409?
04-10-2010, 11:24 AM
#21
Drifting
04-04-2011, 11:48 PM
#22
Race Director
Member Since: Mar 2001
Location: Mustang OK
Posts: 13,852
Received 3,772 Likes
on
1,674 Posts
2023 C1 of the Year Finalist - Modified
2015 C1 of the Year Finalist
Lamar Walden is probably one of the better known 409 builders/modifiers.
LOTS of people talk about the obsolete/slug reputation of the 409----------------------but I wonder if they have priced 409 cars and engines lately!
Oh ya, 30s Fords with ~300cube Flattys, 2-4 carbs, finned alum heads, upgraded distributors and 12volts are also obsolete relics----------------priced 'um lately????? That is if you can even find one to price!
Be careful when criticizing an '09 car!
Tom Parsons
04-05-2011, 03:25 AM
#23
Racer
i have a 1960 el camino with a 62 62 2X4 409. it had the 454 crank transplant over 20 years ago don by paul phaff in orange county. when i take her to shows, the kids don't even know what they're looking at. the cats over 55 spank frank when they see it...
04-05-2011, 07:25 AM
#25
Drifting
Chrysler recommended 102 RON fuel or better and that full-throttle bursts be limited to 15 seconds on their 13.5:1 max. wedge 426 in 1963...
04-05-2011, 09:25 AM
#26
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
04-05-2011, 09:51 AM
#27
Drifting
(11.0:1 is the one Hot Hod tested). Great article!
04-05-2011, 01:56 PM
#28
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
) my cousin had a new 1962 13.5-1 413. It had the warning attached, somewhere. After he lost two 13.5-1 short blocks, he put in a 11-1 and sold the car.I have a 413/426 supplement operators manual that specifically has the same warning in it. It was either for the '62 or '63 model.
I don't know but little about those engines but I'd bet both the 11-1 and 13.5-1 had the same oiling system/oil pan.
I read that article you mentioned within the last year. Good article but it didn't really portray how good those cars really ran.
04-05-2011, 04:20 PM
#29
Drifting
According to MikeM, CF, April,11,() my cousin had a new 1962 13.5-1 413. It had the warning attached, somewhere. After he lost two 13.5-1 short blocks, he put in a 11-1 and sold the car.
I have a 413/426 supplement operators manual that specifically has the same warning in it. It was either for the '62 or '63 model.
I don't know but little about those engines but I'd bet both the 11-1 and 13.5-1 had the same oiling system/oil pan.
I read that article you mentioned within the last year. Good article but it didn't really portray how good those cars really ran.
) my cousin had a new 1962 13.5-1 413. It had the warning attached, somewhere. After he lost two 13.5-1 short blocks, he put in a 11-1 and sold the car.I have a 413/426 supplement operators manual that specifically has the same warning in it. It was either for the '62 or '63 model.
I don't know but little about those engines but I'd bet both the 11-1 and 13.5-1 had the same oiling system/oil pan.
I read that article you mentioned within the last year. Good article but it didn't really portray how good those cars really ran.
04-05-2011, 04:39 PM
#30
Race Director
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
kept blowing head gaskets though with the 13.5 compression...
Bill
04-05-2011, 06:21 PM
#31
I have had good times with my 1962 409.
Here are several pictures of it.
Picture in the Broken Arrow Ledger. Had just won an NHRA regional race in Opelousas, LA
First NHRA World Finals - Tulsa 1965
Picture of two other 409's
Regards
Here are several pictures of it.
Picture in the Broken Arrow Ledger. Had just won an NHRA regional race in Opelousas, LA
First NHRA World Finals - Tulsa 1965
Picture of two other 409's
Regards
The following users liked this post:
jerry gollnick (02-03-2017)
04-08-2011, 03:32 AM
#33
04-08-2011, 10:24 AM
#34
Drifting
04-24-2014, 01:25 PM
#35
3rd Gear
Member Since: Apr 2014
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been doing a lot of reading about the history and evolution of the Corvette in anticipation of buying my first and trying to decide between C1 and C2 but something I haven't seen addressed is why a 409 c.i. was never offered.
"Back in the day" when I was a teenager, 409's were all the rage in the big Chevy's. I'm curious if anyone knows why GM never saw fit to offer this motor in the Corvette. Heck, GM sold 15,000 Chevy 409's in 1962. The Corvette seems like a natural for that engine. Was its physical size too large for a late c1 or early c2?
-- Steve
"Back in the day" when I was a teenager, 409's were all the rage in the big Chevy's. I'm curious if anyone knows why GM never saw fit to offer this motor in the Corvette. Heck, GM sold 15,000 Chevy 409's in 1962. The Corvette seems like a natural for that engine. Was its physical size too large for a late c1 or early c2?
-- Steve
04-24-2014, 03:14 PM
#36
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Sep 2009
Location: "You may all go to Hell- and I will go to Texas- Davy Crockett
Posts: 9,151
Received 474 Likes
on
337 Posts
St. Jude Donor '12
I had a 65' Impala SS with a dual quad 425 h.p. 409 back in 1967. Boy, that car would scream! I truly loved it. But, then, I was infected with the "Vette Bug", totaly incurable. I still have great affection for the venerable "409". I'm still drawn to them, when I see them at cars shows.
04-24-2014, 03:26 PM
#37
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
04-24-2014, 09:57 PM
#40
3rd Gear
Member Since: Apr 2014
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, 21 was not finished and ended with ramps just beyond Rutts…. easy on and off and more than a 1/4 to the next on ramp…. at the other end of 21 in Newark they raced out of a place called the Dream Boat? i think.