New turbo 389 build, '63 Catalina
 

Been holding back until I had more stuff to tell. I had a '73 trans Am that through all it's fazes ended at a 1065 hp turbocharged 462. Aron Kerner from Delaware called me one day, we settled on a price and now it's boppin' around Delaware. This was the first time I've ever had money to do a complete car/engine/drivetrain build all at once. Sooo. My heart has always been in full sized DArksider Pontiacs. Have owned a '64 CAt 2dr sedan and a '63 Cat Ventura 2dr coupe in my past. And always loved them. I always loved and wanted to build a gasser. So I felt that a '60 Catalina gasser would look fantastic. But fell into a deal on a completely rust free (other than a few surface scratches ) '63 Catalina 2dr coupe.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ranks003-1.jpg with full solid rust free floors, rockers, everything. I little surface rust under the roof to body trim but just surface.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...0cranks016.jpg
rust free floors etc,. The trunk had an old carpet laying in it which held a little moisture so the trunk floor is really good except for a small patch on the right side where there is surface rust but one small pin hole. Otherwise fully solid.
So the gasser will be made out of the '63. I do not believe anyone has ever built a '63 full size gasser since the smaller tempests were much more attractive and dare I say---LIGHTER---. So this is new waters. Right now I'm waiting for Sunday to bring the car into the chassis guy to have a '57 chevy truck front beam axle conversion put in.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...sispics002.jpg
This will eventually be converted to disc brakes and 4 3/4 front bolt circle.
Once that is done I will be cutting the firewall and moving the motor back and then I will tie all the front sheetmetal together and make a one piece tilt front end.
The motor will be a twin or big sinlge ( yet to be determined) turbocharged '60 389 block bored .090 to 406. I have Ross light wt. dished forged pistons. I just received my GRP aluminum rods http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...GRProds001.jpg I bought a new Ohio forged 3.75 stroke crank http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...edcrank001.jpg
for the build. I'll be getting the 3 splayed 4 bolt caps as soon as I know the block is good to go. The block is with Paul Carter down in Tucson. He is sonicing it and cleaning it for all further machining. We are going to cryo the block, all the parts to the block an all the transmission internals as well.
I'm making a trans adpater out of an All POntiacs midplate to adapt a 4L80 to the early blocks http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...adapter003.jpg http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...adapter001.jpg . I bought a set of KRE alum heads from Troy Tribby (he is upgrading) tha tflow 3.25 cfm and all set up and ready for a roller valvetrain. I just have to determine what that roller will be as the build goes along.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ranks005-1.jpg Just playing around I put on my slots and slicks that I used on the TA on the '63 to get a visual for a gasser look.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ranks001-2.jpg http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ranks002-3.jpg
So this is where I am at the moment. Once I get the front axle on I can start really going on the body. I will probably narrow the original rear so I can fit 10 inch rims and bigger tires for the street and nicer slicks for the track. This will be a little different but that is where I live. A lot of others are going for the Super Stock look and I love that too. Just always wanted a gasser and I love the full size Pontiacs. This will be a 1 of none build. Well let me have it. Mark L

Cool build Mark. Can't believe the condition of the car. Look forward to seeing the progress.

I know, when I first looked at it walking up from one side I figured it had to be totaled on the other side or something. I could not believe how nice it was. It was advertized for $1500. I traded my '40 Olds ($1600) and my toyota Supra body (worth more than that but could not get it sold) for it. So basically I did not pay much for it. Hence the reason for using it instead of continuong the search for a '60. How's yours coming Brad? Should be racing by now, huh???. Heh! Mark L

Ok, I'll bite. Amazing find in one of the best color combos but why bother putting a straight axle front end on such a nice car?
How is that going to make the car drive, especially with your power plans?
The nostalgia cars are running 120-140mph in the quarter, but none with a straight axle.

I would just put stiffer springs up front to achieve the "gasser" look you want but that's JMO.

