour with the clay covering the windshield trim.C-300'lyRich BarberBrentwood, CA1955 Chrysler C-3001986 Chrysler LeBaron T&C Convertible (Turbo increases the rated horsepowerby 50% over the naturally-aspirated engine with a concomitant 50% increasein absolute manifold pressure created by the turbo and a 7 psig wastegate)-----Original Message-----From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] OnBehalf Of Richard OsborneSent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 5:17 PMTo: paulholm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: moparpjf@xxxxxxx; robkern@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;Thomas MillerSubject: Re: FOLLOWUP: 300C Hauls A** was: Re: [Chrysler300]Warningto F andG ownersHey Paul,Thanks for confirming an earlier statement that "the C was a nice practicerun leading to the G"."THEN look at the main crippling factor, the C and D are handicapped withSMALL CARBS!!!The F and G carbs are along the lines of 500 cfm EACH, where as the much better breathing hemi heads only got 385cfm each from the factory WCFB's"I rest my case.Richard Osborne 






_________________________________________________________________
Win tix to see Crowded House live at the Greek Theatre, LA!
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=800&referral=windowslivehotmailtagline&URL=http://music.ninemsn.com.au/crowdedhouse


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



To send a message to this group, send an email to:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm

For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/ 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:Chrysler300-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    mailto:Chrysler300-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Chrysler300-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/