Moparts

70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct?

Posted By: bogusracer

70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/30/09 04:47 AM

I need photos or a reference book on how to properly detail a 340 Six Pack engine.
items like how many ribs on the vacuum hoses for the 3x2 bbls, vacuum hose for distributor, Correct fuel filter, radiator overflow hose, windshield washer hose - how many ribs? Brake Booster & Master Cyl. are they painted black or cad plated? What do the correct valve covers look like and how hard are they to come by? What was the correct battery - Group 24 or 27? Did the left Exh. Manifold have the Manifold Gasket with the ntegral spark plug heat shield? Air Breather lid what decals and what locations?
Any and all photos would be appreciated.

Thanks Moparts members for your responses.

Bogusracer
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/30/09 05:00 AM

I have photos of some of that available to purchase, I will dig out the link to that thread here in a minute or three.


For the batteries both types were available, if you have your broadcast sheet, what are the F codes?

Edit;

Link with more info on photos;

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...e=0#Post4348097
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/30/09 06:38 AM

Pictures of Troy's T/A someone took at Spring Fling 2008.

This was obviously taken with a flash so some thing may look glossier than in reality. Photographs have limitations.





Posted By: 44D6PAKCUDA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/30/09 10:32 AM

What color should the oil dip stick handle/loop and dip stick tube be?
Posted By: jrwoodjoe

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/30/09 03:41 PM

I would like to know where you can get the black plastic covers for the carbs like Troy has in his pic?

Joe
Posted By: bogusracer

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 01:20 PM

Quote:

What color should the oil dip stick handle/loop and dip stick tube be?



Anyone who can answer this question above?

Bogusracer
Posted By: bogusracer

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 01:23 PM

Thanks for posting the photo's they'll give me a good starting point for reference.


Bogusracer
Posted By: bogusracer

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 01:27 PM

Barry,

Will be sending you paymwnt for the DVD disc.

Also do you know where you can get the correct drivers side Exhaust Manifold Gasket with the integral spark plug heat shield?

Bogusracer
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 02:54 PM

Quote:

...Also do you know where you can get the correct drivers side Exhaust Manifold Gasket with the integral spark plug heat shield?

Bogusracer



Mopar Performance.
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 03:00 PM

Quote:

Quote:

What color should the oil dip stick handle/loop and dip stick tube be?



Anyone who can answer this question above?

Bogusracer



I don't think the handle is black on the car above by accident. It looks like the tube is engine color. You need to get Troy to answer the research behind it.
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 04:47 PM

Dipstick handle is black, tube is engine color.
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 04:51 PM

One thing to keep in mind for anyone using photos of Troy's car for reference - it has N95.

If you do not have N95 then that breather setup will not be the same for your car.
Posted By: ScottSmith_Harms

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 06:51 PM

340 dip sticks & tubes, along with engine end of the neg bat cables being painted or not are details that always bring controversey.

One thing for sure, the alternator on Troys car, while certainly nice, is not properly detailed.
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 10/31/09 08:54 PM

Quote:

.. One thing for sure, the alternator on Troys car, while certainly nice, is not properly detailed.



That's because Baldason rebuilt and OE detailed him one that didn't charge. I guess he missed that detail.
Posted By: Steve340

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/01/09 12:34 AM

Are those battery cable ends correct?
Posted By: cataclysm80

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/01/09 07:23 PM

Quote:

I would like to know where you can get the black plastic covers for the carbs like Troy has in his pic?

Joe



It would be great to have a set of those so that I could display with the air cleaner off!

Tav
Posted By: gomangoRTSE

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/01/09 11:22 PM

Yes the car appears to be a California made car, at least I think so. Looking that the 3 nipple fitting in the passenger side valve cover. It has the vapor return line. I dont believe this starts on non California cars until 1971. At that time wasnt it on all cars?
Posted By: DAYCLONA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/02/09 02:57 AM



Attached picture 5580981-1971carbsta.jpg
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/02/09 03:01 AM

G-series drawing that has nothing to do with 1970 cars. The 1971 cars did not get built.


Also, posting watermarked photos from a website you do not own is a .
Posted By: DAYCLONA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/02/09 03:02 AM



Attached picture 5580993-19713406.jpg
Posted By: bogusracer

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/03/09 06:47 AM

Quote:

G-series drawing that has nothing to do with 1970 cars. The 1971 cars did not get built.