Very cool! I like your ideas. Might want to consider a 9 inch to handle all that power though. Isn't it great to start with a rust free straight body? :)

I don't think I've ever seen a full size Pontiac turned into a solid front axle gasser. I welcome the finished project just to see what it looks like, it sounds intriguing. I take it from your choice in transmission though that this is going to be a streeter primarily? What's the driving force in choosing that transmission for a big heavy full sizer sprung on a solid front axle?

Brian, exactly why I'm doing it. Like I mentioned in a different forum, my plate should read--1ofnone-. It will be unique. It will not match everyones likes but if it matches mine , that's all I need. Just always wanted to build a gasser. I really wanted a '60 since I think the lines fit the look much better but I could not pass up this '63. And there was not enough about the '63 to make it special to warrent keeping it stock or near stock. Hey if someone right now offered my $7000 for it before I cut it I would stop all progress and send it on it's way. Then look again for that '60. But that will never happen so I will continue. There are many "never built" gassers out there that people have built. Some are a little left of right but many are unique and done well enough too apprciate. Anywho. And answering elefantrider (love the name, heh) about just stiffening and lifting the front end. Then it is just a lifted '63 Catalina. That to me does not capture the gasser look. Which to me is the reason for the whole build. Brian. Strength/overdrive/availability/and costs. I really wanted to go manual. But an overdrive 5 or 6 speed would have dug a hole in my finances to a point that I'd never get it on the road. I found a very good core for $100. My son works at Hughes so i can get the internals at a very good price. The clutch would always be wear consideration. Especially since probably 95% of the time it will be stop light to stop light. And just adapting the early block to a usable configuratioin would add costs well beyond the cost of this 4L80 and converter. It'll be a manual shift 4L80 to save eelctronic controls. Overall as much as I'd like a manual, just all the shifting would become a pain. And in the long run, turbos like working against a converter much more than a clutch at launch. It's just a better fit for me. Mt TA was a manual vavle body and it was not a chore at all. Still gave/gives a reason to be behind the hweel (someting to do) and gives the feeling of being in some control. As long as remember to down shift when it is required. For some reason the car just feels lazy starting out in third gear, LOL. Aron, have you felt that yet??? Anyway. The whole idea is to match my dream. And to be different. Remember just being a Pontiac foamer used to be different enough.
misterp266, coming from Wisconsin and finding this car advertised for $1500 dollars was like stepping off of cloud nine right into reality. Up north in any state, to find this condition of a car would be almost impossible. It has little scrapes and a dent or two but all it did was accumulate a little surface rust. If it had set for 5 years up there the rust would have spread much deeper around any scrape/scratch and would have required much more effort and cost to correct. The rockers are %100 solid, not a flake. Anywho, I love Arizona. Mark L

Lots of gassers didn't have a straight axle. Tall springs and these spacers are all you need. Whats the point of building a gasser if it's not period correct? By the time this car would have been raced tires were much better and the front ends were coming down in the front because they didn't need all the weight transfer to the rear. Just like the olds, this is to nice of a car to cut up IMO. I would use 7 or 8" rear wheels 30 x 10 piecrust slicks and some matching fronts from Hurst racing tires .

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/l...Rb5BLjgWlt.jpg

Save your money on your front end labor for the axle install and buy a real transmission adapter too.

Well, I look forward to seeing it when it is done. I still can't wrap my head around the reasoning for your choice in transmissions, even for a car that will see 95% street duty. With the nose in the air and the ill handling characteristics associated with a leaf sprung solid front axle, combined with the cars weight, I don't see it cruising along at 70-MPH, which pretty much negates the need for an overdrive. I think I would have went with a tranny that is proven to be more durable for such an application and is less expensive to build...the TH-400. Build what suits your fancy and don't worry about it.

