69CoronetRT
Senior Member
You want me to prove a negative? Not possible.
it's not up to me to prove you wrong.
It's up to you to support your position and provide the documentation that a 68-70 C body came with the HP cam.
Fuselage Fury HP engines
- Thread starter '69FuryIIIConvertible
- Start date
You want me to prove a negative? Not possible.
it's not up to me to prove you wrong.
It's up to you to support your position and provide the documentation that a 68-70 C body came with the HP cam.
69CoronetRT
Senior Member
Again, I don't know where all this angst comes in with C body and Charger owners. Ya got a 330 horse non HP cam assembly. That's OK.
cbarge
World Famous Barge in a Budget
No angst on my part..I took my 290 horse 383 and made it my own version of a 383 HP,LOL!
And that’s why it’s called hot rodding!!
polara71
Old Man with a Hat
The best part is among all this arguing from the experts, no one has answered the only thing I ever asked......
4 pages of childish bickering over a complete moot point for nothing....
One of the first things I do when I rebuild an engine is throw the cam in the scrap bin....
Oh look HP manifolds on a 4 barrel H code 383....
4 pages of childish bickering over a complete moot point for nothing....
One of the first things I do when I rebuild an engine is throw the cam in the scrap bin....
Oh look HP manifolds on a 4 barrel H code 383....
polara71
Old Man with a Hat
Doug told you zero on the 383 HP.
I think the 440 number answer will have to come from Kevin or Bill, Doug or Trev may even be able to source it.
That's fine Dave, let me rephrase what I want to know.....
Ahem.....
What would be anyone's guess as to how many of the 366,620 1969 Fury's may have been optioned with the E63 or E86 engine option, are these cars unusual to find, especially the E63 cars?
There we go, no engine names or nomenclature mentioned, now we can stop bitching and arguing over semantics.
Nick
69CoronetRT
Senior Member
Nick,
That question can be answered.....IF the factory sales reports I.e. SG reports aka Options and Accessories reports till exist.
IF they exist, I don't think they have been made public or in a format similar to what GG offers.
I'd love to see them if they are out there. I'd love to compile the info if someone has the reports and doesn't want to fool with the data.
polara71
Old Man with a Hat
Nick, it is not semantics . They are factul, trivial as they may seem to you it is important that they remain clear and not lumped together.
Chrysler many times in their numbers didn't seperate or specify the differences. Guys like Doug spend hours trying to decipher build sheets and documents to clear up the facts so questions like yours can be answered CORRECTLY.
He answered your first question partially. This question is a different one.
You'll thank the old timers when were dead I'm sure.
polara71
Old Man with a Hat
Kevin ..... you and I spoke about that. I guarantee he has them.
cbarge
World Famous Barge in a Budget
That's what i did.
The BoaB has the Comp Cams 268HE duration in it.
Nick got to drive the BoaB last month and knows how well the engine works.
Sorry to go off topic,Nick.
Chrysler built a ton of 383HP C bodies even in 1969. As mentioned in the past,C body records are long lost and gone.
Nobody knows how many are still in one piece.
Members here chiming in that own a 383HP makes this site resourceful.
70bigblockdodge
Old Man with a Hat
So where is the part number on the cam?
cbarge
World Famous Barge in a Budget
Thanks! Looks stock...cleans clocks!!
69CoronetRT
Senior Member
WOW! You called Doug out... impressive!
Actually I appreciate it. You know where I come from.
It's another opportunity to share work and research people in the hobby are doing to help clarify history. It's a way to help combat complacency.
Since no one else seems to be doing much C body archeology, I don't mind picking up, part of, the banner. I want to be one of the five people in the world that care about the Rose Bowl cars.
69CoronetRT
Senior Member
Then it will be incredibly easy for you to produce one C body with the HP stamp.
To me it is semantics, when you have people arguing over whether a nomenclature was attached to a specific engine in a specific car.
It's referenced in factory lit as "high performance", but we can't call it that because it may or may not have the specific cam, despite having the correct VIN letter and fender tag option codes.
To me, (opinion time) this is the stuff that makes people look at Mopar guys like freaks.
You'll notice I even asked for an educated guess....the car I'm looking at purchasing is one of two 69 Fury 23 Coupes with a 383-4 barrel I have seen forsale..
If I have to buy the ******* car just to end this one way or another I will....
This is rediculous
Sorry, I was away yesterday. A couple of final points because I'm not going to be able to continue the enjoyable banter, I recently started a new job and am very busy during the week so I have to get all the honey do list done today.
First,
Proving a negative is possible. The scientific method is built around it. "...inability to disprove does not prove."
Although I haven't presented difinitive documenation that they were HP engines, I have seen, and presented a compelling argument that they are.
i.e.
Two,
Sorry, we certainly did hijack your thread but you were asking for detailed technical data on vehicle production. That can't be answered until you determine the semantics. As far a this making Mopar guys look like freaks, this is the same type of conversation you will find in any brand specific board. Final though, as Fury Pursuit has said in the past, probably the best place to find the answer you're looking for is the 1970 Ward's Automotive Yearbook. Unfortunately I haven't been able to source one so I can't answer your question.
Three,
Related to the spirited disagreement that this thread spawned, IF there is no HP stamp on the block, I would agree that the engineers did not consider it a HP engine and it was only marketed as an HP engine in some marketing publications. Regarding the opinion that the cam determines whether an engine is HP or not isn't convincing or even logical. IMO an HP engine is far more than the cam even though the 2 bbl and non-Super Bee, Road Runner 4 bbl used the same cam, that doesn't convince me that the other components don't constitute a HP engine.
Finally,
First,
Proving a negative is possible. The scientific method is built around it. "...inability to disprove does not prove."
Although I haven't presented difinitive documenation that they were HP engines, I have seen, and presented a compelling argument that they are.
i.e.
Two,
Sorry, we certainly did hijack your thread but you were asking for detailed technical data on vehicle production. That can't be answered until you determine the semantics. As far a this making Mopar guys look like freaks, this is the same type of conversation you will find in any brand specific board. Final though, as Fury Pursuit has said in the past, probably the best place to find the answer you're looking for is the 1970 Ward's Automotive Yearbook. Unfortunately I haven't been able to source one so I can't answer your question.
Three,
Related to the spirited disagreement that this thread spawned, IF there is no HP stamp on the block, I would agree that the engineers did not consider it a HP engine and it was only marketed as an HP engine in some marketing publications. Regarding the opinion that the cam determines whether an engine is HP or not isn't convincing or even logical. IMO an HP engine is far more than the cam even though the 2 bbl and non-Super Bee, Road Runner 4 bbl used the same cam, that doesn't convince me that the other components don't constitute a HP engine.
Finally,
THANK YOU!!! This is what I love about these conversations. No one knows everything and these conversations allow all of us to learn from each other. IMO that is the MOST valuable part of this forum.
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
SMH
Similar threads