Barry,

Wouldn't this be applicable to the N95 cars built after this engineering drawing date - since the 1970 N95 cars were what all 71 model cars got for emissions controls?

Also isn't the washer bottle on a 70 Model E-Body supposed to have a square corner. The one on the car looks like a 71 model?

Bogusracer
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/03/09 06:59 PM

Quote:

I would like to know where you can get the black plastic covers for the carbs like Troy has in his pic?

Joe



That is kinda cool huh?!? I made that out of aluminum strap and wood. It keeps the birds out of the carbs.
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/03/09 07:04 PM

Quote:

Quote:

What color should the oil dip stick handle/loop and dip stick tube be?



Anyone who can answer this question above?

Bogusracer



The majority of the ones that I have seen had a black painted handle.
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/03/09 07:12 PM

Quote:

One thing for sure, the alternator on Troys car, while certainly nice, is not properly detailed.



You are correct my "good" alternator looks good but does not work. I spent some real good money with Frank B. and that thing screams like a PIG!!!
Posted By: bremotorsports

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/04/09 02:33 PM

Troy,

This is the first time I have seen these photos.

A job well done.

Bill Rolik

P.S. I have the tags for the negative cable on hand.
Posted By: jrwoodjoe

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/04/09 04:27 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I would like to know where you can get the black plastic covers for the carbs like Troy has in his pic?

Joe



That is kinda cool huh?!? I made that out of aluminum strap and wood. It keeps the birds out of the carbs.



Looked like plastic in the pics. Very Neat!
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/04/09 06:07 PM

An in-progress of Troy's car with some "stuff" out of the way.

Posted By: FJ5_Fish

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/05/09 07:09 PM

Quote:

Quote:

G-series drawing that has nothing to do with 1970 cars. The 1971 cars did not get built.





Barry,

Wouldn't this be applicable to the N95 cars built after this engineering drawing date - since the 1970 N95 cars were what all 71 model cars got for emissions controls?

Also isn't the washer bottle on a 70 Model E-Body supposed to have a square corner. The one on the car looks like a 71 model?

Bogusracer



Yup - That is a '71 bottle, wrong battery cables, no paint on negative cable, spark plug wire holders or exhaust bolts...all minor things - easily corrected. Looks nice.
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/05/09 11:12 PM

Quote:

yup - That is a '71 bottle, wrong battery cables, no paint on negative cable, spark plug wire holders or exhaust bolts...all minor things - easily corrected. Looks nice.



.......you might want to check your notes and try again because you just failed the "T/A 101" class.
Posted By: gtx6970

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/05/09 11:54 PM

Troy,
I know we've had the talk about the washer reservoir so I'm not going there.

I can see the manifolds were previously engine color as the dark border near the head surface is seen.
I had several pics ( lost them all in a PC crash last year) of unrestored T/A 340's and all had natural white spark plug wire clips.


BUT, I gotta question the battery cables. The positive cable has the common grey starter relay lead of the cable thats still avail today,,, Shouldn't it be a medium brown color and a dished lead ends ..
If I'm wrong I apologies in advance
Posted By: FJ5_Fish

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 12:37 AM

Quote:

Quote:

yup - That is a '71 bottle, wrong battery cables, no paint on negative cable, spark plug wire holders or exhaust bolts...all minor things - easily corrected. Looks nice.



.......you might want to check your notes and try again because you just failed the "T/A 101" class.



Really?

The 1970 Washer Bottle is a one year only piece. I have seen plenty of early '71's with leftover 70 parts but I have never seen a '70 with '71 parts (from the factory) on them. The over the counter washer bottle replacement would have been the '71 style. After almost 40 years a replacement bottle would look like the right age. All '70 E-Bodies I have or have seen (Including all my T/A's and AAR's have the 70 style washer bottle.

Galino Groovy started the foolish myth that smallblock negative cables were not on the engine when painted...more BS. I have loads of proof that they were on and painted.

Wire holders - I have seen both ways but the paint did not stick well on those. Most I have had were painted.

I agree with others that stated an engine color dipstick tube and black handle - on a 70. The 69 340's tube and stick were painted Blue - engine color.

Misc. Stuff I have found...

The distrbutor hold-downs are copper plated.

The fuel pumps were painted on the engine.

