I think the Diplomat was an M body, and it still used torsion bars. They were L shaped and the harmonic balancer was just a cvnthair away from touching.

So true. I’m a Ford guy and you are so right. The other thing is Chevy kept the same bell housing patterns for every engine from 55 on regardless of 6, sb,bb and on. Ford and Mopar had different bell housings making it more different/ expensive to change to a later engine.

As a Ford guy, I'm most jealous of Chevys Bellhousings and always figured that was one the biggest reasons they were so successful in the hotrod world.

Tony, as a lifelong Chrysler big block lover this all makes so much sense. It used to frustrate the heck out of me to see how much cheaper it was for others to build a Chevy and have access to everything in the aftermarket goodies. I had two 440s that flat out kicked butt with just about anything on the street, but at a huge cost compared to my Chevy buddies. This explains why. At 74 years old you answered my lifelong question. Thanks for sharing you vast experience and making it interesting.

Chrysler engine flaw, UT says, "let's examine the steering and suspension!" You are like a doctoral student defending a dissertation. Your insights are powerful and come with much merit, plus, your knowledge is universal and can be applied to most things. As always, thank you for sharing with us!

Also you didn't need to change a K member in a Chevrolet to go from straight 6 to small block and even to big block back then. They all shared transmissions and most shared motor mounts and evan radiator hoses.

This is the kinda content I love about this channel, I appreciate what yall do, Uncle Tony and Uncle Kathy.

This is awesome. I was a skeptic as you got going but you really made some great points and I’m glad you acknowledged the 10 year head start GM had with the Tri-fives. I build mostly fords and Chevy’s and am always annoyed by how ford changed things on the engine to accommodate the engine bay. Chevy designed their engine bays to accommodate the engine. So you end up with 50 years of parts compatibility on the Chevy side and you have to be within a few years and exact models on the ford side of tracking down accessories. Great video!!

Very interesting how 1 or 2 relatively minor engineering decisions led to a massive loss of market share for Chrysler. Great presentation Tony!

As a long time Mopar guy I had never considered this! A very well thought out point of view. Another point is Chevrolet anything is so very interchangeable, just easier to build a Chevy on a budget and that's how just about everyone starts out.

You are one of THE smartest thinking guys around. I'm 68 and have been around this game since I was old enough to ask my late Dad "why are you doing that to that thing Dad?" He too was a very smart fella. Thankyou for a top video, Tony.

I am a Chevy guy from August 1969 till today. My friends and I always thought of the Mopar guy's as different and all this time it was the oil pans, I'll be danged. Good video, thanks.

I remember drag racing a hemi in the 80's and the old guy that helped me build the car was obsessed with the oil pan and engine compartment. He reconfigured the whole thing. He never said why but the car lasted pass after pass with no issues. I asked him one time shouldn't we spend more time on the rest of the engine and his response was that it was already built to do the job we just need to make sure it comes to work every day.

Great video. Chevy also had unbelievable interchangeability of parts. You could swap the heads etc from any small block. Over the counter parts at the dealer. A big block fit nicely in a tri-5. Bell housing bolt patterns all matched. Chevy had it going on for the diy folks.

You nailed it , long time ago hot rod guys found out it was easier to put a SBC in a ford than to put a later ford into a ford. all about the oil pan location. Another great episode

I was always wondering why the bowtie has always been the go-to engine for performance mods; what was SO different about the Fords & Chryslers that they weren't seeing the same popularity? This video has certainly shed some light on the answer to that question; it has also made me wonder about what has been learned by Ford & Chrysler since that time and those lessons have been applied. Good video.

The 440 magnum was very well designed for a street performance engine. All I ever did was put on a stock HEMI 6 quart oil pan with the stock 440 pickup--the 440 pickup was the same depth as the hemi pickup. And a stock volume pump with a black oil pressure spring. All a high volume oil pump did was use horsepower to turn it. When I put headers, a Torker, a Crower 280 degree cam and a Holley 750 double pumper on one of my 440s, it made more power but it moved the power band up slightly so the car was much less "driveable" with a 4 speed.

I used a 8-10 quart oil pan for my small block 273 in a '65 Valiant back in the '70's. I believe it was made by Milodon and had the hole/tunnel for the steering link. Just need to add the extended oil pick-up and it was good to go.

I used to run big block mopars on the streets and I lost a few of them to spun bearings. I had pan baffles in them too.

Absolutely love videos like this that take you on an engineering journey and explain why things are how they are. And who else than Uncle Tony delivers? Thank you good sir for sharing your knowledge on everything Mopar (and car engineering in general)!

