polara71
Old Man with a Hat
Check the numbers on the block.
NOT MINE 1970 300 convertible (not mine)
- Thread starter sixpkrt
- Start date
Check the numbers on the block.
Then are those numbers listed somewhere?
Right side of the engine block, just above the pan rail.
It will be the last 8 digits of the car's VIN.
1969 and up, earlier cars don't have this.
Thanks. Found it and engine is correct. Don't know about internals haha
69monaco
Senior Member
9 bids , reserve not met .....$5300,.
1970 Chrysler 300 Series | eBay
Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for 1970 Chrysler 300 Series at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!
www.ebay.com
fury fan
Senior Member
I believe only the 383 4-barrel engines got the higher-stall converter, possibly starting in '68.
The 440 TNT didn't get the higher-stall converter.
It would be a special converter, though, balanced to suit the externally-balanced 440HP of 1970-71.
The harmonic balancer is different from a standard 440 also, and not the same as the balancer from the cast-crank engines.
The market has spoken.
With a bit of assembly and cleanup he surely would've gotten more money.
If it runs, as the seller claims, a video of it running, and oil pressure cylinder pressure numbers, would help also (unless the numbers are low).
(below pic is kinda redundant to 69monaco's post, but a little different)
polara71
Old Man with a Hat
You mean the e bay market has spoken .
I'm going to disagree with you on that.
First, this is the Dealer Data book for the 1970 300. As you can see, a standard 440 and a HP 440.
A screen shot of the 1970 Chrysler service manual.
And the '70/71 parts manual. (I split the page up to make it easier to see the headings)
fury fan
Senior Member
Yes, but the parts book doesn't give the difference between the 2 converters for 440.
It only shows that, by virtue that at least 1 component is different, the overall assembly has a different part#.
@saforwardlook has said IIRC that the 440HP got the 'standard' stall speed TC, as it was not seen as needing more stall vs the 383hp. (I've read that other places also). BTAIM
Your 2nd snapshot is general specs, and doesn't declare which engine gets the std vs hi-stall converters, only that they are different diameters.
9-13-0 damper is shown to be different between the std 440 and the HP (both TNT and 6-barrel engine get the 3512017 damper), and we know those engines are externally-balanced. So it stands to reason that hte converter for those engines has some balance weight on it also (which means it cannot be a 2658457 converter used with the std 440).
So I submit that the difference in part#s is not due to the stall ratio (as safwdlook has also said), but due to the converter having balance weights on it.
BUT - there's no way to know from these parts pages, we would need to see the internal part #s for the converters. To see what part#s are used for the stators.
We'd need to know if the 3410839 converter is the same as the 2801764 but with addition of balance weights.
I doubt if that level of BOM info is readily available outside of the converter-reman industry, though.
It only shows that, by virtue that at least 1 component is different, the overall assembly has a different part#.
@saforwardlook has said IIRC that the 440HP got the 'standard' stall speed TC, as it was not seen as needing more stall vs the 383hp. (I've read that other places also). BTAIM
Your 2nd snapshot is general specs, and doesn't declare which engine gets the std vs hi-stall converters, only that they are different diameters.
9-13-0 damper is shown to be different between the std 440 and the HP (both TNT and 6-barrel engine get the 3512017 damper), and we know those engines are externally-balanced. So it stands to reason that hte converter for those engines has some balance weight on it also (which means it cannot be a 2658457 converter used with the std 440).
So I submit that the difference in part#s is not due to the stall ratio (as safwdlook has also said), but due to the converter having balance weights on it.
BUT - there's no way to know from these parts pages, we would need to see the internal part #s for the converters. To see what part#s are used for the stators.
We'd need to know if the 3410839 converter is the same as the 2801764 but with addition of balance weights.
I doubt if that level of BOM info is readily available outside of the converter-reman industry, though.
We're going to have to agree to disagree.
The smaller convertor, by size alone, can be considered to be a "higher stall". Keep in mind that was a Chrysler FSM, not a Plymouth or Dodge, so two convertors and since we are using the '70 300 dealer data book, there's only two engines, a std 440 and a HP 440.
Of course, from most everything I've ever read says stall speed is kind of a BS number because it's so dependent on engine torque etc. It was a sales tool that the aftermarket used. To my knowledge, Chrysler never used that term except maybe in one of their performance books... and even then... But that's another subject.