The loose washer (found on many untouched cars) under the intake bolt (which have a captive washer) are brass or copper.

T/A's used Organosol on the cowl and fenders. The cowls were masked off and not free-hand as on other e-bodies.

Most Trans-Am (only) cars have 2 plugs in the floor similar to the rubber-steel plugs for the rear shock towers in the trunk but about half the diameter. I have never seen these on anything other than a Trans-Am car.
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 04:50 AM

Quote:

Troy,
BUT, I gotta question the battery cables. The positive cable has the common grey starter relay lead of the cable that's still avail today,,, Shouldn't it be a medium brown color and a dished lead ends ..
If I'm wrong I apologies in advance



Hi Bill, hope all is well. Both the positive and the negative cables are repops and your correct about the colors. If you take a original positive cable and lay it up against a assembline cable....there is a big difference. As for the negative cable, they do look closer however I believe in late 70 and on, one of the big differences in the negative cable is the end that bolts up to the head. There is a large rubber block at the end. It is about 3/4 long, sticks up about 3/16 and it goes all the way around the cable.

Here is a good picture of what I'm talking about on a low milage T/A....

The funny thing is all of the original T/As that I have seen all had this negative cable (with the big end on it) AND it was not painted on the engine.

I have seen many 340 4 bbl engines where the negative was painted....why not on the T/As....I don't know.

Attached picture 5589066-Wiring30.JPG
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:15 AM

Quote:


The 1970 Washer Bottle is a one year only piece. I have seen plenty of early '71's with leftover 70 parts but I have never seen a '70 with '71 parts (from the factory) on them. The over the counter washer bottle replacement would have been the '71 style. After almost 40 years a replacement bottle would look like the right age. All '70 E-Bodies I have or have seen (Including all my T/A's and AAR's have the 70 style washer bottle.

Galino Groovy started the foolish myth that smallblock negative cables were not on the engine when painted...more BS. I have loads of proof that they were on and painted.

Wire holders - I have seen both ways but the paint did not stick well on those. Most I have had were painted.

I agree with others that stated an engine color dipstick tube and black handle - on a 70. The 69 340's tube and stick were painted Blue - engine color.

Misc. Stuff I have found...

The distributor hold-downs are copper plated.

The fuel pumps were painted on the engine.

The loose washer (found on many untouched cars) under the intake bolt (which have a captive washer) are brass or copper.

T/A's used Organosol on the cowl and fenders. The cowls were masked off and not free-hand as on other e-bodies.

Most Trans-Am (only) cars have 2 plugs in the floor similar to the rubber-steel plugs for the rear shock towers in the trunk but about half the diameter. I have never seen these on anything other than a Trans-Am car.



Hi Jimmy, or is it Ed
Here is what I will do. I will try and address each question as you posted them and see if we can shed a little light on things.

First off the washer bottle. This is a fun one!! I don't know why but it seems like many of the late run T/As had the 71 bottles in them. Maybe it was a Hamtramak thing, maybe it was a T/A thing but I do know that none or the AARs had the 71 bottle, only the T/A.

Here is a picture of a very low milage T/A with a 71 bottle in it...

Attached picture 5589109-EngineBay12.jpg
Posted By: wate

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:18 AM

I'm a stranger to these topics and normally don't comment but there are other corrections needed that I see on almost every restored E body. Seems like these just get perpetuated (I have a DVD for $3.98 if you want to know what that word means)
So above experts with your diagrams, etc. why have you never commented on these details?? guess you want to get paid??? $16 for your piggy bank?? Can I just send you a DONATION in a white envelope? keep your DVD!

Wiper hose routing- return hose from reservoir always came back along the firewall, routed up through the black heavy firewall clip above the junction box, wrapped up and behind the wiper motor and then exited above the wiper motor through that small hole that's on the lip. I've seen this correctly done less than 5 times in years of looking at restored cars. What do you think that hole is for??

Heater hoses attached to inner fender??? that's fine for big blocks and small block A bodies, not cudas or challengers. small block E bodies heater hoses didn't attach to the inner fender. as I told a mopar car judge who pointed out my mistake of NOT attaching them to the inner fender, REFER TO THE SERVICE MANUAL, it's in there!! Why do you think the alternator bracket is so tall??

