Looking at potentially swapping out the K member on my '65 Belvedere I for a later model to move the engine back. I have looked over several threads trying to understand what all is exactly involved and what swaps over and what does not (i.e. do you use the same torsion bars, does the steering box bolt right in). I have read that I would need to use a '70 to get the steering box angles to match. Just trying to fully understand what all needs to be swapped, purchased and changed out. I will also be converting to disc brakes (11" slider) if that matters, as I have already read that moving the engine back would allow front caliper placement and thus better brake line routing. This will be 90% race car-80-100 passes a year.

The only thing that really moves is the motor. If it's a racecar you could just put the motor on a plate and put the engine wherever you want. I cut the trans crossmember bracket off. Then weld a plate to it. If using a push button trans? A S10 mount works by slightly elongating the holes. The tunnel.is tight. Cut it and make it big now. Cut and trim the K member as well. Later you'll be happy you did.
Doug

I wouldn't bother changing K frames for a race car, just use a motor plate up front and then fabricate a transmission cross member to put the transmission where you want it. I assume you are using a 727 and not a stick? Do you have a bare block and a 727 case? If so you can mock everything up. The transmission is the big problem, especially for a race car. A 727 takes up a lot of room and if you have to run a blanket then it takes up even more space.
For a race car you need room around the transmission for the shifter, deep pan and blanket. For the engine you need space for a tall intake, deep oil pan and big headers. Mock up that stuff and move the engine/trans assembly around until you find the best location.

I put a 70 unit in my 65. As Andy mentioned, trans room is at a premium. I had to do some thumping in areas of the tunnel around the case bulges for the accumulators etc. Had to fold the floor pinch weld down flat. There was roughly about .5-.75" clearance around most of the case with the change. Of course firewall to head gets tighter too.

Moving the firewall back is easy with engine out of the car. Place a 2x4 across the firewall. Bottle jack against the Kframe. Place a pipe between the 2x4 and the jack. Work slowly. If you go far it’ll put a small kink in the metal. You can see how it puts a curve in the upper area if the firewall.
Doug

What is the oil pan situation on a 65 with the factory k? If I take the motor from my duster, it is externally oiled with the Milodon pan. I am already a little concerned about header routing as a couple of tubes hug the block where the oil line is currently routed, not a deal breaker but one more thing on the list. I have the line high on the block (angled toward the pump) which leaves some oil in the line for start up.

With a K frame modification like dvw did there is no requirement for the 62-5 only pans...

FWIW pay close attention to any input he has...

His car is above and beyond 95% of the other cars out there...

If it was me I would go with the elephant ears and a modded 65 K frame for your application...

My hoopty has its orginal 1964 K frame but engine has a front plate and a mid plate. Seems to work ok, wheelies are fun they say

Very good input, I really appreciate it.

I agree about dvw’s stuff, very nice and I would say the same about Andy’s stuff. I do like having examples to follow, while I know I”ll be short it is still good to have. I did find a post where dvw provided pictures of the cuts to the k member, extremely helpful.

I will be putting a reverse valve body automatic in the car. I bought it as a 383 four speed (not original).

How big a difference does moving the motor back 1-2” make?

The car will be bracket raced and hopefully attend a few NSS races, so I’m not worried about being fast as I am about being consistent.
Being on a budget causes everything to be passed through the cost vs benefit portal.

I have considered cutting up my K member for weight but in the end have decided not to, it's just a few pounds. My goal is to keep mine as stock as possible (think Stk/SS) and as quick as we can for 3600ish pounds hoping to maybe get that down a bit but not doing anything drastic. Its undergoing some much needed bodywork now so with my luck still a year out. We also have the engine apart looking for more HP, and I am sure we will find 30-40 more. After all cage is good to 8.50 may as well see if we can get under that here in Vegas

Love these old B bodies for sure. Had 5 of them over the years and have always been good racecars. For some reason this one is by far the heaviest one I have had. Most were much closer to 3400 than 3600. This one is hiding a LOT of filler. And that is mainly where any weight reduction will come from.

Moving the engine back will help with weight bias, although with all the rear overhang I don't think it's needed myself. But depends on how much power you are making and how you plan to race it. I dont think these cars have any issues with pitch rotation given the rear overhang. Moving it back will move weight back obviously. If its a lower powered bracket car likely will be a benefit especially on moderately good tracks

I really think I’m in the same boat. I have always loved these cars, especially as race cars but they have always been out of reach for me, that is really how I got the Duster, as 20 years ago it was the cheapest way in to a Mopar race car. I have realized after four engines in the Duster that 11.00 fits me just fine. My biggest debate now is whether to cage it and put my race motor (700 hp) in or just shoot for 11.50 and put my pump gas motor in from the Duster and forgo the cage to keep it mainly stock. This also puts me on the border for the rearend which I posted in another thread. The Duster has a Dana that I would swap but I would need to move the springs in to the frame. Anyway I appreciate all the information.

