CMG

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you say it came from a 300M didn't you? Aren't those 10 to 1 compression and 250+ horsepower? Isn't the gearing steeper in a 2.7 car?

Congrats for a hard job well on it's way to being done Dodgefan! Looks great!

I can actually say I owned a 1937 Plymouth nicer than this! Hahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!! I remember an article 25 years or so ago (maybe more) about the "Ugliest hubcaps ever made". They voted the B210's hubcaps the winner!

Cool stuff! How does it sound?

Well...... I tore the stinking engine entirely apart, and I'm glad I did. It was a mess to say the least. A NEW mess, but a mess... lol I upped my compression, it is now 446 cubic inch, 9.35 to 1 compression (measured) with a 270H Comp Cam. I ported the heads and deshrouded the valve bowls, redid a few things done poorly/wrong, and hopefully will have a stout engine now. The camshaft in the engine that started the whole teardown was measured at .250" lift, which was .375" lift at the valve. Pretty pathetic! I'm tossing it back together, this is what I started with at 12:00 noon today... This is where I quit, in the middle of making my leads. LOL Back at it tommorow!

I gotta say, after hearing all the moaning about "cheap plastic interiors" over the last couple of years here at C&G, I rode in a 2008 Super Duty Ford diesel on the weekend. PLEASE, if ANYBODY wants to talk cheap plastic interiors, have a nice ride around the block in a Super Duty Ford. Everything else WILL seem Bentley-like opulent after, trust me. LOL

Slowly but slowly.... LOL Well, I've had to rip out more than I thought, wiring here and there, battery cables buried deep and half melted, all sorts of funny stuff. I can actually close my hood on the intake setup, air cleaner and all, which saves me from reskinning a hood... Here's what I mocked up, the intake fits, the waterpump housing will work and everything should attach, now I have to pull off everything, polish the waterpump housing and start final assembly.... I have polished valve covers and some other shiny parts, but the mockup shows what it will look like basically........

Maybe worn suspension components, or wheel bearings, but it sure sounds like warped rotors..?

There is a big difference in some of the low cost replacement rotors and some of the higher priced good quality rotors sometimes. Beware the inexpensive rotors with the attractive pricetag! I find on some vehicles even one very hard stop from three digit speeds can bring a rotor to pulsate. I assume the rotors in question are vented and not solid?

I might be out of touch, but I would have looked at Saturn long before Pontiac.

We got a one year old Canyon four door from a rental place, and wow was I surprised how bad the truck was. It drove terribly, to put it nicely. My wife phoned an hour after we picked it up and requested a different vehicle, I kid you not! They ended up swapping the Canyon for something, I can't even remember what it was!!!!! My wife drove the truck home, asked me to come out and drive it (I was wondering what the heck she was asking that for!) then when I drove it she kept saying how mad she was that they gave her an old truck. It was less than a year old with 12,000km on it! I know rentals are brutal vehicles, but I was stunned how poorly it drove. It was a 5 banger I think... automatic four door, definitely not (hopefully not) a loaded vehicle!

It's gotta be the biggest drawback of the car, most who don't like it that I have read about blame the rearward visibility as the worst part of the car. I've never sat in one, and I have a gas pedal in most of my cars to reduce my need to see behind me anyways.... :AH-HA_wink: haha

LOL I get all sorts of these arguments all over the internet. Take my Dodge buddies, who post about the NEW Challenger's interior being less than opulently stellar, they always compare the NEW Challenger to the OLD Challenger, which a lot of them own and most think is superior.... LOOK AT A 1970 DODGE CHALLENGER INTERIOR!!!!! For Pete sakes, I can'r tell you how hard we laughed the first 70's Challenger we bought and we looked at the door panels. One huge molded expanse of cheap plastic! The dashes were cool, lots of stuff was interesting and some stuff downright wild (pistol grips etc) but as far as plastic interiors go Puh-lease!!!! The newer cars are miles ahead in terms of creature comforts. Performance wise they are nothing to shake a stick at either. You want a Bentley interior, buy a Bentley! You want a Camaro to have fun cruising in, don't expect Grey Poupon in the limo divider! :AH-HA_wink:

The Pontiac news SUCKS. I'm a MoPar guy, but I can't believe GM would axe Pontiac before some of the other stuff. TRULY disappointing. Sad day for domestics IMO.

Chrysler has always had cool, weird, innovative stuff over the years. Lots of extremely weird appearance options such as gator grain and mod top roofs, lots of performance stuff (sometimes at a price- max wedge cars, early Vipers, etc etc etc) Chrysler truly is a unique car company, always has been, always will be. Too much emphasis here in this forum is placed on the transportation type boring daily driver vehicles, Chrysler is at it's best when it's producing the oddities. And this guy sure loves the weird stuff.

I agree. I've spent many hours in many of them, and I have to say, I like the 300 interiors.

I don't mind it.

The chassis and body are BEYOND USE. It's not a "car" anymore. What is left would collapse under regular use. It's a piece of history, it's automotive related, but it can't be driven, "dud" engine, "dud" chassis, nor "dud" body. It's akin to bringing up the Titanic, tossing a paint job on it, refitting the interior and setting out into the Altlantic. Great idea, but it ain't gonna happen.

I've thought those were nice looking cars since they debuted, I've always liked the styling. Nice looking car Dodgefan.

It's not that it WON'T be done, it's that it CAN'T. The body is wafer thin, a finger could be pushed through the body in places. To ME that car is a piece of art. It's an American car that has gone through the absolute WORST of elements over 50 years, and even though it's a useless deteriorated mess, it's got a profile that is unmatched, remnants of some of the most beautiful and personality packed features and parts, and the hope it "could" be a car again. The jewel in the rough, times 100. Problem being of course that it's a piece of art now, as the car CANNOT be brought back to life. To some it's a piece of junk, but to me it's everything automotive encased on a 3d canvas. A piece of true art.

I think some of you guys completely miss the point... the car will NEVER, EVER run and drive again. It's beyond saving. The engine will NEVER turn over. It is solid as a rock. It's a piece of history like Dodgefan says, because of what it was, and what it went through. There is a Plymouth Prowler that was entombed around the change of the century, I think it will fare MUCH better than Miss Belvedere did. It could have been a fairy tale story, but Mother Nature had other ideas.

And what else would you POSSIBLY expect Chrysler personnel to say? Can you imagine GM going to the media and saying they are much worse of as far as viability when compared to Ford? LOL It ain't gonna happen.

I thought the SRT8 Challenger had an MSRP of less than 40K even with the guzzler tax. That's pretty close to what that R/T came out at after the almost 10 grand of options... it said $30K msrp and 38K+ as tested? It would have been a better race, 425hp, bigger brakes, better suspension, better interior etc...? Reminds me of the Chrysler 300 SRT8/Cadillac CTS-V/GTO comparison. Why include a 2 door GTO with two four door performance sedans? I just don't get it... lol

Am I missing something? The Camaro is listed at 6146cc and 426hp. Why did they not test it against the SRT8 Challenger, which is 425hp and 6.1 liters.. ??

Did you ever see any of the video footage of any of the Chrysler Turbine cars of the 60's being crushed? It was NASTY. I kinda thought something was odd with that pic above.