6 pak vaccuum hoses always S clipped to the fuel lines, all three of them. never see this correctly done. doesn't make sense to have the hoses flopping around?? they didn't!

engine wiring harness between alternator and horns always routed across and through the large black clip. again, can't have wires flopping around in there!

spark plug wire holders always painted, never white! Yikes!!!

I can't take anymore, back to my Mopar cave............
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:19 AM

Here is a picture of the bottle that came out of my car....to be honest with you I still have it somewhere.

Attached picture 5589115-EngineCompartment.jpg
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:23 AM

....here's a good one, I love this car!! This is a very low milage T/A that I saw at Carlisle a few years ago. Very original....only a few things ever changed on it. Check out the washer bottle!!

Attached picture 5589120-TAREFPIC037.jpg
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:24 AM

....same car, check out the Negative battery cable.

Attached picture 5589124-TAREFPIC020.jpg
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:28 AM

Mine has the so-called "71" bottle as well. Date code on the pump is the 107th day of 1970.


For the guy that asked about 1970 vs. 1971 N95, the 1970 system was ECS & the 1971 system was NOX. There may be some similarities, but there are deffinate differences.
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:42 AM

Quote:


corrections needed that I see on almost every restored E body.

never

always

looking at restored cars.





I picked out some bits of what you said. Never & always? So, were you actually there taking notes on every one of these cars as they were built? If so, why are you using "restored? cars for reference?

Some of us prefer using original cars for reference, but even then we know that cars were not always built exactly the same every time.
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:45 AM

Here is the next one...

"Galino Groovy started the foolish myth that smallblock negative cables were not on the engine when painted...more BS. I have loads of proof that they were on and painted."

OK....where is the proof?? I'm not saying that all 340 engines did or did not have painted ends. What I personality believe is the negative cables that DO NOT have the big rubber ends got painted AND the ones with the exposed ends did get painted. The reason is the ones that had the exposed ends were prone to corrosion so they painted them. Do I have any proof of this...no, but it does make sense and this is what I have seen.

I can say this, I have never seen a painted cable with the big rubber end, AND I have never seen a cable without the big rubber end not painted. But I also never saw every car that was ever made so....

Check you photos and see what you come up with. Pictures help...
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:53 AM

....next...

"Wire holders - I have seen both ways but the paint did not stick well on those. Most I have had were painted.

I too have seen many of the wire holder painted, just not late 70 built cars out of Hamtramck. Here is a few fun photos...

Attached picture 5589154-Wiring32.JPG
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:56 AM

....here is a nice one, look at the original upper hose!!

Attached picture 5589160-originalTA(2).jpg
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:17 AM

I'm going for a three fer!!

"The distributor hold-downs are copper plated."
....Yes, your correct about the copper plated hold down. Mine is plated (What photo did you see that on my car??) Can you and were WHY it is plated???

The loose washer (found on many untouched cars) under the intake bolt (which have a captive washer) are brass or copper"
I'm sorry but I don't follow you on this one..

"The fuel pumps were painted on the engine."
Fuel pumps were painted??? Not on the T/As that I have seen, I might be wrong but here is another picture.... Many of the big blocks were painted but I don't know about the small blocks.

Attached picture 5589171-Fuelsystem66.jpg
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:19 AM

This is also a real cool car!! 2500 mile 70 or 71 Demon 340 car....unpainted fuel pump.

Attached picture 5589174-Moparsatthestrip138.jpg
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:24 AM

Photo from 1970 of the 1970 McAllister Dodge T/A.

Modified for drag racing? Yes.

But look at these photos close.

Attached picture 5589177-m1.jpg
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:31 AM

...ok Almost done..
"T/A's used Organosol on the cowl and fenders. The cowls were masked off and not free-hand as on other e-bodies.

I heard this too but when I sanded my original paint T/A down, it was not Organosol....there was no texture to it. The black was painted first and then the color. Here is two photos one of the inner fender black out and you can see that it is smooth....not Organosol...

Attached picture 5589183-EngineBay23.JPG
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:31 AM

Close up from the same photo.

Spark plug wire looms? - No paint.

Negative battery cable end? - No paint.

Also, note how glossy the black is on the master cylinder. Most folks seem to think that was a semi-gloss. Interesting........

If anyone has arguments either way, please back them up with original photos from cars that still have original details intact. I would love to see what you have.

Honest.

