Going to pick up my 325 Hemi from black mountain Hemi, it is pretty much just a stock rebuild cam has been polished nothing fancy. I plan on putting this little gem in my 34 Plymouth. I have questions concerning the actual Hemi itself and the drivetrain. My first question is in regards to the motor. This one is setup with a single 4 barrel. I see that there are very little options for intakes I think just 2x4 and 3x2. Ideally it would be cool to go with a 3x2 with 3 big97 stroms is anyone else running something like this. I ask because it seems the 325 need about 750-800 cfm. And running 2x4 it would be really hard to get some 350-400 cfms carbs. (unless I go original which seems very hard to find) Ok, now onto more concerning things. Transmission I plan on doing a 727 or a 700r4 still on the fence this is my first hotrod build. I guess giving that information I would like to know. What stall converter would be recommend? What type of rear should be used and type of gears?
If youre not hauling a lot of weight, but want to drive a lot, I'd go taller gears. It will still give you eeehhaaa off the line. 700r4 has the overdrive so that would be even lower rpm. I had a 270 in a 46 Military weapons carrier, read 6000lbs and real low gears. That sucker jumped, and cruised at 60.
Use a 518 dodge trans,4spd overdrive based on a 727, leave the 700 r4 in the dumpster where it belongs.
Probably your best bet with the intake/carb is to open up the bore holes to match the Edelbrock. The usual CFM calculators put you just over 500 CFM on that little CID. 3X2 looks cool but a lot of inefficiency on them.
Put a 2 X 4 manifold on it. Get 2 vacuum secondary carbs about 500 cfm each. The engine will only get the amount of fuel needed
Thanks guys! I really appreciate the input. To the guys that can't see the side mount you're not looking hard enough LOL. I posted a better picture here for you though. As for the carbs are you just saying 3x2 is inefficient in general? Stromberg big97 are a lot more efficient than original strom 97's at least from what I read the specs on them. I was also considering doing the dual quad with two vacuum secondary carbs and it is still a possibility just based on price. However the 3x2 is aesthetically more pleasing for my taste.
Stock cam stock converter. 727 tranny is my suggestion and why on earth would you think that a 325" Hemi needs 750-800 CFM? Did someone tell you that or you think it just sounds cool or????? That motor would run fine a 600 CFM and that single 4 is a good setup.
Well I thought from factory when running dual quads the super D or power pack they came with....WCFB 2633S and 2634S. You figure stock was somewhere around 375-400 per carb. And according to http://www.hothemiheads.com/hemi_info/hemi_engine_id.html KD500 - 1001 Came with single or dual carbs. And looking at this http://www.cowtownmopars.com/original/HemiSpecs#57rr Gives me the thinking that 2x4 is better than one I mean I could always use one with a bigger cfm. But keeping true to the car it would be neat.
The carbs actually flowed 325 on a good day those carbs were flowed dry and when you add fuel to the venturi it really slows things down gasoline in heavier than air. A 2x4 is different than a single 4. you seldom if ever use all of what you have on top of the intake. I figured your engine with an 83% volumetric efficiency because it is a hemi mostly stock, most stock motors produce about 70% and a 5K redline which is probably generous. Dual plane you are looking at the 390 to 500 CFM range with a single 4. Same parameters with a single plane intake comes up to 429 to 546 range. 3 carbs looks neat and when there was no other way to get more air to the combustion chambers than to add carbs it was the way to go. Along came the 4bbl and that changed the game exponentially, that said if looks are more important than performance than trips are pretty cool. One thing to remember is that by the mid '50s a 2x4 was available to the general public and if multi carbs are what one was after the 2x4 was the holey grail.
Nice looking Dodge. What did it originally come out of? I ask because my 325 from a car has plain valve covers. Why not an early 60's aluminum 727 with its pushbutton shifter and something like 2.75:1 axle gears. Have fun! -Dave
Honestly I do not know what it came out of the guy that built it has I think when I was talking to him last over 50 hemi cores mostly complete. Said he is retiring soon and wont get to build them all. I always thought the pushbuttons were cool I just dont think it would look right in my car.
The push button trannys are cool but they are also not user friendly when it comes to keeping them alive. They are shifted with solenoids except for park which is manual, they don't have a common U joint on the front of the drive shaft they use a ball and trunnion. Most rodders have no idea what that is let alone how to repair it, they are not alone waltz yourself into a modern shop and ask to have it repaired. LOL A later aluminum 272 is a good stout transmission easy to repair and cheap compared to other automatics. They use a normal driveshaft and a common shifter will work just fine.
The Edsel pushbutton used solenoids. The Mopar used cables. Think it was in '63 when the Mopar got park added to it. -Dave
My 62 Fury has the internal park, 61 and earlier had drum on tailshaft. Nice to know about the Edsels, I always wondered how the shifter could operate thru the steering column
Thanks man! Appreciate all the input. Reason I am asking all these questions too, is Spring Carlisle is just around the corner. So I would really like to know what im looking for there rather than have things shipped from all over.
I really hope that this is just some mis-communication..... For a 325 with stock cam and c/r use your 1x4 with a 600 Holley. .
Yep my fault 73rr it was sent out the crank was in good shape so was a very mild cut. Cam nothing was done to it.
I think a 65 727 used a cross and roller U joint, Yes they did not have push buttons but the lever controlled the cable push buttons could be back fitted.
Do not get wound up in pushbuttons unless your doing a restoration. Instead use the 67 and later TF with the lever shift. The so called kick down linkage must be used unless the tranny has a full manual valve body. The 67 and later can be reasonably identified by the 24 spline input shaft. That allows you to get a better torque converter. Remember that these antique transmissions have probably had several sets of hands in them and possibly me! The same thing applies to GM trannys. Take the time to consult with 73RR and TRwaters here.
I like the push buttons with a manual valve body just push a button and you are in the next gear. Just remember the pattern is backwards.
My 1st car, a '63 Dodge, had the pushbutton and I loved it. Ever since I've wanted a hot rod with one. Oh well, someday! -Dave
Had a 63 convertible and it as the badest sumbitch in a 4 county area. I had removed all of the convertible extras to remove weight. It would absolutely spin to 7800 rpms and I won many bets on that fact. The old Mopars had piss poor valve trains and Crane Cams had the answer. Yep they did!
A friend of mine has a 315 with 3x2 and a 200r4. He sent his cam out for regrind not sure to what specs but its choppy but not too much, his converter is around 2400 stall, rear end gears I think 325 or 355. I don't think you need a lot of cfm especially with a stock motor. To me it seems like my friends 315 has a bit too much cfm but he doesn't like to get on it so its hard to tell.
Ted Eaton, of Eaton Balancing - Lorena TX, has said on several occasions that as long as the secondaries are vacuum operated the engine will only take as much as it needs. But, what do I know? I know Ted knows more than I do about this -LOL! -Dave
The Jalopy Journal
