Long time lurker, finally taking the plunge and joining!
- Thread starter GrumpyBadger
- Start date
Wollfen
Old Man with a Hat
GrumpyBadger
New Member
Thank you all so much for those links!! especially the "diamond in the rough" area known as Tuscon!
who knew?!?
I'm really excited about these two:
http://tucson.craigslist.org/cto/4259908143.html - thanks Wollfen
and
http://tucson.craigslist.org/cto/4225558709.html
http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/cto/4225556849.html
if she's as clean as they claim, with a good solid engine.. that 4-door is right up my alley!
thanks everyone for the help!
who knew?!?
I'm really excited about these two:
http://tucson.craigslist.org/cto/4259908143.html - thanks Wollfen
and
http://tucson.craigslist.org/cto/4225558709.html
http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/cto/4225556849.html
if she's as clean as they claim, with a good solid engine.. that 4-door is right up my alley!
thanks everyone for the help!
440Sled
Well-Known Member
Welcome to the site!
thrashingcows
Senior Member
I saw those ones as well, but thought you wanted something a little more "done". So that's why I didn't post them up.
I noticed a big price difference in the vehicles from Arizona, compared to the ones from Nevada.
bluefury361
Old Man with a Hat
:sSig_greetingsthor: .......... 
Glad you found us.
Good luck on locating the car of your dreams. Be patient, 4 doors are pretty plentyful yet and nice ones come up in the 3-4K price range often.
You might concider a wagon also.
Glad you found us.Good luck on locating the car of your dreams. Be patient, 4 doors are pretty plentyful yet and nice ones come up in the 3-4K price range often.
You might concider a wagon also.
Fratzog
Old Man with a Hat
Welcome aboard. Keep us posted on your search.
70NPORT
Old Man with a Hat
I kinda like these two...most potential me thinks
http://tucson.craigslist.org/cto/4259908143.html
&
http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/cto/4225556849.html
The four door looks like it's in particularily good shape all things considering, but the other is a coup w/440. Both bb cars, one better shape then the other, one two doors, the other four..... Decisions....decisions....decisions....
http://tucson.craigslist.org/cto/4259908143.html
&
http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/cto/4225556849.html
The four door looks like it's in particularily good shape all things considering, but the other is a coup w/440. Both bb cars, one better shape then the other, one two doors, the other four..... Decisions....decisions....decisions....
Last edited:
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
Proof your replies, Gary.......
70NPORT
Old Man with a Hat
Its early, my java getting cold....what am I missing?
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
bluefury361
Old Man with a Hat
I think he's refering to this Gary ...... Look Ma, no fins!
Should read ...... Look Ma, no stabilizers!
Should read ...... Look Ma, no stabilizers!
70NPORT
Old Man with a Hat
Nope, it reads correctly.
GrumpyBadger
New Member
hey, no making fun of a person that hasn't had their fill of good joe in the morning! 
I'm of the "coffee pot never empties" belief. I'm so upset too, as much as I love my lady (she is after all supporting me 100% in this) she washed my coffee cup!
I'm definitely leaning towards those two cars myself. I like them ALOT.
found another one too:
http://phoenix.craigslist.org/wvl/cto/4284843887.html
I'm definitely a fan of the two in Tuscon, and it seems there's quite a few. I'm actually hoping to be able to make a move on one by the end of the month. So wish me luck!
I'm of the "coffee pot never empties" belief. I'm so upset too, as much as I love my lady (she is after all supporting me 100% in this) she washed my coffee cup!
I'm definitely leaning towards those two cars myself. I like them ALOT.
found another one too:
http://phoenix.craigslist.org/wvl/cto/4284843887.html
I'm definitely a fan of the two in Tuscon, and it seems there's quite a few. I'm actually hoping to be able to make a move on one by the end of the month. So wish me luck!
GrumpyBadger
New Member
hey all,
has it really been almost 10 months?
well, here's an uneventful update:
I don't have a Fury yet. My sis, Mom, my girl and Uncle all made good points. They're all greasemonkeys too btw. They wanted me to be sure this was the car for me, now.
so...
