67 Wildcat - 426 Chrysler

A good quick read. It does not really pertain to marine applications, but still some good info.

http://www.carcraft.com/projectbuild/ccrp_0711_1964_mopar/viewall.html

A six pack set-up would look good too! Intakes are much more affordable.

My mustang also has bad cracking under the step pads.. water?

JoeinNY wrote: My mustang also has bad cracking under the step pads.. water?

Could be, never even thought of that.

A guy in my neighborhood still has this Golden Lion sitting in his yard.
http://www.nautiqueowner.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12370&PID=135477&title=for-the-mopar-fans

There's very little in the manual about the 426Ski, but I wonder if it might have been a hemi to get its hp to 415. I believe the auto hemis were 425 hp.

Wow Joe this is interesting. I would freak if I found a 426 ski. It would have been very easy to get a 426 wedge to 415 hp. Mopar is easy to make power ;). This could end up being a very beautiful very fast boat.

Is this a standard or reverse rotation because I just had a very interesting idea for camshaft selection that will make big power.

Peter is seeing the mopar light!! haha

Hollywood wrote: Don't worry about that "clown" in Chicago he never buys anything, just a keyboard kicker.

Yeah, what a clown.. Eventhough he was kicking for another clown, he's still a keyboard kicker for sure.....

My Skier has a lot of cracking, including a few pretty large fissures. Some of it is stress, like around the tow pole where it goes through the seat back. Some I'm not sure, like in the dash top. I just look at it as part of the character of an almost 50 year old boat. I've never had the pads up to take a look there. The motorbox is almost perfect, yet that's been a seat for people almost every time out in the boat.

Riley wrote: A guy in my neighborhood still has this Golden Lion sitting in his yard. http://www.nautiqueowner.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12370&PID=135477&title=for-the-mopar-fans There's very little in the manual about the 426Ski, but I wonder if it might have been a hemi to get its hp to 415. I believe the auto hemis were 425 hp.

I have a friend that has the 2x4 / 426 in his Century. Very Kooool!


Nice old 'Cat!!!!!!

From the old thread Bruce linked....you can tell its from a few years ago. (2008)   

TRBenj wrote: Chuck, great info- thanks. I bet the extra length of the boat smooths out the ride a bit. Come to think of it, I dont think Ive ever seen a SN bounce- only the smaller 16 footers. Phats, it takes exponentially more power to make the newer boats fast. The 2001 rides more bow-high than the newer boats, but it still has a lot of hull to overcome. Just ask JoeinNY... his 400+hp 408 stroker is hitting somewhere in the 52-53mph range.

yeah 75 Thats why if any mods are ever done to my 86 for power it will be for holeshot purposes. I think I will be more than happy when I upgrade to the acme 540 now its spinning a 13x13 4 blade super cup oj legend. Good economy at cruising speeds but it lacks holeshot and only spins 4100 at wot.

75 Tique wrote: I'm not real smart about such things, but that's hard to believe there is so much difference between the 16 foot hulls that will run 50+ with a stock motor (like my 305 chevy 230 - 50.7ish) but 403 HP will only beat that slightly in the different (but not that different) hull.

Larry, I think your fallacy is your assumption that the difference between a 16' Ski Tique hull and a 18'9" 2001 hull is small... when in fact the difference is pretty significant. The extra weight (600lbs) and size (both length and beam) both translate to a significantly higher wetted surface area on the newer hull. It takes a LOT of power to overcome that much friction.

In simplistic terms for our application, propping for max speed involves knowing where your hp peak occurs (rpm's), and then finding a prop that allows your motor to achieve a WOT speed as close as possible to that point. In theory, a boat that makes 400hp @ 4000rpm should be as fast (on the top end) as a boat that makes 400hp @ 5000rpm... assuming both boats have comparable hulls and are propped to achieve their max power at WOT. At least thats the theory we've been operating under!

ok so who is gonna attach a hydrofoil to their nautique for our curiosity to be satisfied?

JoeinNY wrote: True story - that version of the motor was 403hp on the dyno but never quite saw 53 mph. I am hoping that peter finds a wildcat a little easier to move and sees similar speeds with 290 hp.

I wish I knew what model, but there was a CC on our lake in the late '60's into the '70's that would run 50, thought to be the fastest boat on the lake at the time. If I had to guess I'd say 19' Wildcat, no idea what the power was. It seems to make sense that the Wildcat has to be one of the fastest hulls they built, an extension of the flatbottom 16 ft. boats, and maybe more to the point a hull capable of running that speed with a bit more stable handling. Joe I'm sure you're right that Peter will be in the 50's with that power. When he adds the intake and dual quads .......

This thread really gets me thinking about taking on a project. The way I move on stuff like this it might take 5 years, but it's fun to think about at least for now.

I think tim and larry both have a point, a 2001 hull is a lot bigger and harder to push than a 16 footer. But that combination I feel was also not that effective at getting power to the water and I am sure that 400 hp could get a 2001 a lot closer to 55 with the right gearing, prop, etc. I never could quite dial that one in the last 500 rpm were only good for about 1 mph.