New Pure Stock car added to the team

[mfchassisworks]

The car was delivered 67

[Verne_Frantz]

[ QUOTE ]
As for the VIN not being there, it depends on the build date of the car. The new Federal VIN law came into effect in the middle of 1968. So the factory actually handstamped the VINs on the top of the bellhousing flange of the engines that went onto the end-of-model-year cars to comply with the new law. You may not have looked there yet. Look in the area where the oil pressure sending unit screws into the block. That outer flange area was where they stamped the VINs. I've seen some 1968 stampings that were half on the block and half on the trans bellhousing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somehow I think only you would know that Steve.

[njsteve]

Thanks Verne.

It was a hit or miss thing as said above. Chrysler was kind of scratching there heads on the where and how of adding the VINs to the engines so they just started stamping them across the top of the back of the assembled drivetrain. That's why you find them on the block, on the block and trans, even on the trans only in that top spot. It wasn't til 69 that the process was formalized with the VINs put on the machined boss of the block, near the oil pan.

But either way, build another block and save that one! It's too valuable to risk.

[Steven J]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with what's already been said. Put the original motor on a stand and build a replacement motor for the FAST class.

[/ QUOTE ]

He is not running in the F.A.S.T. class

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with what's already been said. Put the original motor on a stand and build a replacement motor for the FAST class.

[/ QUOTE ]

He is not running in the F.A.S.T. class

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, the OP straightened that out. It was a little confusing in his original post.

If you go to my original post it was something I suggested based on what he has, but better to be safe than sorry, I would still build a 2nd engine.

Nice car BTW.

[mfchassisworks]

Thanks guys! It might get a few passes on the original engine. We have another engine for it. It was kinda nice knowing a car is ready to race next year in NOV!! Oh well...

We are getting a photo shoot done on the car in the near future. More pix to come.

[njsteve]

A real problem with the hemis was the oiling. The pump can empty the contents of the oil pan into the valve covers a lot faster than the single drain back holes in the back of the head can feed the oil back down to the pan. (And under acceleration the only drainbacks available will be the rear drain holes). Also the 66-69 pans held at least a quart less oil than the 70-71 pans. If you have to go with a stock pan I'd upgrade to the 70-71 style and get a lower volume pump.

[MultiMopars]

[ QUOTE ]
A real problem with the hemis was the oiling. The pump can empty the contents of the oil pan into the valve covers a lot faster than the single drain back holes in the back of the head can feed the oil back down to the pan. (And under acceleration the only drainbacks available will be the rear drain holes). Also the 66-69 pans held at least a quart less oil than the 70-71 pans. If you have to go with a stock pan I'd upgrade to the 70-71 style and get a lower volume pump.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true.

There are also some oiling upgrades that were created by the old racers when these cars were new that should be considered. I may have a copy of them saved. If you are interested I will look for them.

[x Baldwin Motion]

[ QUOTE ]
What a beauty!

I hate snow.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree X2

[442w30]

In the website whose link you've provided, you state:

Eugene and I are on the return trip picking up his new baby. 1968 HEMI RR auto. Galen inspected this 1 of 1 radio, heater and tach delete car. QQ1 Blue. Silver w black taxi cab ,bench on the column. And oh ya. 6000 original documented miles. With complete Born with drivetrain. And original tires. Pix to follow.

You aren't aware EVERY Mopar is 1 of 1?