I raced a Factory Five Racing Daytona, Cobra, and Type 33
I checked out a raced-spec Sn95 Mustang
I checked out a 1968 Plymouth Roadrunner 383 4spd
I checked out a 1967 Ford Mustang Fastback for my cousin, he got her, and now is adamant I find my "baby" lol
I also checked out a 1971 SD455 Trans Am and a 1969 Judge GTO
and then there's the real life shenanigans of having a 3 year old.
all along, I've come back to the big C-body Mopars. I just love em. I really want a 1966 Sport Fury. Or a Fury II.
basically, I have wanted a big Fury. But I wanted to check out all the other cars too, while "closing off" anything to do with the Fury. I know she's unique, that's a good and a bad thing. It's harder to find parts, harder to hotrod, and harder to race. But at the same time, how many Furies do you see at your local autocross event or track day? Yeah, me neither
I just wanted to make sure it was worth it. And after a busy summer, and long days at the track, I can honestly say I'm willing to take the bad, along with all the obvious good.
here's what I've come up with using a car that for some reason people love to hotrod and sells for 10x as much, and yet...
1969 Dodge Charger R/T - Forza 3 - taken from oldride.com 69-70 Dodge Charger R/T
Shipping weight Wheelbase overall length overall width front track rear track
3646 117 207.9 77 59.7 59.2
1965-66 Plymouth Fury weight - http://newcharger.org/mopar-b-bodyc...h-muscle-specs/plymouth-fury-1965-1966-specs/
Curb Weight: 3610lbs(Fury I post coupe), 3665lbs(Fury II post sedan), 3720lbs(Fury III convertible)
so, the Plymouth Fury I in theory has all these benefits versus the big mean B-Body "King"
it's lighter by 56lbs
front track is 2.3" wider
rear track is 1.5" wider
only problem is it's "massive length" which in reality is only 2" longer in wheelbase, and 5.2" longer overall...
HOWEVER, a 1965 Plymouth Fury - same chassis underneath as the 1967, so same track and wheelbase
is
209.2 inches overall in length
yet
78 inches in overall width!
so, she's wider than the 67, yet only 1.3" LONGER than a 1969 Dodge Charger!
the 1966 Plymouth Fury is only marginally larger at
209.8 inches overall length
78.7 inches in overall width
so arguably, the Plymouth Fury can become a meaner pro-touring car, because
A) about the same weight as a Charger - incredibly light for its size, only a couple pounds off my El Camino!
B) long wheelbase can make it a much more stable car at speed!
C) overall width is OVER 6 FEET!!
D) if we can increase the track width to fill out those fenders, which isn't hard... BINGO
She's WIDE, LONG, fairly heavy.... with a torquey 383 or a 440-6/efi = plenty of power
basically, I could, in theory take the shorter 383 block, rebuild the 383, throw in the 3.75 stroke from the tall block, increase the con-rod length
and build basically a short-deck B block in 426 inches
One of the standard formulas for predicting torque peak given the cross sectional area (CSA) of the intake is RPM = CSA * 700,000/CID. In our case,
the formula predicts the torque peak will be at 3.65 * 700,000/505 or 5,100 rpm. In comparison, a standard port head has a CSA of only 2.88 square inches,
which would result in a torque peak at 4,000 rpm with 505 ci. The moral of the story is that you need to pay attention to the cylinder head volume and
cross section when building a stroker or you might end up with a tractor motor rather than a race motor.