Now I can be wrong... but unless there was some running changes in what they put in the cars (very possible) I'm still thinking I'm right.
fury fan
Senior Member
Your first pics is for 70 300, so yes, only 2 440s available.
But - the 2nd pic is from the Chrysler SM, so the 383-4 would be included in that, for the Newports. That's where I believe that higher-stall converter comes into the picture.
I'm willing to be wrong as well, but let's keep this open until we get a conclusive answer? I have you on one side and Saforwardlook on the other, and both of you are knowledgeable.
But - the 2nd pic is from the Chrysler SM, so the 383-4 would be included in that, for the Newports. That's where I believe that higher-stall converter comes into the picture.
I'm willing to be wrong as well, but let's keep this open until we get a conclusive answer? I have you on one side and Saforwardlook on the other, and both of you are knowledgeable.
All I can add to this discussion is that I have two 1970 Chrysler 300s and one is the 440 std. performance and the other is HP plus I have numerous standard performance 1971 Chryslers and a couple are HPs. All I can say is if there are different stall speeds between any of them, I certainly can't feel it.
I have a couple standard performance 383-2 bbl engines and a couple 383-4 bbl. engines in C bodies and the difference in launch feel is night and day. The 383-4 engine spins much higher at launch.
With the 440 standard performance and HP engines I can't tell any difference in launch feel or RPMs off the line at all. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if a 383-4 engine compared to either 440 engine in a C body beat them both off the line for a significant distance..............................
That difference is what makes the 383-4 engine such a joy to drive around town even in a C body, as they just feel torquey and swift around town in overall feel than any 440 in a C body. But I also wouldn't be surprised if the 383-4 engine in a C body would get no better or even worse fuel economy around town than either 440 as a result (and I would just add that axle ratios vary among the various options but off the line launch feel isn't affected by axle ratio significantly is my experience).
I have a couple standard performance 383-2 bbl engines and a couple 383-4 bbl. engines in C bodies and the difference in launch feel is night and day. The 383-4 engine spins much higher at launch.
With the 440 standard performance and HP engines I can't tell any difference in launch feel or RPMs off the line at all. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if a 383-4 engine compared to either 440 engine in a C body beat them both off the line for a significant distance..............................
That difference is what makes the 383-4 engine such a joy to drive around town even in a C body, as they just feel torquey and swift around town in overall feel than any 440 in a C body. But I also wouldn't be surprised if the 383-4 engine in a C body would get no better or even worse fuel economy around town than either 440 as a result (and I would just add that axle ratios vary among the various options but off the line launch feel isn't affected by axle ratio significantly is my experience).
Are the gear ratios the same? Any difference in the transmissions?
If you look at the engine specs, the std 440 has 480 ft/lbs of torque @ 2800 RPM and the HP 440 also has 480 ft/bs, but @ 3200 RPM. Think about that for a minute.
Given that the torque is higher at lower RPM with the std 440. I would expect, with the same axle ratio and let's say for argument, the same convertor, the std 440 would accelerate from a stop harder. That is assuming you have the optional 3.23 gears in the std 440. The 3.23 gears are standard with the HP 440.
So if you had the same axle ratio and different convertors, with a higher "stall speed" for the HP 440, it would seem logical that they could accelerate the same from a stop, the convertor making up for the lack of torque at lower RPM of the HP 440.
Acceleration from a stop is ALL about torque.
Of course, "Seat of the pants" comparisons don't mean much. There are soooooo many variables including what the driver wants to feel.
You have a bunch of these cars... Surely you've taken the transmission out of a couple unmolested cars and seen any differences.
RE: Stall speed. I'm going to say I was wrong and Chrysler does reference "stall speed" in their convertor performance tests. I'm going to still say that it was a BS tool used in the aftermarket though.
I was looking for a reference I could link to explain torque v. stall speed. I had read about the "K" factor in a few places, most notably the Munroe authored 727 Trans book. Motor Trend explains it here. (although there's a typo in the formula) https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/mopp-1302-the-mystery-of-the-fluid-coupler-torque-converter/
K=rpm divided by the square root of torque.