I understand. Most of mine were 10 second daily drivers. The one before this one was a high 10 second stock deal (iron heads and block). It was a fun very nice little car. My problem is I dont keep anything. But now that i have a 64 post car she's a keeper for me. Plus, I am getting old now. It is by far the fastest one I have owned.

For a bracket/ nss car there is no real advantages except for more exh. header options and rad. clearance. Lots of work to change things that don't need changing. If you really want to move the motor back without using a plate, the stock motor mounts can easily be replaced with aluminum biscuits redrilled to gain a little over an inch. Sprayed with rubberized undercoating and its hard to tell the difference from stock even in tech.
Still no real advantage though.




























brBB

If you are going to cut the tunnel (highly recommended and not hat hard) and/or move the firewall a touch (very easy). Then there is no reason not to move it back. The 62-65 is very limited in the radiator to motor clearance. Mine has one of the fan motor (late model charger/Challenger) housings notched to clear the crank pulley. A single motor fan would've been really tough to fit unless it was a slimline. The axle in mine is also moved forward 3".
Doug

I loved both my 64 post cars (Plymouth). Keep it slow for a fun easy to get in and out race car that you can race by yourself (no other persons needed). They can get light with bolt on stuff removed but still all steel. My first was 3100, second was 3200 with regular side glass.

I have always heard how "lite" these cars were. And for their size they are not as heavy as one might think. But with all of the ones I have owned NONE have been what near 3200. I must be lucky. Last to were 3400ish but I will also admit I have done nothing really to take weight out but plenty to put some in like cage dana etc. My current 64 is the secind heaviest one I have owned the only one heavier was the 64 Savoy wagon

As far as the motor to radiator space, I had to be creative even with my Duster, as the electric water pump and fan are using the same space. I am using a Taurus fan that I run offset on the radiator so I cut a few of the ribs from the fan for the water pump to sit in. I have looked at the ‘65 already trying to see how things could work. There does seem to be the option to run a fan out front as a pusher.

My fan is a pusher in front of the radiator. Not ideal but its never run hot here.

Al, are those hooker super comp headers?

No they are custom step pieces. However I have used the Hookers on two previous 65's they worked great.

My first car eventually was patterned after the FX cars, lexan side glass back and front with vent window removed. All the tracks removed. One van seat and anything bolted on not necessary was removed. Before I sold car I was searching for the aluminum front and doors plus the glass dash, lexan back window. Those FX cars were reportedly around 2800 pounds. A fellow racer out of Jersey had his 64 Dodge post car down to that weight with no fiberglass or aluminum but ALL the reinforcements and bracing were removed just hood-trunk-door-roof skins, 440 auto and 8-3/4 with minimum cage, It was too extreme for me. Also never had any problem keeping cool with stock radiator.

My 65 Coronet has a 67 Coronet k frame

I used a Lakewood scatter shield
I have 66 up headers
The stock 65 trans mount was gutted and I used pieces of a diplomat trans mount in its place
I flattened the pinch weld
Clutch z bar is on a bit of an angle but it's not terrible.

There is a lot more room for a clutch fan or electric fans and a larger radiator which is likely the best benefit in my opinion

This winter I will find out of the clutch can be changed with the engine in the car.
It's pretty tight get ng the shield off.

My 65 turbo car had a lot more room after dropping in a 69 K.
The clutch Z bar was going to be tight so I went back to a 727.

The pinch weld had to be flattened a bit but that was about it. For the trans mount, I flipped the crossmember around backwards and made it work. Naturally, the drive shaft needed attention. I was running a C-body pan because that's what I had.

I can't comment on header clearance since I was running turbos but it opened up room to run the big Mercedes cooling fan.

Firewall clearance was tight but it fit without issue.

I only have one good pic of the engine compartment and it doesn't show much in regards to clearance.

My 330 is 3,460 lbs. with a full (15 gallon) tank. Heater delete, radio delete and bostrum seats.

All steel/glass with Dana 60, 6 pt. and subframe connectors.

Mine must be hiding a LOT of bondo...Will now soon enough as finally the 1/4's and outers are on the way. I would love from mine to get down to there believe me. Mine is also ASAG, full cage and a Dana, 20 gallon cell which will be replaced with one we fab to hold more. Less weight maybe we can finally get to running right at the cage cert here in Vegas.

My 64 has a light hood, lexan side and rear windows, no window regulators (has straps), light bumper brackets, no wipers, heater, back seat, or exhaust system. It does have a mega block, Dana 60, full cage, large radiator/fans, heavy intake w/2 carbs, and is all steel including bumpers. Weight can be as low as around 3125lbs with no driver or fuel. Race ready just over 3350lbs.
Doug

Life goals...New 1/4's and wheelhouses just showed up today so we shall soon see how much filler is in here

Throw the pieces up in the air, if they fall back to the ground, discard them.
My car was similar to dvw car but no cage just a roll bar and braces, with Max Wedge, 8-3/4 at first.