Read more: http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/techarticles/mopp_0708_max_wedge_engine_build/#ixzz2qVcfNY7A
so for my build, 5,000RPM(ish) = CSA *700,000/432
5,000=X(700,000/432)
5,000=x(1620.37)
X= 5000/1620.37
X= 3.08 CSA
my minimum CSA for a 4.28 bore x 3.75 stroke at 6,500 RPM is 2.57
Your Limiting Port Velocity computed from your Cross Sectional Area of 3.08 sq. in. and Bore of 4.28 in. and Stroke of 3.75 in.
and Peak RPM of 6500 is 511.75 fps.
thought on camshaft:
Voodoo Retro-Fit Hydraulic Roller Cam & Lifter Kit - Chrysler 361-440 282/290
Product Description
Lunati’s Voodoo series of camshafts deliver more area under the curve than any other series of camshafts. This means more throttle response, quicker
acceleration, more vacuum and better efficiency. These factors, combined with maximum horsepower and torque, make Voodoo camshafts the perfect choice
for a wide range of high performance applications. Retro-Fit Hydraulic Roller Cam. High performance street cam. Likes upgraded intake, carb and exhaust.
Needs 2800 RPM stall converter in most cases. Requires 9.5:1 compression for maximum performance.
Advertised Duration (Int/Exh): 282/290
Duration @ .050 (Int/Exh): 231/239
Gross Valve Lift (Int/Exh): .535/.550
LSA/ICL: 110/106
Valve Lash (Int/Exh): Hyd/Hyd
RPM Range: 2200-6200
Includes: Cam & Lifters (#72338-16)
Part Number: 20230712LK
Previoius Part Number: 60312LK
Jobber Price: $712.69
cam degree calculator:
http://www.wallaceracing.com/cam-deg-calc.php
IVO is 35.0 ° BTDC ( - indicates ATDC)
IVC is 67.0 ° ABDC
EVO is 79.0 ° ATDC ( - indicates BTDC)
EVC is 31.0 ° BBDC
Overlap is 66 °
110* LSA x 2=220 - 106 = 114* ECL BTDC
Calculate Primary Header Tube Length and Diameter
http://www.wallaceracing.com/header_length.php
Your Primary Tube Length is 35.03
Your Primary Tube Diameter is 1.81 inches
Your Collector Diameter is 3.16 inches Two Collectors
- wtf?!? those are some seriously long tube headers...
- long story short of it, I've thought about this long and hard. I think a 383 Fury, let alone a torquey 440 would be just stellar. They're only relatively longer than the already massive 2nd gen Charger, BUT also have a wider stock track width.
tight, technical courses... will be... entertaining. And thank God they're only cones!
but on open ones, like at the now defunct MCAS El Toro... she should scream.
and on that note, there's a purdy one for sale here in my hometown actually. It's a 68 4 door, not a 66 Sport Fury. But still, it's worth at least a look.
has it really been almost 10 months?
well, here's an uneventful update:
I don't have a Fury yet. My sis, Mom, my girl and Uncle all made good points. They're all greasemonkeys too btw. They wanted me to be sure this was the car for me, now.
so...
I raced a Factory Five Racing Daytona, Cobra, and Type 33
I checked out a raced-spec Sn95 Mustang
I checked out a 1968 Plymouth Roadrunner 383 4spd
I checked out a 1967 Ford Mustang Fastback for my cousin, he got her, and now is adamant I find my "baby" lol
I also checked out a 1971 SD455 Trans Am and a 1969 Judge GTO
and then there's the real life shenanigans of having a 3 year old.
all along, I've come back to the big C-body Mopars. I just love em. I really want a 1966 Sport Fury. Or a Fury II.
basically, I have wanted a big Fury. But I wanted to check out all the other cars too, while "closing off" anything to do with the Fury. I know she's unique, that's a good and a bad thing. It's harder to find parts, harder to hotrod, and harder to race. But at the same time, how many Furies do you see at your local autocross event or track day? Yeah, me neither
I just wanted to make sure it was worth it. And after a busy summer, and long days at the track, I can honestly say I'm willing to take the bad, along with all the obvious good.
here's what I've come up with using a car that for some reason people love to hotrod and sells for 10x as much, and yet...
