I’ve just let the chooks out to run, enjoying my morning coffee in Queensland, Australia watching another great video mate… and the animations look fine👍

Great video.

Keep ‘em.

The 70 Cuda is such a good looking car, it is simple yet masculine!

I had a six pack 440 4 speed 69 Charger R/T. No, it wasn't factory but was a factory six pack engine. I had the mechanical linkage holley six pak and as a carb specialist back then, it never missed a beat. That thing would fry a set of M 50's in a heartbeat.

this is still true haha

Chevy and Ford built their pony cars by taking a compact, cutting a bit out of the wheelbase and putting sports coupe bodywork on it. The MOPAR E-bodies applied that formula to an intermediate platform.

​​​@@skaldlouiscyphre2453the chevrolet camaro was built on a Dedicated 2 door platform called the f body which is a 2 door Only platform

@@sebdupree1 Don't forget, the F-body is a modified X-body. The Camaro is derived from the Nova, much like the first gen Mustang was derived from the Falcon.

And the AMX

Only thing cooler was to drive them

Good day , and the LJ in the background?

@BROOKWOOD64, I agree totally, I would rather have a nice clone or tribute car ,that I can take liberties with in the building process than( ie clone or tribute car) than have a numbers matching car sitting in the garage with a cover over it that nobody can enjoy,with out worrying about devaluing the car, if you build your own, go have fun with it, I see too many trailer queens... never driven...lol

Contaire, even if had a numbers correct car I would still continue to use and enjoy it, toys are meant to be used, enjoyed, and cared for, showboat trailer queens don't exist in my world,, having anything just for the sheer bragging rights of "I have a _ ", is totally bullshit

Weren't you a Tire salesman.......lol

Hey Mister...Didnt your Cousin used to Own that Tire shop right around the corner ? .....lol xo

that 302 screaming with those 456s had to be fun!

That Maser doesn’t have the soul the Chevelle did, fast, turn and stop agreed, just not the same animal as the Chevy 👍

@@johnhughes2043 Thanks for comment. Totally agree, Late Model Italian Supercar is going to sell for far less than my 67 Chevelle SS is worth today. It was a blast to drive. Sold it to a kid who totaled it in less than a week. Way too much power and way too inexperienced to handle it. Should have kept it in the garage. Could be driving a True Classic if I had.

Disconnect the speedo drive it by the tach

Drive it now. After death, no more driving​@@user-jq6wz5de4y

Better get started on your hobbies..

That is a pretty awesome build, I might end up doing the same with that budget!

Think u can buy real z38 for 80k

Absolutely agree

Lemon Twist Yellow. 🍋

Not one negative comment that I could find about the 340 says it all...

Wow i knew they were underrated but I didn't know it was that extreme. 12 seconds in the quarter would probably put it around there since a 20121ish mustang GT has 412hp and that's a 12 second car.

Uh, M22? How....

As of 1970 Chevy used their 350, destroked to 302. MOPAR used their 340, destroked to 303.8. Pontiac used a 303.6 CI version of their V8. Ford stuck with their 302. AMC used their heavy duty replacement block, with a displacement of 304.6.

​@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 The AMC Special Service Block (390/401 water jackets with 360 cast cylinders) could use the parts catalog 4 bolt mains. It's really to bad that Trans Am really didn't continue like it ws in 70.

I wonder if that had anything to do with the oil pan configuration. The front cross member forcing a mid sup pan. I know the Javelins were running an extra wide 11 quart pan specially built for road racing. I would assume that the Mopar along with everybody else had specially built pans.

That is a great series as well, so much awesome racing happened back then!

Can-Am went through periods where one car or another was completely unbeatable unless it broke down. It's a great period, but it was one of the least 'balanced' eras/categories in racing ever. They called it _The Bruce and Denny Show_ for a reason.

@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 But this period was absolutely fantastic to watch!

@@tkskagen Definitely. It was kinda like Loeb and his Citroens in rallying during the 00s. It was a great era, but you had a pretty good idea who was gonna win.

​@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 with that logic you can say that about all eras and series of vintage motorsports. The 911 for an example has dominated so much in the 60s,70, and 80s..... But what group 5, DRM, IMSA and trans Am series is boring because it won so much? God no...... motorsports has been balanced due to it's plateauing in tech innovation and BOP rules for the last 10ish years..... and there is a strong argument that modern motorsports is boring as hell........

I don't recall the width, but yes the Challenger was longer, I believe 2". Like the ElCamino was slightly longer than the Chevelle, the extra length helped in Drag Racing.

Most Plymouth versions of the comparable Dodge products, B-body, E-body were a bit smaller because Plymouth was Chrysler's "value" brand, so they had a bit less room in the back seat floorboards.

The 340 seems like the perfect powerplant when done correctly. I love the B-Body Mopars!

Agreed, direction changes just make for such an entertaining watch

Keep in mind, some day that modern appliance will be a classic too. I remember as a kid people insisting things like Hondas and Datsuns would never be classics, and yet here we are.

Just keep them in the garage for 50 years..

good point :)@@skaldlouiscyphre2453

Still a super sweet car! But yes very similar build, I am sure its a blast to drive!