Not sure if the post was on here or B Body’s only, very long post too, he had a 63 330 Dodge, after many refinements (making lightweight stuff, all metal) his was down to 2800, street driven and not a flexing piece. Ex rock singer I think ? Dang I wish I could remember his handle-name.

FMJ?

forbbodiesonly.com/the-elephant-in-the-room-unloading-the-load-from-a-b-body

Thumperdart started a thread on here about weight loss and the guy from New York was making all kinds of amazing lightweight pieces for a 63 or 4.

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/3233604/1.html

Yeah, Fullmetaljacket was going nuclear on the weight loss deal - impressive stuff.
IIRC, he's a grafitti artist. I think he still posts on FBBO.

FMJ isn't done yet. His car is still.being lightened up as we speak. I've worked on his car. Very trick. Talented guy for sure. He is an artist by profession.
Doug

Fullmetaljacket is the guy, great stuff he did!

FMJ's work was done on his 65 Coronet...

It was different from what nearly everyone else does...

Most of his art was right in front of your eyes and you didn't even know what you were looking at...

Sounds like some NHRA Stock and SS racer cars I know of

Where the illegal car that took out a legal car just drives by the scales and is DQ'ed? Or the guy that red lights on the first bulb. That kind of NHRA racer? Sounds like the 1964 and 1965 US Nationals SS eliminations, engineered by Ford. I'm sure there are many more that I wasn't aware of too.

FWIW in my case I am not looking to get the weight way down at all. If it can get it 34xx I would be happy. Not taking anything out of it, we are just painting the car and its hiding extra weight for sure. Its fast as is so no reason to go crazy. Engine is out getting upgrades as well and it will never have more than an 8.50 cage in it, so no reason to go crazy here,

What are the aluminum biscuits?

I started my disk brake conversion and while under the car noticed how heavily the headers were clearanced for the tie rod.

Here is a QA1 that we cut the engine mounts off - I am putting this in my 64 Dodge with an engine plate

Cb1289 stated
the stock motor mounts can easily be replaced with aluminum biscuits redrilled to gain a little over an inch.

I have been searching but can’t seem to find anything like what he is describing. Do you redrill the k member mount and use a solid engine mount? Any pictures would be great.

Can also space the K-frame down from frame like the 68 S/S cars were done.

Is this a ‘66 V8 k frame? It looks a little than what is shown on the Schumacher site.

That looks like a 1966 or 1967 B body slant six K frame

Here is a 1971 B body V8 K frame

Here is an early B body V8 k frame

Andy
Is there a biscuit mount that will move the engine back an inch on the early B k member?

It isn't that simple. You start by locating the engine where you want it. Then you fabricate custom motor mount brackets which are welded to the K frame. When you are finished everything fits perfectly. Headers, PS, radiator, shroud, factory clutch fan, etc.

I think the "biscuit" as it was referred to above is the 67 up (maybe 66 up) style of mount and not the 65 version...

The 65 uses 2 studs facing down and into the K frame...( you can see the holes in the pic above from Andy F)

The newer one only uses 1 stud and is a different design of mount...

Ok, that makes sense as I did see a solid mount that has one stud per side.

Is it acceptable to drill another set of slots further back on the mount?
It’s looks as though to make an offset biscuit is doable.

No Redrilling on the K-Frame itself. Look at Andy's picture of the early B K-Frame. There is no premade biscuit that I know of that moves the engine back an inch for early B K-Frames. We bought the aluminum, cut it and drilled it as seen in these pics. This was in the late 70s when we ran stock eliminator in a '62 dodge wagon. Just needed to modify the trans mount as well, but it worked fine. At the same time, we also moved the rear axle forward approximately 1". If you decide to do the late model K-Frame, you will at the very least be hammering the seam in the tunnel on vintage metal. Not worth the damage IMO. Hope this helps. Good luck.

1962 was the first year that Mopar went to unibody on all the B body cars. it has a one year only K member also
I bought a pair of 1963 Fury several years back, one two door and the other parts car is four door, the two door has a 1962 B body K member in it and I'm going to change it to a 1967 B body K member to move the motor back and give me a better choice on headers as well as more traction if needed

A friend made these for my car.

I see no need to move the engine back as we have plenty of traction (even with 275's) and, in fact, trying to keep the front end down!

Thanks guys that is exactly what I was looking for. You don’t happen to have the dimensions of the aluminum blocks?

The move back is more for header, oil pan, and radiator clearance. An inch will go a long way on header clearance and keep me from having to close down 1/2 a tube, while hopefully not creating two much problem in the tunnel. I am planning to move the rear forward an inch by using the springs and caltrac under my Duster along with sliders.

Speaking of ‘62 wagons this was the last car my dad was involved with when I was a kid (me in the red circle).

62 had a wild looking mount that set flat on the k-frame. I used those mounts putting a Super Bee 383 in a Jeep CJ 5. I used the 3 peed bell housing from a Max Wedge (Borg Warner trans) that thing would fly through the mud holes.