I guess I didn't explain. It will not be period correct, it is a style. I also don't plan a sky high front end. Probably not much above what I would accomplish with the stronger springs and ball joint spacers. If you check out many "Pro Street" cars they are there for the look not to run a competative pro stock number. This is the same. It is a look. The car will sit level. Just not too sure how high until the front is converted. But I can do a drop axle or put the springs under the axle if I need to lower it. Again it is not going to be period correct. It will be period like. Anywho, it's going to happen. The major thing is the engine build. This is where I want this thing to stand out. The 4L80 is what I want for a trans. I want to drive this thing to the next city and still have a semblence of gas mileage. I want to enjoy it. OK, get this. Do you think air conditioning wil be period correct? I'm seriously thinking of adding it in for this ungodly heat down here. It's May and it's it the high, high 90's already. I want to use this thing even in the hottest times. SOOO. Air is the only way. And this is an original air car so the dash is already build for air. Is that cool or what? Mark L

Mark,
I'm a big supporter of "build it the way YOU want it" not the way someone tells you it has to be done. As for saving a nice '63, you are saving it, you're just saving it your way. I'm building a '63 Catalina Safari with a blown 433 and a five speed. No A/C, no P/S, no P/B, no radio, no aftermarket block. My way. Keep us up to date and keep on doing it your way.
Rob...

Rob. If you're building a Safari, then you really get it. Thanks. Too bad we aren't closer. You could tow my '63 into shows and to the strip. Would make a great combination. Mark L

You'll have to excuse my harshness on your build, at least your better off building on a solid car than having to replace floors , 1/4's etc . How much hp is the turbo engine planned on having? Should run like a raped ape regardless....

A '63 solid front axle big body Pontiac, with a turbocharged engine and AOD tranny, with air conditioning. Now THAT'S what I call "walking in the woods by yourself" (which is what most of my non-Pontiac car buddies think us Poncho guys are doing).

Bill. My TA made 1065 hp. I want to top that and with comfortable streetable manners. I'm building the motor to stand more than that. Where I end up will be completely due to the turbo/turbos used and how well my spread bore carb works out in a blow thru configuraion. Although it is about 56 Cubes less than the 462 and a much shorter stroke, the heads, crank, the rods and the cam will all be much better peices, and I'm expecting the block to stand up to more. I originally built the 462 with intentions of getting about 800 hp out of it. I hit 1065. I hope I can make the same magnitude of mistake I did before, heh. Maybe I'm crazy. We'll see.
Brain. I've always thought outside the box. Didn't always have the money to act on it but now I can. The car will end up rough around the edges but it will match me that way. Mark L

I would not use any Holley "Spread Bore" style carb for blow-thru.

The idle and part throttle circuits are screwed up for boosting. Mixture Screws add air, not air/fuel mixture.

Holley did make a Square Bore Carb List # 6709 with a small primary venturi and a large secondary venturi. For those that aren't familiar with this carb, it combines primaries from a 600 with secondaries from the 850 in a regular square flange dp body.

Tom Vaught

Thanks Tom for that heads up. Gotta look into that and may have to replan. I used an 800 spread bore Holley on my '72 TA back in '72-'73. But that was so long ago that I can't remember any of the tuning. Mark l

Mark I'll take a long hard look at my thermoquads. Mine are early 70's non pop in jet (1972-1975)Mopar Large primary (850 in Mopar speak) I do have a set of solid floats avail. I have the primary venturi opened to 1 3/8 from 1/3/16. 1 3/8 is same as 1000 cfm version. IIRC I'd have to remove the outer booster ring to hit 1000 cfm.(950 if I leave it in.) I have a matching carb. I think it will work best in a box rather than a hat. Let me stare at it again and I'll give opinion on putting a hat on it. IMO its boostable.