Barry

Attached picture 5589185-m2.jpg
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:34 AM

Here is a photo of the cowl. You can see how the yellow goes over the top of the back paint. Even in this photo it look like a smooth black paint.

Attached picture 5589186-EngineBay5.jpg
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:34 AM

Please do not bring 1971 cars into a 1970 T/A thread? All it does is confuse folks.

We seem to have an uphill battle here as it is.
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:53 AM

And last but not least...

"Most Trans-Am (only) cars have 2 plugs in the floor similar to the rubber-steel plugs for the rear shock towers in the trunk but about half the diameter. I have never seen these on anything other than a Trans-Am car."

Not sure what your talking about here....I don't recall any trunk photos being shown. My trunk floor (and all the other sheet metal) in my car is original, nothing was ever replaced.

That should be it on that subject..

I will say this....I'm no expert when it comes to these cars or any other car but I do love them and respect them. Because of that I put alot of time into the researching them. I don't say things like "Always" "Never" and "Positively" because somebody will prove you wrong.

Jimmy and I started off on the wrong foot and I'm sorry for that. I had a bad day at work and I guess I popped off a little to quick so I'm sorry for calling you out.

Again I would like to thank Berry Washington (Alaskan TA) for all of his photos and knowledge. If anybody would like a CD that is FULL of photos of a VERY low milage T/A, just PM him, IT IS WORTH EVERY PENNY!!!

Attached picture 5589199-1970TA.jpg
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 06:59 AM

Thanks Troy, but I gotta say.....

No PMs. Email only (or snail mail for orders) I have PMs disabled because I like all my messages to go to one place.

Barry
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 07:02 AM

....long night, I'm going to bed!!
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 07:05 AM

How do these survivor reference cars relate to each other in terms of serial number and SPD? How close were they built to each other?
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 07:24 AM

The SPD & VIN have very little to do with when they were really built, so that is anyone's guess.

But, I can tell you that the low mile T/A did have four broadcast sheets in it, one was for a later car (if you go by the SPD & VIN).

The SPD of the low miler is 406. The sheet for the other car is 407. The VIN numbers are over 2000 apart. The broadcast sheet sequence numbers are only 12 apart. So, for whatever reason, the cars were actually built VERY close together regardess of the SPD & VIN & what most folks seem to assume.

It is a fascination of mine, I would like to know why they did it that way. The more folks that send in broadcast sheet info for 1970 Hamtramck cars, the better chance I have of figuring it out.

Barry
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 07:30 AM

Quote:

The SPD & VIN have very little to do with when they were really built, so that is anyone's guess.

But, I can tell you that the low mile T/A did have four broadcast sheets in it, one was for a later car (if you go by the SPD & VIN).

The SPD of the low miler is 406. The sheet for the other car is 407. The VIN numbers are over 2000 apart. The broadcast sheet sequence numbers are only 12 apart. So, for whatever reason, the cars were actually built VERY close together regardess of the SPD & VIN & what most folks seem to assume.

It is a fascination of mine, I would like to know why they did it that way. The more folks that send in broadcast sheet info for 1970 Hamtramck cars, the better chance I have of figuring it out.

Barry



Would car with close broadcast sheet sequence numbers be built close to each other??
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 07:37 AM

I am pretty sure that is what I just said.
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 07:44 AM

Quote:

I am pretty sure that is what I just said.



I thought so, but didn't want to assume that.

Do you think broadcast sheet sequence numbers are issued in flat out built order? Would it be in order per line or both lines inclusive?
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 07:50 AM

Per line.

It was subject to change too, but I need a lot more info before exploring that aspect in depth.

See the July & Sept. IOTMs at this link if you missed them for more info.

http://www.hamtramck-historical.com/previousItemOfTheMonth-2009.shtml
Posted By: gtx6970

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 11:41 AM

great information fellas.
Keep it coming
Posted By: moparo

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 12:40 PM

Barry

Love the photos you have. One thing which I noticed on the picture which you may be able to answer. The valve cover looks to be later with the raise circle in the front.

I just noticed the by pass hose is not painted on this engine also.

I will post pictures later of the neg bat, cable with the rubber cover paint on a low mile car.

This washer bottle thing is way out of hand I have a June built 70 cuda all orig. and it has the "70" bottle.