Love the unblinkered and honest approach of this channel. I love mopars but they have their flaws, all cars do.

Chevy also had the advantage of compatibility. You could change out a 350, 327, 307, or 283 with little to no problem. With Fords I always ran into problems if it wasn’t an exact replacement. Never meddle with Mopar to much.

At 16 I could not figure out why I spun bearings in my 67 Fairlane. It was a bored 390, cam, headers and good heads. Was a brand new bottom end with perfect clearances. Guess it accelerated fast enough to do the oil starvation thing.

My dad was a Ford man when I was a little boy in the 60 s. When he started building engines for the boys drag race and other races. Chevrolet is the way to go 40 years later he still holds to it

The Chrysler oiling problems make total sense to me now Tony, thanks

The shaft mounted rockers are definitely *not* a benefit in most applications. You had a video where you yourself describe the tuning issues you have with shaft mounted rockers. I believe it's called "The Engine Tuning Issue You Didn't Know You Had". So you get the higher RPM valve train capability but then it's killed by the issues you describe in that video with valvetrain geometry on decked heads/block. Chevy doesn't have that issue and they can spin plenty high.

Tony, I absolutely love these historical perspective videos. Keep it up.

This was very interesting! To me, it was just that Chevrolet was the best selling, most well known brand - so since so many people owned them, it translated over into racing as well. But, apparently there was more to it than just that.

Im an AMC guy myself and other day I saw that one old commercial here in youtube from Chrysler and there was a comparison between Valiant And Rambler American, it was fun and all but what really got me giggles was that when it was time to compare the front suspensions "In out Valiant its got the torsion bars meanwhile American still got those old coil springs.." That line totally got me LOL

Good Show, Tony. I lost an excellent 340 partially due to the oil sump placement in 1973. I had an awesome Orange 340 Duster 4 speed that went like crazy. I made the mistake of letting a hobby mechanic freshen up the valves, although it burned no oil and the compression was 150 all across. He threw the valves in a pile and went to work. When I put the heads back on it sucked oil through the guides at the rate of one quart every 200 miles. I was Not happy. On holidays within a few days we went camping. My wife was driving up a steep hill to a campsite in Nevada and she said it seems like we're losing power. I quickly leaned over and saw the oil pressure gauge at zero, so we coasted back down the hill where I added 2 quarts. Thankfully the oil pressure came back but at a reduced level. We drove that tough little fighter all the way back to the Cold Lake, Alberta Air Force Base, 1400 miles away, where I was an aircraft tech. No bearings were turned but they were pretty well burned out. Cost me lots for a full rebuild but it went better than ever until some envious sob poured sand into the oil filler cap. That finished it for good, poor girl. I still admire that tough and feisty 340! It was a real marvel of Chrysler engineering. God Bless you and God Bless America. RS, Maj Ret, Alberta, Canada.

I really like your analysis here. Good information I didn't know as a GM guy. I work on modern Mopars professionally but never worked on their old stuff

I've worked on many many many different manufacturers vehicles over the years... I've been hot rodding my whole life. GM's vehicles in my experience and opinion have always been much easier to work on and modify. Even now, I rebuilt the top end on my Dad's 2004 f150 and did a complete timing set on its 5.4L and it was a pain in the rear. I have completely built multiple 2003 - 2010 GM vehicles and they have all been relatively easy to work on and modify. Even the ends of the bolts on GM cars and trucks are rounded to make them easier to start. Not to mention the aftermarket and even factory parts availability.

Nicely done! You presented a well thought out analysis. Being a MOPAR guy, myself, I was a minority in my home town when it came to hot cars; everyone had a 67-69 small block Camaro. I love MOPAR engineering, but you're right, the aftermarket support is a lot less than for the Chevy small block.

Plus, as you mentioned before, in the junkyard, that the ford's also had the front suspension springs on top of the upper control arms, which limited the exhaust manifold clearances.

What I love about the Small Block Chevy - Is that it was the perfect working man's engine, because it was designed in a no-frills application to go in everything from secretary cars to trucks and everything in between and there were thinking it would get them through the next 10 - 15 years to the next redesign and it's against ALL FRIGGIN ODDS that it's basically lasted until today!!

A lot of wisdom in this video, Tony... As a long-time Mopar fan and owner, I always hated having to work around the steering and tight K-members. However those front sumps were wonderful for road racing, where frequent hard braking in a Chevy would cause the same problem for them. The A-bodies like Valiants and Barracudas did well in SCCA events. And yes, the Ford engine compartments were a complete nightmare. I'm not sure what they were thinking back then...