Then I looked at the TSB for 1970 and interestingly enough, the "stall speed" spec for all all the 440 engines is the same in this TSB from 1970. Looking a little more, I also found this on page 21-18 in the FSM.
While on the surface, yep, the stall speed is the same spec... But would greater low end torque of the std 440 would come into play here? Or is that minimal enough that it would be the same spec range?
What does this prove? I don't know... So I went even farther down the rabbit hole and realized I was looking at the proof all along... and I had posted it!
The flex plate! There is a different flex plate for the smaller convertor, so it would seem that there would be two listings for the 440! But there isn't!
Again, I squeezed the heading down on this pic so it makes sense.
I guess that proves that only one convertor was used with the 440 and that appears to be across the models (and that surprises me even more)
OK, as my wife always reminds me, I'm wrong.
It does surprise me... Not being wrong, I'm wrong often enough not to be surprised.... Again, ask my wife.. Still... If someone took apart an unmolested 1970 440 with an HP motor in it and pulled out a 10 3/4" convertor, it wouldn't surprise me at all, because I know never to say never with Mopars.
Now I have to go back to earlier (67-69) cars, especially the B-bodies to see if that holds with them.
fury fan
Senior Member
@Big_John I'm glad you kept drilling on this. Yes, kinda funny that the answer was in there via the usage/part# on the flexplate.
I did once need to replace a converter in a 1970 TNT, and replaced it with a std large-dia converter that had weights welded onto it (or onto the flexplate, I don't remember what I did).
But I do remember that there was no noticeable performance change.
And the converter I removed was painted blue - so I didn't mention it previously, as someone had obviously been in there before me.
So now the question is - what's a TNT feel like when changed to the higher-stall converter?
@saforwardlook You are tasked with reconfiguring one of your TNT cars and reporting back.
I did once need to replace a converter in a 1970 TNT, and replaced it with a std large-dia converter that had weights welded onto it (or onto the flexplate, I don't remember what I did).
But I do remember that there was no noticeable performance change.
And the converter I removed was painted blue - so I didn't mention it previously, as someone had obviously been in there before me.
So now the question is - what's a TNT feel like when changed to the higher-stall converter?
@saforwardlook You are tasked with reconfiguring one of your TNT cars and reporting back.
The 383-2 engines generally have the 2.7 axle and the 383-4 have the 3.2 axles. I have not rebuilt transmissions for these two applications but I have for the 440 standard and HP engines. It has been some time now since my last rebuild of one, but I believe the only difference was the HP engine transmissions had 4 pinion planet carriers and the standard performance ones had the 3 pinion carriers in the 440 cars. There might have been some difference in the number of friction discs in the clutches, not sure anymore........................
I haven't done it but I do firmly believe the launch would be much better with the high stall converter, but the fuel consumption would be miserable if you had to drive the one with the high stall converter with a 440 under any condition.@Big_John I'm glad you kept drilling on this. Yes, kinda funny that the answer was in there via the usage/part# on the flexplate.
I did once need to replace a converter in a 1970 TNT, and replaced it with a std large-dia converter that had weights welded onto it (or onto the flexplate, I don't remember what I did).
But I do remember that there was no noticeable performance change.
And the converter I removed was painted blue - so I didn't mention it previously, as someone had obviously been in there before me.
So now the question is - what's a TNT feel like when changed to the higher-stall converter?
@saforwardlook You are tasked with reconfiguring one of your TNT cars and reporting back.
fc7_plumcrazy
Old Man with a Hat
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 5,315
- Reaction score
- 6,549
the owner of the 300 vert is Peter Jenslund.
A great Mopar fellow who is deeply into B&E-Bodys usually.
I saw the car some years ago when he was still in LA.
He does bodywork professionally for living.
Like he mentioned he owns it since many moons and it is his only C-body.
The body will be as he described it. Seems like he had it down to bare metal as he mentioned
Carsten
A great Mopar fellow who is deeply into B&E-Bodys usually.
I saw the car some years ago when he was still in LA.
He does bodywork professionally for living.
Like he mentioned he owns it since many moons and it is his only C-body.
The body will be as he described it. Seems like he had it down to bare metal as he mentioned
Carsten
azblackhemi
Old Man with a Hat
For Sale - Mopar Full Size - Cars - 1st Quarter
Similar threads