Attached picture 5589321-5589185-m2.jpg
Posted By: RestoRick

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 01:30 PM

Quote:

Here is a photo of the cowl. You can see how the yellow goes over the top of the back paint. Even in this photo it look like a smooth black paint.



Correct, the black was applied first, then masked off before the topcoat color. As Troy points out, you can see some bleed back of topcoat color under the masking.
Non TA/AAR cars had the blackout applied after topcoat color.

As for the type of black... my belief is it was organisol.
I have a perfect organisol sample on hand right now; it's a very fine texture, that can be easily mistaken for smooth especially if dirty & aged.
Logic... AAR's were painted in the same sequence... however, the AAR also had the fender tops, door & quarter upper edges sprayed at the same time as the cowl & fender banding. Why would two different kinds of black be used?

The real dead give away to identify it is to clean it well and look close to see the metallic flecks.

Rick
Posted By: Troy

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 04:24 PM

Quote:


The real dead give away to identify it is to clean it well and look close to see the metallic flecks.

Rick



Hi Rick, hope all is well. On my car, before I started to strip it down I took many pictures of the black paint that was used on the trunk lid and under the rear spoiler.....It was organisol....no doubt about it. I compaired that paint to the cowl and there was a big difference in texture. Where all T/As this way? I don't know.....
Posted By: autoxcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 04:30 PM

Quote:

however, the AAR also had the fender tops, door & quarter upper edges sprayed at the same time as the cowl & fender banding. Why would two different kinds of black be used?




On an AAR did that fender tops, door & quarter upper edges organasol get put on before or after final color exterior top coat?
Posted By: RestoRick

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 04:34 PM

Doing great Troy!

Very possible...
I haven't seen them all

Funny how anytime words like "detailing, details, OE, etc." are in a thread subject, how fast the topic drifts!!
Posted By: moparo

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 04:48 PM

yes all before color was applied
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:36 PM

Quote:



The valve cover looks to be later with the raise circle in the front.





Not sure what you mean by "later"? It is a 1970 car & the photo was taken in 1970.

The low mile T/A has the same style.

Since more than one style of washer bottle was available, I am sure it was pretty random as to which one ended up on which car.
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:42 PM

On the blackout....

One of the engineering drawings states;

"Apply blackout paint or organisol paint in areas indicated"

This is no doubt why some of you have found original cars one way or the other.
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 11/06/09 05:44 PM

Quote:

yes all before color was applied



With the exception of the rocker pinchweld area.
Posted By: RareTA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 12/04/09 07:19 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Here is a photo of the cowl. You can see how the yellow goes over the top of the back paint. Even in this photo it look like a smooth black paint.



Correct, the black was applied first, then masked off before the topcoat color. As Troy points out, you can see some bleed back of topcoat color under the masking.
Non TA/AAR cars had the blackout applied after topcoat color.

As for the type of black... my belief is it was organisol.
I have a perfect organisol sample on hand right now; it's a very fine texture, that can be easily mistaken for smooth especially if dirty & aged.
Logic... AAR's were painted in the same sequence... however, the AAR also had the fender tops, door & quarter upper edges sprayed at the same time as the cowl & fender banding. Why would two different kinds of black be used?

The real dead give away to identify it is to clean it well and look close to see the metallic flecks.

Rick



I dissagree with the black first. This is the tear down of my T/A. You can see in this photo the yellow was first then the black. Download the pic and enlarge it.

Attached picture 5646031-OEMBlack(Large).jpg
Posted By: DAYCLONA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 12/05/09 06:36 PM

I dissagree with the black first. This is the tear down of my T/A. You can see in this photo the yellow was first then the black. Download the pic and enlarge it.






As with "mass production" of anything, cars, trucks, kids toys, etc,....there may be factory prints, procedures, etc, they all change as production gets underway, some are due to mistakes, some are due to "experimentation", or penny pinching as production is underway,...in the case of different blacks, for black outs,....might have run out of "that" paint that day, and substituted something else, or a certain procedure was done at another work station on the line and Gomer used the "wrong" paint, or what was substitued on purpose or accident ,....back in the day it was Human intervention/mistakes on the line, not robots programed with a set of perimeters
Posted By: hemi68charger

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/26/15 02:58 PM

Quote:





Mike,
This thread is a blast... Now that I have my own T/A, I'm discovering things... One of my latest detailing questions is the center carb vent and it's relationship with the breather on the pass. valve cover. I see in the picture above and your factory illustration, the 340 pictures had all three nipples;
1. air cleaner base
2. Carb float bowl vent
3. gas tank vent

I thought #3 was only for California Emissions cars in '70 and then bacame standard on all cars starting in '70. I have seen a lot of T/A's and AAR's and haven't seen many, if any, with the gas tank vent. If that's the case and it was only for California emissions, then a production T/A and AAR would have the breather with 2 nipples, both on top, not the bottom-smallest one for the gas tank vent line...

