Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: ECS]
#77065
07/04/08 05:12 PM
07/04/08 05:12 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,940 New Jersey Bada Bing
bremotorsports
master
|
master
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,940
New Jersey Bada Bing
|
Dave, You are slipping: You don't have your entire broadcast sheet tatooed on your arm? I will let it slide this time ! I will check my available info at the warehouse tomorrow for the "65" hose. Bill Rolik
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: ECS]
#77067
07/04/08 05:33 PM
07/04/08 05:33 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,940 New Jersey Bada Bing
bremotorsports
master
|
master
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,940
New Jersey Bada Bing
|
Dave, et al.
One additional item:
The parts catalogs can be very goofy with many things, including hoses.
An example would be, once again in my own particular case, the 71 340.
For the inlet hose the book (1/72 Edition)reads as follows:
71 All except A-Body:
"w/318,340,360 W/A/Cond. W/Max.Cooling" 3462102
Where is the reference to non-A/C cars? There isn't one printed. Reading this, you would assume that the car was built without one, and the parts counterman and/or customer is on his own for a hose. FYI, non-A/C cars used the 3462102 as well.
Bill Rolik
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: bremotorsports]
#77071
07/04/08 05:47 PM
07/04/08 05:47 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,711 USA
ECS
David Walden
|
David Walden
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,711
USA
|
Quote:
I will see what I can find out tomorrow.
Bill Rolik
Sorry Bill! You responded while I was typing.
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: ECS]
#77072
07/04/08 06:34 PM
07/04/08 06:34 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA
Alaskan_TA
Fluffy Balladeer
|
Fluffy Balladeer
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 29,679
Hamtramck, PA
|
Quote:
(Mine is at the office so I don’t have access to it right now
Your broadcast sheets are coded for the 57 hose.
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: ECS]
#77073
07/04/08 07:22 PM
07/04/08 07:22 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,103 East Coast, NJ
fig426
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,103
East Coast, NJ
|
[quote)
Has it occurred to anyone that the incorrect hose has somehow become accepted over time as the correct one?
Dave,, That is the case, as you know, with alot of these cars. Not just the Mopars but the other two also. There are things on my cars that people are going to say are wrong, but that's the way they came. And alot of people have cars like that. Then someone (or two) go and say that it can't be right because they THINK they know every answer to everything on every car.... so... the person doing the car goes and changes it on someone else's suggestion,,,, and,,, history gets changed once again.
Chris from New Jersey
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: fig426]
#77074
07/04/08 07:32 PM
07/04/08 07:32 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 636 California
sixpaktoogo
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 636
California
|
Quote:
Dave,, That is the case, as you know, with alot of these cars. Not just the Mopars but the other two also. There are things on my cars that people are going to say are wrong, but that's the way they came. And alot of people have cars like that. Then someone (or two) go and say that it can't be right because they THINK they know every answer to everything on every car.... so... the person doing the car goes and changes it on someone else's suggestion,,,, and,,, history gets changed once again.
I have a 70 340 Cuda, built in Los Angeles, that I am presently restoring. The K-member shows NO sign of ever being painted black!!! Looks to have been bare steel from day one. Car appears to have never been apart previously. Has anyone seen another like this? I know Resto Rick states he has, on his web page! Anyone else?
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: fig426]
#77076
07/04/08 08:33 PM
07/04/08 08:33 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,711 USA
ECS
David Walden
|
David Walden
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,711
USA
|
Quote:
[quote)
Has it occurred to anyone that the incorrect hose has somehow become accepted over time as the correct one?
Dave,, That is the case, as you know, with alot of these cars. Not just the Mopars but the other two also. There are things on my cars that people are going to say are wrong, but that's the way they came. And alot of people have cars like that. Then someone (or two) go and say that it can't be right because they THINK they know every answer to everything on every car.... so... the person doing the car goes and changes it on someone else's suggestion,,,, and,,, history gets changed once again.
Hello Chris! How are you doing? Thanks for the post. There is something odd regarding the upper radiator hose for an A/C car. Was there a variation hose used for A/C equipped cars at the factory? I have no idea. Barry confirmed that my build sheet (as did Steve a little while ago) shows a 257 hose. Are all of the original A/C hoses on the cars I saw coincidently the exact same AND incorrect? I doubt it. I do know that provisions were made on the assembly line to compensate for the A/C cars. Bolts were also removed and replaced which eliminated the normal paint patterns of the engine. I do not have an absolute opinion on this subject just yet. I am leaning towards the upper hose on A/C cars being like the ones I have documented with the “hump“. Like I said earlier, I have both styles to choose from. I will definitely find the answer to this one over the next few days. This is starting to be reminiscent of another beating I took concerning hood scoops being painted in or out of the car. Check out the attached picture and the big drip hanging from the closest screw. Might just be another “fluke”.