1969 Dodge Charger R/T - Forza 3 - taken from oldride.com 69-70 Dodge Charger R/T
Shipping weight Wheelbase overall length overall width front track rear track
3646 117 207.9 77 59.7 59.2
1965-66 Plymouth Fury weight - http://newcharger.org/mopar-b-bodyc...h-muscle-specs/plymouth-fury-1965-1966-specs/
Curb Weight: 3610lbs(Fury I post coupe), 3665lbs(Fury II post sedan), 3720lbs(Fury III convertible)
so, the Plymouth Fury I in theory has all these benefits versus the big mean B-Body "King"
it's lighter by 56lbs
front track is 2.3" wider
rear track is 1.5" wider
only problem is it's "massive length" which in reality is only 2" longer in wheelbase, and 5.2" longer overall...
HOWEVER, a 1965 Plymouth Fury - same chassis underneath as the 1967, so same track and wheelbase
is
209.2 inches overall in length
yet
78 inches in overall width!
so, she's wider than the 67, yet only 1.3" LONGER than a 1969 Dodge Charger!
the 1966 Plymouth Fury is only marginally larger at
209.8 inches overall length
78.7 inches in overall width
so arguably, the Plymouth Fury can become a meaner pro-touring car, because
A) about the same weight as a Charger - incredibly light for its size, only a couple pounds off my El Camino!
B) long wheelbase can make it a much more stable car at speed!
C) overall width is OVER 6 FEET!!
D) if we can increase the track width to fill out those fenders, which isn't hard... BINGO
She's WIDE, LONG, fairly heavy.... with a torquey 383 or a 440-6/efi
= plenty of powerbasically, I could, in theory take the shorter 383 block, rebuild the 383, throw in the 3.75 stroke from the tall block, increase the con-rod length
and build basically a short-deck B block in 426 inches
One of the standard formulas for predicting torque peak given the cross sectional area (CSA) of the intake is RPM = CSA * 700,000/CID. In our case,
the formula predicts the torque peak will be at 3.65 * 700,000/505 or 5,100 rpm. In comparison, a standard port head has a CSA of only 2.88 square inches,
which would result in a torque peak at 4,000 rpm with 505 ci. The moral of the story is that you need to pay attention to the cylinder head volume and
cross section when building a stroker or you might end up with a tractor motor rather than a race motor.
Read more: http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/techarticles/mopp_0708_max_wedge_engine_build/#ixzz2qVcfNY7A
so for my build, 5,000RPM(ish) = CSA *700,000/432
5,000=X(700,000/432)
5,000=x(1620.37)
X= 5000/1620.37
X= 3.08 CSA
my minimum CSA for a 4.28 bore x 3.75 stroke at 6,500 RPM is 2.57
Your Limiting Port Velocity computed from your Cross Sectional Area of 3.08 sq. in. and Bore of 4.28 in. and Stroke of 3.75 in.
and Peak RPM of 6500 is 511.75 fps.
thought on camshaft:
Voodoo Retro-Fit Hydraulic Roller Cam & Lifter Kit - Chrysler 361-440 282/290
Product Description
Lunati’s Voodoo series of camshafts deliver more area under the curve than any other series of camshafts. This means more throttle response, quicker
acceleration, more vacuum and better efficiency. These factors, combined with maximum horsepower and torque, make Voodoo camshafts the perfect choice
for a wide range of high performance applications. Retro-Fit Hydraulic Roller Cam. High performance street cam. Likes upgraded intake, carb and exhaust.
Needs 2800 RPM stall converter in most cases. Requires 9.5:1 compression for maximum performance.