@@rarecars3336 thanks man and it definitely is but also a labor of love. It’s a 50 year old car and has all the problems that go along with that, i’ve been working on it since i bought it 3 years ago lol

One of those Keith Black prepared engines found it's way into a Superbird. Richard Brooks ran it at Daytona, finished 7th. That was the last time one of the winged warriors ran in NASCAR.

The AAR & TA were the first American cars to come with different size tires..Out back was a G-60x15 tire(bigger than the Hemi Cuda) & a E60x15 front tire..The larger rear tire was used to give it a rake so the rear side exhaust would clear better..All AAR's came with a 15x7 Rallye wheel as standard equipment.. it was optional on the TA Challenger however..

The current TA2 class puts on some really good races.

Thanks for mentioning and being useful 👍

Wow that is a cool tidbit, I did not know that!

@@rarecars3336 Another give away that it's an AAR is the driving lamps.

426 hemi is nice & more legendary

I think I would do the same!

An amazing era of automotive design

says who when?

That is crazy to me because I really like these stripes, but to each their own!

That sounds rad, do you have a link to that video?

I have a little 400 Pontiac that “ate” 340’s and most 440’s. Mostly stock engines and tires, back in the mid to late ‘70’s. Fun times. Still have the light little Firebird with RA 400.

@@jrwstl02 Ok

So , did Chrysler not actually have any quick ratio steering boxes but just an alternative pitman arm ?. Interesting.

Thanks for the additional information on the ARRs..

Also, I think it was Swede Savages trans am Cuda that went to a new owner in France , and he took the 340 out and installed a 426 Hemi , and raced it at Le Mans .But it ended.up back in America with it's original 340 back in and repainted back to the AAR team colors.

@@barrycuda3769 Nope... but maybe... the car said to be the 42 was donated to Good Year and was a part of their traveling road show for a few years... it was found in a Good Year storage area and restored in the early 90s... Savage totaled one of the three and that leaves the Dan Gurney car as the one that went to France... maybe...

@@thomasauslander3757 You are very welcome. Mopar or no car.

Because, starting in 1970 Trans-Am allowed teams to destroke larger engines to meet the 5000 cc limit, rather than requiring the destroked version in the homologation model.

As much power as the 303.8 destroked 340 made in the racecar, it was all above 4500 rpm. It basically would've had to be the exact engine to be able to move the fully dressed 'Cuda off the line. The 340 street engine had better manners. Besides, they were actually homologating the engine block... not the displacement. If that was the case then the camaro of the same year would've had to have a 302 when in fact, they had LT1 350s. Ford was the only manufacturer who ACTUALLY produced an engine with the correct displacement as a factory option in 1970. even the javelin had a 390 in their 1970 dan gurney special.

Because the SCCA was trying to keep factory interest high. If the companies are averse to offering a small-displacement, hi-po engine, allowing them to destroke an existing engine might make them more willing to participate. The bigger displacement, less highly strung street version was more appealing to customers, meaning the bean-counters would be easier to persuade into approving it for production. If the bean-counters cause the brand to withdraw support, it reduces the overall level of competition. The SCCA also allowed cars to run larger wheels and tires than they were offered with for the same reason. It's reasonable to have the cars all running the same brakes and the same tires. Production based GT and touring car racing is always a compromise between putting the various models of car on an equal footing and trying to maintain similarities to the production models. When they get too strict in one direction you get waves of certain models dominating (like the Sierra and then R32 Skyline in Group A), when get too loose you end up with a silhouette formula. Personally, I'm tempted to believe that gradually becoming a silhouette series is the inevitable fate of any production based category that survives too long. GT3 is a good example of a category that's slowly marched in that direction since it's start.

@@derektrieglaff9103 Ironically, AMC modified their engines (raised the deck height) for that year, giving them a version with a 304 displacement. I can't help but wonder if that was the result of preparing to homologate a hot-rod 304 engine for Trans-Am, only to end-up not needing to build that version of that engine. Chevy would have just combined the LT-1 with the 302's crank to make it a 302, if the rules didn't change. Ford had an engine; the stories about Pontiac and MOPAR's stillborn 303s are known; the AMC engine is the only one that not much is known about.

@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 if you combined the LT1 block with the 302 crank you would've gotten something like a 330ci engine. The LT1 was a 350ci engine whereas the DZ302 was a 327 block with a 283 crank. So, just using the LT1 block would've been useless to meet the 305ci displacement limit. That's why chevy just stuck with the 69 DZ302 for the 1970 series. By 1971 the trans am series upped the cubic inch rule to accommodate the new engine sizes. That's where the Boss 351 came in and the continued use of the LT1. Pontiac already had a 350ci engine and mopar wasn't even racing. AMC did still use javelins for trans am but, I'm pretty sure they were using a destroked 360 at that time. I'm pretty sure it was the 360 block and pistons with the 304 crank. Which would put the displacement at right around 330ci.

@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 I appreciate your comparison of trans am racing in the 60s and 70s to JGTC and silhouette racing of the late 70s early 80s and the aussie supercar racing of the 90s. You're right when it comes to convincing the bean counters. Because in the end factory racing development is all about making the money from the public. As they say, win on Sunday, sell on Monday.

Heck yeah!