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: ECS]
#77077
07/05/08 07:11 AM
07/05/08 07:11 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 974 www.mmcdetroit.com
MMC Detroit
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 974
www.mmcdetroit.com
|
The following quotes from this post sum up what the ICCA has been attempting to drive into the hobby relating to judging/ validating vehicles. "I just have a difficult time understanding how some people have the ability to easily notice inconsistencies in some products but seem to be blind to the variations that exist within their own selections." "Has it occurred to anyone that the incorrect hose has somehow become accepted over time as the correct one?" "Do you see the confusion that is starting to developed here? Chryslers own parts application book seems to be contradicting what came on their own cars. How can anyone be absolutely sure what is correct unless you were lucky enough to still have the original hose when you took possession of your car?" "That is the case, as you know, with alot of these cars. Not just the Mopars but the other two also. There are things on my cars that people are going to say are wrong, but that's the way they came. And a lot of people have cars like that. Then someone (or two) go and say that it can't be right because they THINK they know every answer to everything on every car.... so... the person doing the car goes and changes it on someone else's suggestion,,,, and,,, history gets changed once again." I have seen thousands of vehicles that have variations from one to another. I'm sure we will all see many original variations as we begin to look closer at details that did not concern us in the past now that we are all doing our best to make our cars as accurate as possible. Dave Wise MMC / ICCA Detroit
MMC/ ICCA Detroit.
The Motor City or where ever there is Mopars
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: MMC Detroit]
#77078
07/05/08 08:09 AM
07/05/08 08:09 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,427 PA
PLATINUM6BBL
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,427
PA
|
I know this is from the wrong year but here is the rad hose on my Dads' 6846 mile 66 300 2dr
1969-1/2 A12 LOH Road Runner A4 w/ M6S 13.34 at 104 PSMCDR 9/06 in Mopar Action 8/07 12.95 at 105.94 F.A.S.T. 11/06
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: sixpaktoogo]
#77080
07/05/08 01:51 PM
07/05/08 01:51 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,679 Maple Ridge, BC, Canada
Barnabas_Kriss
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,679
Maple Ridge, BC, Canada
|
Quote:
I have a 70 340 Cuda, built in Los Angeles, that I am presently restoring. The K-member shows NO sign of ever being painted black!!! Looks to have been bare steel from day one. Car appears to have never been apart previously. Has anyone seen another like this? I know Resto Rick states he has, on his web page! Anyone else?
I have a 70 Challenger, that has a gray painted K-frame. Car was never apart before I got it, also had the part number stamped right on top of the gray paint. I'm sure it came that way, so I restored it the same way. Of course I get questioned all the time, but I have "before" pictures to back it up.
|
|
|
Re: Taking it to the next level? Wow!
[Re: MMC Detroit]
#77081
07/05/08 06:55 PM
07/05/08 06:55 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,711 USA
ECS
David Walden
|
David Walden
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,711
USA
|
Quote:
I have seen thousands of vehicles that have variations from one to another. I'm sure we will all see many original variations as we begin to look closer at details that did not concern us in the past now that we are all doing our best to make our cars as accurate as possible.
Dave Wise MMC / ICCA Detroit
Hello Dave. Good to hear from you on this subject! If you have been following this post (that took a u-turn with these hoses)you can certainly see some of the differing opinions on the subject. There are people who say the A/C hose is incorrect for my Challenger but based on what? If they know the part is wrong, they MUST know what makes it wrong and/or it's correct application. No one can answer why these A/C cars have this hose with the hump in it. This particular hose is not a reproduction item so where did it come from? How did all of these A/C cars get the exact "incorrect" hose that is not a reproduction example. I personally think that the cars with A/C had this particular hose for extra clearance around the belts. In the picture posted by PLATINUM6BBL, his hose even shows the "hump"characteristic like all the other A/C cars I have documented. As you can see, everyone here is using NON A/C examples to substantiate the #257 hose for A/C cars. Dave, do you (or anyone else) have ANY engine photos of 1970 big block original cars that are A/C equipped but with the regular #257 hose on them?
|
|
|
|
|