Agreed. I remember as a kid when building model cars, I always wondered why the mopar kits always had the oil pan on backwards. Even then it didn't make sense to me. Once the concept you presented took place, it was all over. To this day, when you see an article or an ad about a great part you know you can get it for your Chevy. If they by some chance make it for a Mopar or Ford it is usually twice the price of the Chevy version. As a teenage hot rodder in the 80's, that was all it took to make me a Chevy guy. I still love those Mopars though!

Thanks for explaining this. I had a friend with a 66 Satellite with a 440 and a heavy foot and he kept spinning bearings. I also had a 383 that did the same thing.

As a lifelong Chevy guy, this was a fascinating video. I have always cited other good things about Chevy's design but did not consider this one. Great Video!

Interchangeability of parts across decades making parts easy to find everywhere and affordable to the regular guy on a budget . Aftermarket support helped tremendously. Same bellhousing pattern was retained the entire production run..carried over even to today. The real reason the LS is popular. You can bolt a TH350 transmission from 50 years ago on one if you want.

I can't tell you how many of those "K" frames I replaced after they were damaged in accidents. You just couldn't straighten them like a "normal" car frame at the time. They were too strong and had complex geometry, plus it took a real jolt to bend them. Insurance adjusters hated them because you couldn't fix them on the cheap but in 99% of the cases you had to replace the K frame with a new one. Got to the point I could single handedly change one in less than 5 hours as I recall. Brought the vehicle in first thing in the morning and by lunch it was being buttoned up. Still needed a front end alignment & minor torsion bar adjustment but easy peasy. The oil pan situation made it a terrible street rod setup but for frame repairs it was the cat's meow! My only complaint with them was rusty alignment cams and the ridiculous over/under (inner/outer) cam set up in the aprons. Ohhh ... dem was da days!!!

Someone who answers questions that nobody is asking.... that's a philosopher!! LOL. Great video and thank you for sharing. 👍

Thanks for that, Uncle Tony. The only car I hot-rodded was my first car, a 1970 340 Dart Swinger. The headers were definitely a bear to put in. All I did to it was headers, Edelbrock LD-340 intake and a 750 cfm AFB. Had I put a hot cam, low rear gears, and slicks on it, I might have had problems with the front sump. But I still beat a lot of Camaros and Mustangs. I especially enjoyed your explanation of why the first Mopar funny cars had the front wheels extended so far forward. Genius! I have read stories about the early funny cars since the mid 70's. No one else ever explained it as a way to move the sump. They always said it was to extend the wheelbase so as to try to minimize the wheelies. You're always a treasure of information. Thanks!

There's a reason the LS is one of the most swapped engines today. Great explaining details!

I remember as a kid ia asked an old timer about why all the old streetrods used chevy engines. It was exactly as you say, the rear sump oil pan. I work with friends for years on circle track cars and they were doe hard blue oval fans. All of the engines were converted to rear sump but were mounded further rearward than stock so steering clearance wasnt an issue.

Fantastic historical segment Tone. That was very educational bro. Good stuff.

Duntov cams and solid lifters over the GM counter for less than $25 in 1965 helped us poor boys out.

Dang, I never thought about this. My Dad always kept a Dodge in the garage for circle track and a Chevy for the straight line. I always wondered why.

Chevys are swap friendly too. Same bell housing for 6, small block, big block v8s. Chrysler requires separate trans for each engine family.

Tony you're the best teacher. Now I better understand why my old friends & relatives use to give so much Grefe about my beloved Fords & Chryslers.

When you started I could see that huge steering box in my mind before it was mentioned. Such a good presentation. When a man can discuss honestly the faults of his favorite brand you will get a lesson. Thank you!

You’re right. I’m a GM guy, cause a Camaro was my first car. I’ve built a couple of Ford engines, and thought that they could make a bunch of power. I did notice that the oiling system needed a bunch of improvements, but the basics of the block and heads, had a bunch of potential. I haven’t worked on any Chrysler engines, but I understand how potent they can be. Now that I’ve seen your video, I can clearly see the shortcomings of the engine to chassis design. I thought it was pretty interesting

Ford Windsors also suffered from no good flowing heads until around 1990 (Probably for the same reasons Tony said for Chrysler) Today, there are options that make it great, but back in the day people had to make Clevors (Cleveland head on Windsor block) in order to get a reasonable head on it.

Yes, also, the small Chevy V-8 breathed well, ran well, and sounded really good when it was screaming. The sound it made was a major (overlooked) factor in its popularity.

Excellent Tony, and I totally agree. I was in Engineering School in the late 60's and owned a Fabrication/Collision/HotRod shop (small aircraft included) I raced highly modified MoPars with success but used Chevy for street fun. We need major surgery to get good headers on street MoPars. One of my professors called out the similarities of the big MoPar block with Ford and GM too.