No?
Posted By: Alaskan_TA

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/27/15 12:19 AM

Single nipple breather on these engines unless the car has N95, 3 nipple breather on those.

On the non-N95 cars the port on the middle carb was open to the atmosphere.
Posted By: ns1aar

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/27/15 04:44 AM

Quote:

And last but not least...

"Most Trans-Am (only) cars have 2 plugs in the floor similar to the rubber-steel plugs for the rear shock towers in the trunk but about half the diameter. I have never seen these on anything other than a Trans-Am car."

Not sure what your talking about here....I don't recall any trunk photos being shown. My trunk floor (and all the other sheet metal) in my car is original, nothing was ever replaced.

That should be it on that subject..

I will say this....I'm no expert when it comes to these cars or any other car but I do love them and respect them. Because of that I put alot of time into the researching them. I don't say things like "Always" "Never" and "Positively" because somebody will prove you wrong.

Jimmy and I started off on the wrong foot and I'm sorry for that. I had a bad day at work and I guess I popped off a little to quick so I'm sorry for calling you out.

Again I would like to thank Berry Washington (Alaskan TA) for all of his photos and knowledge. If anybody would like a CD that is FULL of photos of a VERY low milage T/A, just PM him, IT IS WORTH EVERY PENNY!!!



My AAR had these plugs located over the mufflers. Only thing I could think of was the plastic/rubber might melt.Also had a steel plug located over the side exhaust outlet.
Posted By: hemi68charger

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/27/15 05:39 AM

Quote:

...

On the non-N95 cars the port on the middle carb was open to the atmosphere.



Get out of here !!!! Well, I would have never thought that.... Thanks Barry....
Posted By: mopar346

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/27/15 02:55 PM

Quote:

Quote:

...

On the non-N95 cars the port on the middle carb was open to the atmosphere.



Get out of here !!!! Well, I would have never thought that.... Thanks Barry....



The question I have been running through my mind is was there a stub hose attached or was it bare.

The one at Wellborn's has one and pictures of my car right out of the barn has none. I run with none and believe it correct.
Posted By: NANKET

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/27/15 09:20 PM

Quote:

Quote:


The question I have been running through my mind is was there a stub hose attached or was it bare.

The one at Wellborn's has one and pictures of my car right out of the barn has none. I run with none and believe it correct.



Please define "right out of the barn", are we talking Hamtramck, MI in the spring of 1970? Or sometime later. As you know those will pull out quite easily sometimes.
Posted By: mopar346

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/28/15 01:19 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:


The question I have been running through my mind is was there a stub hose attached or was it bare.

The one at Wellborn's has one and pictures of my car right out of the barn has none. I run with none and believe it correct.



Please define "right out of the barn", are we talking Hamtramck, MI in the spring of 1970? Or sometime later. As you know those will pull out quite easily sometimes.



Literally pulled out of a barn in South Georgia in the early-mid-80s, in a reasonable state of originality. There is some incorrect items in the pictures from then and it is known that the shortblock was replaced under warranty in 72 with a non-TA 340. By no means an absolute reference but a was a very original lowish-milage car. That is why I ask about the vent tube, I have seen both ways but most every car has some many incorrect items that I can point out that I have not found one I consider proof. Troy's in a N95 car and although I used it for many things in my restoration it is no good for that question. Barry's DVD is the closest to proof, it has no hose either. I believe no hose but I figured I would ask since I had all the experts tuned in.

Thanks, Kevin
Posted By: hemi68charger

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/28/15 04:30 AM

Quote:

...The one at Wellborn's has one and pictures of my car right out of the barn has none. I run with none and believe it correct.



