For the Mopar fans
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Discription: Anything Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12370
Printed Date: November-24-2024 at 2:27pm
Topic: For the Mopar fans
Posted By: Riley
Subject: For the Mopar fans
Date Posted: November-12-2008 at 7:36pm
1963 Chrysler Golden Lion. It is in a friends 1963 Century Coronado. It's a 426 ci Wedge.
|
Replies:
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: November-12-2008 at 8:48pm
|
Bet that sounded off. ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: 65 'cuda
Date Posted: November-12-2008 at 8:49pm
|
That one is in my chrysler manual:
9.2:1 compression, 325 horsepower, 410 lb/ft torque.impressive. 100 octane required, no warranty. They also made a model M-426SKI 415 HP at 5600 RPM. THAT's some serious big block power. ------------- Gary http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=941" rel="nofollow - 1965 Barracuda SS |
Posted By: reidp
Date Posted: November-12-2008 at 10:18pm
|
I've always loved that engine and the fact that Chrysler was so quick and common to sell a marine engine with dual quads. During the first few years of 440 production, they offered a dual quad 335hp model, and then later a 390hp 6-pak, just like in the auto world. Bruce, you got to get on him about keeping that thing cleaner and maybe detail that beauty. I still want to do something with the two 413 marine rev rot Mopars I've got and am still willing to sell one to Phats or some other Mopar fan out there. ------------- ReidP /diaries/details.asp?ID=231&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 1973 Mustang |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: November-12-2008 at 10:40pm
The boat looks beautiful, but he found out soon after he bought it that it needed a lot of work. He knows what he has as he was telling me all about it. I'm sure in time it will be detailed.
 ------------- |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 12:03am
|
Thats freakin awsome riley. They used that dual quad setup in the 300's and big chrysler cars in the early 60's late 50's.
I always thought it would be awsome to build a mopar boat and throw a cross ram intake and make it look and run like a ramcharger motor. Reid if you still have those when I finish school one or both of them will definatly be sitting in my garage. What neighborhood money wise would you be asking for them? The 440 single 4bbl's (hp)version were all 375 and 480 and the 6bbl's were 390 and 490 the 383 (hp) single 4bbl was 335 I dont know that they ever offered a dual quad 440(maybe marine if thats what ur talkin about) but the 361 413 and 426 i believe were all offered with dual quads but dont quote me on the 426. Sorry got off on a mopar tangent haha. Oh and if you are saying they made a 6bbl marine 440 ill *************** if i ever see one. By the way Reid. You can bet that if I ever get a hold of one of those motors you have I will have the fastest inboard on CCF.com haha. |
Posted By: reidp
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 6:40pm
|
Zach, I was indeed just referring to the marine offerings. As you noted, I don't think they ever offered a 2-4V set-up in the auto world for a 440 and for the marine pkg it was similar to the 426 above with low compression. Later, they decided to offer the high compression auto longblocks in marine form with the same specs as you showed above. I'll try to pull and post several of the neat Chrysler spec/advertising brochures I have.
Oh, and Zach, based off the last sentence in your post above, I've decided to never sell one of those engines to you. jk. ------------- ReidP /diaries/details.asp?ID=231&yrstart=1971&yrend=1975 - 1973 Mustang |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 8:18pm
|
Haha come on Reid be a good sport. Do you think my little skylark would still float if I threw one of those 413's in it? Talk about a scary ride.
I wonder what the best over all hull would be as far as speed and handling the power of a big block mopar would be. I have read on here that when you get over the 60mph mark with these skylarks and stangs they start to bounce alot. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 8:28pm
From what I gather (mostly from Reid), the fastest CC hulls are: 1. 1st gen Ski Nautique 2. 2nd gen Mustang/Skier/Ski Tique 1971+ 16'5" hull The next 2 fastest are likely the 2nd gen Ski Nautique (1971-1981) and the 1st gen Mustang/American Skier/Skylark. You dont have to get above 60 to start bouncing (whose boat is that fast anyways?)... My Tique will start bouncing in the mid 40's, which is not at all uncommon for the 16' boats. Any of the following will increase the bouncing: greater speed, increased weight in the rear (someone in the back seat), less hook in the hull, choppy water. ------------- |
phatsat67 wrote:Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 8:34pm
|
Tim, I bet a big block making power would work out better in a first or second gen ski nautique due to them being longer and less bounce(I would assume).
Btw it would be pretty easy to get that 413 to crank out around 500 hp in the low 6000rpm range. Ried my wheels are turning and If one of those are still there when I graduate I smell another project boat. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 8:39pm
|
Not sure about the 1st gen SN bouncing less- Reid says thats the only CC hull with ZERO hook in it. Reid, do those boats bounce at speed? ------------- |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 9:33pm
| I have plenty of time to research before I build one for speed haha. Looks like ill go with the second gen hull. Ive always wanted a red 74 just like my dads first one. |
Posted By: The Lake
Date Posted: November-13-2008 at 11:48pm
Tim, I'm not Reid, I know for a fact that Reid has forgotten more about engines than I know, but I do have a 1st generation Nautique. Now, granted, I just have the stock 318, but when I run in the mid 40's she rides very smooth. I only get bouncing with a couple of people in the back and a full tank of gas. Chuck ------------- Walk on Water www.coldwater.me http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=775&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970 - 69 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: jbear
Date Posted: November-14-2008 at 12:39am
|
Well I remember a little bit of water in the back seat...but no bounce.
john ------------- "Loud pipes save lives" AdamT sez "I'm Canadian and a beaver lover myself"... |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: November-14-2008 at 1:27am
|
That hull should be fast with no hook Chuck. Reid and I could fix that stock motor problem you have haha.
My 86 2001 doesnt bounce at all ever unless ya hit some waves then itll get to bouncin a bit if you dont get outt of it. I wonder if a 2001 hull could be fast with alot of power. Mine runs around 44 bone stock. |
Posted By: The Lake
Date Posted: November-14-2008 at 4:27am
|
John,
How could I forget; it does tend to bounce in 6' seas at GL. You and Patty sure looked good in those CC rain slickers. Thanks phats, I've got my stock motor at just about the right stage of belt dust and oil slime. Chuck ------------- Walk on Water www.coldwater.me http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=775&sort=&pagenum=3&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970 - 69 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: November-14-2008 at 1:55pm
|
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. ------------- |
Posted By: dmiracle
Date Posted: November-14-2008 at 2:39pm
|
If anybody's looking for a good deal on a Coronado, this might be it.
This guy's been trying to sell this boat for a long time and would probably take less. http://www.captainmorganboats.com/boats/1965.html |