Even UT loves GMs deep down inside that cold Chrysler heart ❤️

Finally done a video for us Chevy guys, just kidding love your stuff man I really appreciate the time, effort and work y'all put into your content, you and Kathy are awesome people

Just to add some additional context to Tony's point about the oil pans, Chrysler introduced a "windage tray" in an effort to keep the oil in the bottom of the pan. The windage tray even became standard on the 340 ... another was Chrysler's performance division also recommended the deeper oil pans and extended pickups, giving extra oil capacity to help make sure the oiling system did its job, compensating for the front pan/pickup with extra capacity.

This is what I am talking about!! I could have some beers and talk to guys like uncle Tony all day! So much knowledge and experience in old time hot rodding. I love this stuff!

When I was a younger man and started messing with cars in the 70's I went with Chevy and Pontiac because it just seemed simpler to work on, modify and make power, add to that the fact that it also cost less, seemed like an easy decision. Most of my friends who went with other brands told me while sneering that my prized engines were also in Motor Homes. To which I replied, "exactly." I don't think they meant it as a compliment. I have always admired all high performance cars, even new ones still. They all get the heart rate up in a good way.

That and GM didnt change their bellhousing bolt pattern every new block casting. Love my MOPAR but that modular aspect Chevy has is respectable.

Interesting theory but GM sold close to 45% of all the vehicles on the road in the 60s so there were just simply more of them. GM became the main focus for after market performance parts during this era. Swapping out a SB for a BB was quick and easy also and so many interchangeable parts between engine sizes and years. GM showrooms displaying Corvettes and Camaros definitely caught the attention of many young guys.

The big block Mopar has several improvements over the SB Chevy. It has the front mounted distributor, front mounted oil filter, a separate water pump from the housing so the accessories stay in place during removal, and a dry intake manifold.

Great explanation. As an old guy who grew up in the heyday of muscle cars (1960's) I never thought about the differences in the oil pans/pickups.

This is an awesome early automotive history lesson.

UT the depth of your knowledge in these cars is nothing short of amazing. Thanks for letting it out of your head.

The hot Chrysler big blocks that I was seeing back in the 60's (my time) were not reliable and as you pointed out, it was almost always a bottom end bearing. And you could take the water pump off a 65 Chevy dump truck at the salvage yard & put it on your 55 283 with minor heater hose routing.

My pops told me that Smokey Yunick was once quoted as saying that if he could do it all again, he'd have gone with MOPAR. Having seen his awesome reverse flow cooling solution on a SBC, I'd love to see his solution to Chrysler's front sump problem. Hell, maybe he did come up with something.

Very informative video but I think Chevy's bell housing compatibility made a huge difference and should've been mentioned.

For 50 years and engine displacements from 265 to 400 cubic inches parts and accessories interchanged. It took a whole lot less parts in the aftermarket to build just about anything you wanted from a small block Chevy.

Yup-rear sump let the SB Chevy replace all those flatheads. Then we stepped up to 55-57s. It became generational. Interchangeability was so convenient, easy. Let a lot of shade-tree boys look like mechanical geniuses. Great info on the rear steer. I love Chevys but have always had a ton of respect for Mopar engines. Well-done video.

I love all of the big four American V8's but I always liked the five head bolts per cylinder in the small block chevy.

Very interesting analogy of the evolution of the big 3 comparisons Unc.Although mopar starters always dominate!No shims needed.Great content UTG.Keep it flowing.

AMC's had many of the same issues with oiling under acceleration forces. We would always run an extra quart of oil because there was plenty of room for it with the typical amc v8 pan and it helped keep the pick up covered. Many fords of the 60's were based on the falcon and just like the valiant they weren't ever really meant to have a v8. Always interesting thanks.

Thanks Tony, for those of us who lived during those magical 60's and 70's. We kept our fingernails dirty, tried to keep up with the latest car magazines, and loved many a bench racing session in driveways and garages throughout the country. those memories will be with us forever. Keep doing what you do to get this younger generation on board. All three brands are fantastic!

Great video Tony couldn’t have said it better myself. Also, Chevys interchange ability for over 60 years is over the top.

Thanks for the education, had no idea about the oiling problem. I started driving in 1976, I thought the sound of the starter made them sound cheap. And they rusted so fast in the mid 70's. But GM did too.

Only a bona fide drag racer would have known about the oil starvation issues. Great lesson Tony!