I found and bought a 31 spline 2 piece posi unit for the '63 rear on another board. In case I stay with it. Took it apart to inspect all the spiders etc. Looks good as far as I can tell. Anyone familiar with these units? I know the spiders are the weak points and from what I read there are no replacements for them. Is there any point in adding clutches or better clutches etc? Does anyone know the torque specs for the bolts that hold the 2 pieces together?
I called Speedway Motors and ordered a complete front beam axle disc brake conversion kit for it. Mark L

Mark,the spiders are really not the weak link.The bolts that hold the unit together are.They stretch,allow the gears to go out of mesh and wipe them out.The spiders are avail.They are the same as dana 44.When the gears go out,they take out the side gears and they are not avail.Brad is close to having a repop one piece unit avail.Tom

Mark,
Brad has new blots and clutches if you decide to stay with that unit. I bought all my stuff from him and he's a great guy to deal with. You might also consider a 9 inch conversion using your housing. Dil B. did one on his blown race car after destroying his rear center section. Do a search, looks like a great upgrade.

Yes I've seen the conversion posting and am very interested. I'm sitting on a detroit locker right now and would love to have it adapted. Just not sure of all the costs to do that. Or try the posi first with new bolts, then try a spool. I've just never used a spool on the street and hate to go thru the trouble to put one in then hate the manners. So many have said they run them all the time, so maybe it is not a problem. I've also heard stories of the lockers popping in an out making them annoying. So who knows.
Tom thanks for sticking with me. I was under the impression that the spiders were also possible soft or??? but I can see where the bolt stretch would initiate be problem, and also that there was nothing to replace them with. Good to know about the Dana 44 spiders. . When I get to that point I will have to give Brad a call and see what he can do for me. Thanks guys for the info. Mark L

Mark,if you run huge tires with a spool the drag will feel more pronounced as it wont drag well.I had Toms Diff do a posi for me years ago with larger bolts and NEVER had a problem since.He HATED to do it because the case is damn near impossible to drill and even harder to tap.FWIW,Tom

Mark from what I've read the Ford 9" has the same depth from mounting face to the centerline of the axles. The Olds/Pontiac rear housing needs a flange built up to accomodate the ford pattern basically flush with current face. IMO for the work involved it may be easier than using a Ford housing if you plan to keep your factory suspension. If changing rear suspension then just using a ford housing would be easier.

As a side note turbo cars may not be as hard on the rear as NA or N2O. I plan to stay with my Pontiac/Olds 3.08 posi and upgrade the bolts.

I posted an article awile back converting the 9.3 rear to a 9" pig.

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=598512

Mark is the whole front suspension and frame rails getting replaced with 2 x 4 tubing for the axle install?

That was a great article too. I read it with great interest. I may actually ask my chassis guy if he might like trying the mod for me.
Yes the frame is cut off just out from the frame and square 4X4 tubing will run to just ahead of the original end of the frame. I had him extend the old end point by 2 inches but the end of the new rails will be right at the same location as the old stock frame end. This will allow me to put the front bumper back on in case I get too much trouble from the fashion police. He is referencing everyting off fo the front frame end point. The new tubing will come back level from that front point and where it intersects with the back of the frame near the firewall is where he will cut and graft. That point initially seemed to be about where the steering rag joint sits. That point forward will be just square tubing. The rear spring hanger is right under the frame where it makes the 90 degree turn out to the outer frame rails. The width may mean a bit of a bracket extension to the side of the original frame as it is wider there than the spring widths. The front of the new extensions will have a smaller square tubing cross bar. I wanted the square tubing so at sometime in the future I can add a front sway bar if it is required. Gunna go look and see where he is si far. If he is anywhere started I'll get some shots. Mark L

What timing cover are you using? And what for front mount ? I'm using a 55-58 front bracket and mount on the 60 cover i'm using. If needed i'll use the Hurst front mount I have. I'm planning on using the 60 cover on my 66 389.