I'm supposed to talk to Tim tonight or this weekend, I'll ask him. Do you have any pictures of what you're talking about.
Posted By: mopar346

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/28/15 05:22 AM

Quote:

Quote:

...The one at Wellborn's has one and pictures of my car right out of the barn has none. I run with none and believe it correct.



I'm supposed to talk to Tim tonight or this weekend, I'll ask him. Do you have any pictures of what you're talking about.



Yes, they're to big to post though. It is a tube from the vent on the center carb bowl, it protrudes beyond the edge of the breather. It has the line like so many factory hoses and is held on with a keystone clamp. His Blue T/A which is a survivor by all accounts has one, his Red AAR which is a surface restoration with moany incorrect items does not have it. I cant say that I have seen it many if any others.

Thanks for info you can come up with.
Posted By: mopar346

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 02/28/15 06:28 AM

This is on his blue TA, a survivor from all accounts.

Attached picture 8443477-IMG_2104.JPG
Posted By: Transamcuda

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 03/02/15 09:22 AM

"Some of us prefer using original cars for reference, but even then we know that cars were not always built exactly the same every time"

I think everyone needs to remember this when researching. These cars were built by individuals and sometimes those individuals did things their own way and not according to correct production standards... different suppliers/manufacturers of parts...shortage of parts...build outs... All these things can be taken into consideration of why one car has it one way and another is completely different. Ive seen several questions concerning the raised circle on the valve covers... Barry,Scott and I just commented on a thread recently about this and it may very well be a manufacturer issue. If its one thing I think we all have learned after all this time and countless threads is there will always be that one car or one part that comes along and throws a wrench into what we consider the norm. Were they supposed to be built a certain way or to a certain standard?? Yes.. Did it always happen that way?? No.. 1st shift did things different than 2nd shift.. and 3rd did it different than everyone else.. and god help you if your car was built on a friday!!! lol
Posted By: NANKET

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 03/02/15 09:59 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:





Please define "right out of the barn", are we talking Hamtramck, MI in the spring of 1970? Or sometime later. As you know those will pull out quite easily sometimes.



Literally pulled out of a barn in South Georgia in the early-mid-80s, in a reasonable state of originality. There is some incorrect items in the pictures from then and it is known that the shortblock was replaced under warranty in 72 with a non-TA 340. By no means an absolute reference but a was a very original lowish-milage car. That is why I ask about the vent tube, I have seen both ways but most every car has some many incorrect items that I can point out that I have not found one I consider proof. Troy's in a N95 car and although I used it for many things in my restoration it is no good for that question. Barry's DVD is the closest to proof, it has no hose either. I believe no hose but I figured I would ask since I had all the experts tuned in.

Thanks, Kevin



Kevin, here we are again, this car was 15 years old with an engine change before you saw it. That is hardly proof positive that is was built that way. It doesn't prove it didn't come that way either, just no wat to know for sure when the timeline stops in the mid 80's.
Posted By: mopar346

Re: 70 Challenger T/A - Engine Detailing - Whats correct? - 03/03/15 03:43 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:





Please define "right out of the barn", are we talking Hamtramck, MI in the spring of 1970? Or sometime later. As you know those will pull out quite easily sometimes.



Literally pulled out of a barn in South Georgia in the early-mid-80s, in a reasonable state of originality. There is some incorrect items in the pictures from then and it is known that the shortblock was replaced under warranty in 72 with a non-TA 340. By no means an absolute reference but a was a very original lowish-milage car. That is why I ask about the vent tube, I have seen both ways but most every car has some many incorrect items that I can point out that I have not found one I consider proof. Troy's in a N95 car and although I used it for many things in my restoration it is no good for that question. Barry's DVD is the closest to proof, it has no hose either. I believe no hose but I figured I would ask since I had all the experts tuned in.

Thanks, Kevin



Kevin, here we are again, this car was 15 years old with an engine change before you saw it. That is hardly proof positive that is was built that way. It doesn't prove it didn't come that way either, just no wat to know for sure when the timeline stops in the mid 80's.



"By no means an absolute reference but a was a very original lowish-milage car. That is why I ask about the vent tube,"

Kinda what I said and again that is why I am asking, I have viewed very few truly original AARs. And most I say have inaccuracies that I can pick out and I'm no guru, so the rest is automatically suspect. So do you know the answer of have any pictures or original examples that will verify it one way or the other?

Thank you
© 2024 Moparts Forums