Advertised Duration (Int/Exh): 282/290
Duration @ .050 (Int/Exh): 231/239
Gross Valve Lift (Int/Exh): .535/.550
LSA/ICL: 110/106
Valve Lash (Int/Exh): Hyd/Hyd
RPM Range: 2200-6200
Includes: Cam & Lifters (#72338-16)
Part Number: 20230712LK
Previoius Part Number: 60312LK
Jobber Price: $712.69
cam degree calculator:
http://www.wallaceracing.com/cam-deg-calc.php
IVO is 35.0 ° BTDC ( - indicates ATDC)
IVC is 67.0 ° ABDC
EVO is 79.0 ° ATDC ( - indicates BTDC)
EVC is 31.0 ° BBDC
Overlap is 66 °
110* LSA x 2=220 - 106 = 114* ECL BTDC
Calculate Primary Header Tube Length and Diameter
http://www.wallaceracing.com/header_length.php
Your Primary Tube Length is 35.03
Your Primary Tube Diameter is 1.81 inches
Your Collector Diameter is 3.16 inches Two Collectors
- wtf?!? those are some seriously long tube headers...
- long story short of it, I've thought about this long and hard. I think a 383 Fury, let alone a torquey 440 would be just stellar. They're only relatively longer than the already massive 2nd gen Charger, BUT also have a wider stock track width.
tight, technical courses... will be... entertaining. And thank God they're only cones!
but on open ones, like at the now defunct MCAS El Toro... she should scream.
and on that note, there's a purdy one for sale here in my hometown actually. It's a 68 4 door, not a 66 Sport Fury. But still, it's worth at least a look.
Wow....I didn't know buying a C Body could be that complicated. LOL!
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2010
- Messages
- 27,955
- Reaction score
- 26,901
And this one sounds expensive too but I look forward to watching you build your dream car.
Looking forward to seeing how you tackle this project. Here are some things that will cost you a good bit of money and something no matter how much you have you won't be able to solve. I know I am building a 65 Sport Fury.
Suspension: There are very little to no performance suspension parts for these cars. You can get larger torsion bars, front sway bars. But you'll be limited on the rest of the suspension if your intent is to auto-cross. B-body leaf springs fit, so you can get them without an issue.
Body Panel: The limited amount of rear panels for 65 and 66 are just crap. You are better fabricating your own. Other sheet metal is none existent except from donor cars. So make sure the care you get is in really good shape body wise or have a line on a good donor car.
Engine mounts 65 only: If you plan on putting a 440 in a 65 Fury you'll need a certain mount and tap and drill the block on the driver's side. I have a thread with the directions from engine-swaps.com. There may be other companies that make a mount.
Headers: be prepared to either beat the crap of headers to get them to fit. TTI makes some headers that are supposed to be a really nice fit. Just be prepared to spend a grand on them.
Transmission: 65 uses a trunion joint and not a u-joint. So the transmissions are different on that year. I am pretty sure that 66 went to the typical u-joint style.
There are more issues with building any C-Body. Just don't get discouraged and be prepared to spend more on it.
Suspension: There are very little to no performance suspension parts for these cars. You can get larger torsion bars, front sway bars. But you'll be limited on the rest of the suspension if your intent is to auto-cross. B-body leaf springs fit, so you can get them without an issue.
Body Panel: The limited amount of rear panels for 65 and 66 are just crap. You are better fabricating your own. Other sheet metal is none existent except from donor cars. So make sure the care you get is in really good shape body wise or have a line on a good donor car.
Engine mounts 65 only: If you plan on putting a 440 in a 65 Fury you'll need a certain mount and tap and drill the block on the driver's side. I have a thread with the directions from engine-swaps.com. There may be other companies that make a mount.
Headers: be prepared to either beat the crap of headers to get them to fit. TTI makes some headers that are supposed to be a really nice fit. Just be prepared to spend a grand on them.
Transmission: 65 uses a trunion joint and not a u-joint. So the transmissions are different on that year. I am pretty sure that 66 went to the typical u-joint style.
There are more issues with building any C-Body. Just don't get discouraged and be prepared to spend more on it.
68plymouth383
Senior Member
Welcome!! It's best to find the right car and then make a shopping list/wish list. Take care of the necessity's first get it running, driving, and stopping well. Then figure out your long term goals. Running around the barrel until your dizzy trying to build a puzzle out of no pieces doesn't work!! You need a car to build first before you can buy or figure what parts you want...........
Similar threads
