|
|
|
|
|
This image has expired.
Final Stats:
| Total Votes |
607 |
| Average Score |
3.09 |
| Verdict |
Not Rice
|
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=1734 |
|
| Comments: 38 (Read/Post) Favorites: 5 (View) |
Submitted
on: 03-07-2002
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Car |
|
|
Description:
The God of Ponies |
Showing page: 2 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
 |
| #21 |
3-08-2002 @ 10:43:41 PM |
| Posted By : MadScientistMatt |
Reply | Edit | Del |
CRXtrackguy, I think you're thinking of the DZ302 instead of the Chevy 350. The 305 is a 350 with a smaller bore, while the Chevy 302 is a very rare destroked 327 that revs like a VTEC. That was the engine built for Trans Am racing and installed in the first Z28's. It didn't stay around for more than a few years, unlike the 305. Some people claim the DZ302 can rev beyond 8,000 RPM in stock trim, but I'm kind of skeptical about that.
|
|
| #22 |
3-08-2002 @ 10:48:59 PM |
| Posted By : CRXtrackguy |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Not sure. The SCCA maximum for Trans Am is 5 liters, aka 305ci. Knowing chevy, I would expect them to take the maximum amount of cubage they could get, even if it was only 3ci difference. I'm pretty sure they ran 305s, not 302s, but you may be right. But the Chevy 305 should rev high, it had like a 1.73:1 rod:stroke ratio...
|
|
| #23 |
3-08-2002 @ 10:57:07 PM |
| Posted By : MadScientistMatt |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Well, Chrysler campaigned a 273 inch V8 in there for a while, before they were allowed to destroke the 340 with a non-production crankshaft. And Ford usually ran a 302. I think both Chevy and Ford used engines that were 3 cubes short of the maximum so that the race engines could be overbored if something went wrong and they had to rebuild it. Or maybe because of inaccurate ways to check for the displacement - it wouldn't do to have an engine that's exactly the class maximum and have the tech inspector measure it by something that reads a few cubes too high.
|
|
| #24 |
3-08-2002 @ 10:59:51 PM |
| Posted By : CRXtrackguy |
Reply | Edit | Del |
again, you may be right. I never claimed to know everything, just a hell of a lot ;p
|
|
| #26 |
3-22-2002 @ 12:25:24 AM |
| Posted By : cuda_man |
Reply | Edit | Del |
YAY!!!! 273s in Trans AM!!!! LOL they probably got their asses beaten! but a Barracuda did win the Canadian National Rally in 1965 and the SCCA in 1966 :-)
|
|
| #29 |
7-17-2002 @ 09:25:26 PM |
| Posted By : TinIndian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Yeah, baby. Let's go stomp somethin! Only problem is, if you beat on Hondas in somethin' like this you're a bully. Screw it, I'll be a bully. Oh, not to argue, guys, but the Trans Am came out in '69 and it was made to handle the 400, not 350.
|
|
| #30 |
7-17-2002 @ 09:28:43 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Saw one of these at our yearly hot-rod cruise-in last month, WOW, they're nice, a few ricers showed up, they sucked
|
|
| #31 |
7-17-2002 @ 09:30:42 PM |
| Posted By : cams116 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I saw one of these once. Ever so nice. And bloody lould.
|
|
| #32 |
7-17-2002 @ 09:32:11 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
He he, you wanna know how bad the ricers sucked? THey had an "open cruise" where all you had to do was show up, just for shits and giggles, I put my car in, its' a bit rusty and dented, and I was STILL getting COMPLIMENTS from the crowd, he he he..........
|
|
| #33 |
8-01-2002 @ 04:29:08 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I did a little research, and the Camaro engine was in fact the 302 cross ram design as Matt said it was, just a bit of info for ya'll, and Z28's that still have them are rare and desireable as a result
|
|
| #34 |
8-01-2002 @ 04:37:19 PM |
| Posted By : firebird4ever |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Yeah Trans Ams where out in 69' but where really just straight line machines still. Yeah I think when they first came out they had the 400, but later I think I went to a 455, not for sure though.
|
|
| #35 |
8-01-2002 @ 04:38:29 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
455 was available up untill 72' I believe, then it went to Pontiac 400's and then from like 77' - 79' 403 Olds, and after that, BB wasn't even an option anymore
|
|
| #36 |
8-01-2002 @ 04:40:45 PM |
| Posted By : firebird4ever |
Reply | Edit | Del |
72' maybe right, I was thinking like 73' but I don't know for sure.
|
|
| #37 |
8-01-2002 @ 04:42:33 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
the 445 SD was a victim of the gas crisis, so it would have to be 73' or 72' certainly by 74' at least, too bad, they had origianly planned to put the 445 SD in the Grand Am when it came out, that would've been a nice car too
|
Showing page: 2 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
