Re: 392 Hemi

[Dave64 <lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx>]

Bill and Ollie - you guys are pushing me over the edge!  Thanks for your support - I think!  Ollie - I had that same thought about how a 440 is no more correct for the car than a 392, so why not?  The one thing with the 440 is I could put the cross ram on it that I love the look of so much.  But I'm not into the clone thing - more of a period correct feel.  I always looked at my car as ending up to be what I might have done with it in the late 60s if I had a 318 car.  A 392 fits that criteria as well.

And Bill - you hit on the other part that's pushing me to do it - it would be different and unique - which really sums up the life of the Mopar man.  I think that's why we love them so much - there aren't as many of them around.  My love of drag racing and drag racing history puts the 392 on my list of iconic Chrysler engines - one of the early foundations of Chrysler's dominance in fuel racing.

Thanks, guys.

Dave

Dave,
Here comes Ollie's 2 cents.....
We all laugh about the 350 Chebbies in everything....
You kinda come out the same with a 440 in our cars.
Wish in second thought I had used a 340 in my 65 Satellite, rare engine and rare car.
So no 440 in a 64 either so why not a 392?
I like it.
Ollie

--- On Thu, 3/4/10, Bill <Y1TopBanana73@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Bill <Y1TopBanana73@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: 392 Hemi
> To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 9:54 AM
> ${top_text_ad}
> Dave,
> 
> I LOVE the idea of a 392 HEMI in a 62-65 B! It's probably
> the ONLY
> non-stock swap that I would do...just because it's so cool
> &
> different. That's why I love Mopars...anyone can & will
> drop a 350
> into anything. How many people put 392 HEMI's in? GO WITH
> IT! You'll
> be glad you did and have one of the coolest rides around!
> 
> Bill
> 
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Dave64 <lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > Nobody has talked me out of it yet.  I'm still
> conflicted between what I wanted to do with the car and what
> I think is realistic.  I wanted to eventually put a 426
> Hemi or MW in it.  But I don't think that's financially
> realistic for me in the foreseeable future - if ever.  I've
> been leaning toward plan B - a 440.  Much more affordable
> and realistic for me.  But that's a crapshoot too - I see
> some that are pretty cheap (but who knows what you end up
> with - could be junk), and others are up in the price range
> of this 392.  The uniqueness and cool factor of the 392
> along with the price puts it ahead of the 440 idea, in my
> mind.  It's historic significance is also appealing to me
> (even though not correct for a '64 car).  I wasn't planning
> to buy an engine this soon (of course we're always looking
> ,aren't we?), so the timing isn't the best.  But I can
> swing it, and I have a gut feeling I'll regret it if I pass
> on it.
> >
> > Thanks for all of your comments, and keep them coming!
>  I'll definitely let you guys know what I decide.
> >
> > Dave
> 
> ${bottom_text_ad}
> ----
> Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one
> person -- directly to that person.  I.e., send
> parts/car transactions and negotiations as well as other
> personal messages only to the intended recipient, not to the
> Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect your
> privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the
> content signal to Mopar topic.  Thanks!
> 
> 1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
> http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html and
> http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.
> 
>