Working on Mopars ever since the early 80's you always experienced a domino effect on changing anything. Even when going from swapping a 318 to 360 required too many changes all the way to replacing the torque converter to eliminate the excessive vibration above 30 mph. Even to this day PCM's are constantly changing requiring other components to make anything work.

Great video, lots of good infro, I agree, people in the late 60s were putting big blocks in tri- five cars with little or no trouble, I have a 454 in my 57 and love it thanks.

Thanks. I am a Chevy guy and I really learned something. Keep up the good work.

Very informative, easy to see with the engine on the stand, thank you very much Tony!

That's really neat, not something I would have ever thought about but it makes complete sense. Thanks for sharing your wisdom.

I grew up with a Chevy dad - actually, he liked Pontiac as well (yes, I know they're both GM but the power plants weren't necessarily the same lol) - it's obviously understandable that I would be a little partial to Chevy but I do recognize greatness when I see and/or experience it. I like many models across all of the brands but I must say as a career mechanic that my least favorite to work on are Ford! Granted, I am speaking on more modern Fords... Anyhow, I don't currently own any hot rods (can't afford it) but I do own a 2nd gen Ram 4x4 with the 5.2 Magnum and I love it, even though it averages about 9 mpg and the dash is more brittle than candy glass on a Hollywood set 🤣. Okay, I'm done rambling. Awesome presentation, sir.

This reminds me of one weekend when I was in the Army in ‘71. Two guys swapped engines, a 427 or 454 from a long hood Nova for a 350 from a ‘68 Chevelle. Amazingly the Nova had way more room for the big block than the Chevelle. Take care and keep the interesting stuff flowing.

As a poor kid in rural Maine I gravitated towards GM because of the availability of parts and interchangeability. Replacing a 6 cylinder with any small block GM is no problem. My buddy pulled his slant out of his pickup and installed a 318. Lets just say his didn’t go so easily

Uncle tony likes a challenge, that’s why he likes mopars

This is probably the best video that you have ever done! With all the info that you have just bestowed upon us, would it be better to take a Chevy and drop a 440 in it with a rear sump oil pan? And 727 torqueflite trans in it?

AH-HA! I knew there was something about the rear sump on a Chevy engine but I couldn't put my finger on it. I understood engine compartment layout was easier with a rear sump, but I hadn't thought of oil pickup during acceleration. Thank you for helping to put the puzzle pieces together! Great video.

Great video! I definitely learned something, and you expanded my perspective on car design overall.

I had no idea, Uncle Tony! Always wondered about why such high-output Mopars weren't more common. Thanks for clearing that up!

I love this guy every time I see one of his videos I learn something new he breaks down technical things to basic common sense and I have been working on cars for almost 40 years there is always more to learn even with a 50 year old engine

Thanks, Tony. I never knew how much suspension choices affected engine architecture limitations. I do recall as a young fella reading hot rod magazine, a die hard mopar guy showed off his dry-sump oiling system. I had to go look up what that was, but the guy never stated why he did that. It was presented as "that's what race cars use" but never why the stock system had an issue.

This type of vid is why I love your channel Tony. Golden info

Chevy starters are also bolt easy to the block with just two bolts in the vertical axis, not to the bell housing like Ferds and Dodgers! This makes it real easy to start the engine out of the car, sitting on a tire, in the junk yard, or in your back yard hanging from a great old FLorida oak tree!

Absolutely brilliant, I never even considered those points. As an Aussie Ford man, we had completely different issues, no shitty Windsors over here until the super smog 5.0 in the 90’s; thankfully we cast our own Clevelands at the Geelong plant, the few Windsor short blocks we did have were fitted with Cleveland heads to make our fabulous BOSS series. But, the old saying of, if you want to rev it, you gotta Chev it! Held true because their go fast parts were so cheap, you could build a Chev for $1 a rev. BOSS Fords were around $1.50 per rev, and poor old Mopar was more than double that, if you could even find a builder that wanted to take it on given their proclivity to spit bearings at passers by.

Great video and it better says what I told my Chevy friends. It's the header set up that makes these cars more difficult for the beginner, young hotrod crowd. But also, a lot of people had bad experiences with their cold starts. Almost all early 70's cars that I worked on for complaints about cold starts had some part of the choke system either disconnected or inoperable.

Worked on cars for years and NEVER considered windage or understood it so much, thanks Tony.

You really thought about this a lot. When Chrysler car were racing and spinning bearings. This is very interesting Thnks for the video UT

Uncle Tony, you are mostly correct. But, probably the main reason Chevys were more successful in the hot rodding world was because of Zora. He was the driving force to make Chevrolet engines more accessible to the aftermarket for the development of performance parts.