I'm using an AllPontiac front engine plate. I have a R.A.R.E smooth front timing cover I could use but then I have to use an electric water pump. They are set up to use a chevy pump. I may use a late factory cover and mechanical pump for reliability. Just not sure yet. I still have to get a balancer as well. Mark L

He has not started on the '63 yet. Monday or Tuesday it is scheduled. Mark L

Mark use a 55-58 type front center mount not a frontplate. That way twist from the chassis can only be put TO the block at the bell and mid plate(strongest area of block) and NO chassis twisting force can be put THROUGH the block. Use your front plate for something else (like tieing your chassis to control chassis twist) but DONT attach to the block. The 55-58 front mount(bottom center of timing cover) can be fabbed with a trans mount cushion and scrap of mild steel and mounts to the unused(59-81) timing cover holes. Add reinforcement rods to mid plate mount to control fore/aft movement.

With stock block's weak valley, putting chassis twisting forces THROUGH the block is much unneeded stress which you want to avoid, especially at your anticipated power level. You cant twist the block with only a mid plate and soft flexible center mount up front. Its like trying to open a jar by only twisting on the lid with the jar on wet ice. Dont use the whole block to control chassis twist. The bell area is plenty strong and applying twist only to the bell wont twist the motor itself. Reinforce the frame in front of the motor to control chassis twist. Dont tie the front of the motor to either side of the frame. Pontiac had the right idea 55-58!

The 60 cover is unique because that was the first year of standard cooling (55-59 reverse cooling) and the last year for the steel cover. It's been bored to accept a regular seal, not the cork and spring deal. I would be hesitant to put any type of mounting to the lower portion of an aluminum cover unless it was reinforced. The spacing from the block to the 4 bolt water pump pulley mounting surface is the same as my 8 bolt cover and pump.

Bill I wouldnt hesitate to use the center front mount on an aluminum cover AS LONG AS the block is supported at the bell and soft mounted at the cover. The bell becomes the main weight carrier and center mount and trans tail keep the weight reasonably "balanced".

Over the years I have jacked on the aluminum covers to remove motor mount bolts, install headers, etc. and never damaged them.

The factory never changed the timing cover bottom holes because they used a support fixture in the same location when building the motors.

If one wanted a little more "security" you could modify (trim lead edge off) the pan rail and make a mild steel support bracket that covers the entire lower face of the timing cover and overlaps the pan rail.

Update. The original front frame is history. Replaced with 2X4 tubing. The axle is all tacked in place. I'm expecting to bring it hime Wednesday. The disc brake conversion for the beam axle arrived today as well.
Paul Carter called and confirned that the block soniced out fine. Now we start the block work. The deck rods have to go in first. Then the jacket get filled. After that the cylindes get rough bored. I have to buy the splayed caps (I was holding out incase the block failed) and get them down there with the crank and the rods. So things are moving. Mark L

Steel midplate, aluminum front plate sandwiched between block and timing cover...that's how I would do it after reading your front frame is just a pair of box rails with no crossover.

Brian there is a crossover. It will be Just back from the front edge of the frame horns incase I want to add brackets/gasser tank, sway bar in the future. More of a crossbar frame stabilizer. The engine should be hanging out in the middle of space. That way when I add too much nitro and singe the rings a little I can do a pit dissassembly and assembly so I'm ready for the next round. Drop the pan with nothing in the way. (Yeah right). Mark L

Found a good pic of a '62 Chevy that is very much like the concept of how mine should look. About that stance and height. Except mine will not have the blower, but the down pipes from the turbos could hang down like the headers on the Chevy.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...delgassers.jpg

Mark L

This is a pic of a '62 Chevy gasser. This is very close to what I envisioned for my '63 only with twin turbos versus the big blower. I could mount the turbos high enough to pop out of the hood for that affect but the down pipes could definitely drop down the same as the headers on the chevy. If I stay with the metal front end I'll tie it all together and make a tilt front end. Did it on my '63 Cat back in '73 using the hood hinges as the tilt mechanism. Worked great.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...delgassers.jpg

Mark L

Also just got the call to come get my '63 from the chassis guy. Will add pics as soon as I get them. Mark l

Here be the new '63 Gasser. New frame and axle.
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ntframe004.jpg
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ntframe003.jpg
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ntframe001.jpg
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ntframe005.jpg
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/t...ntframe006.jpg

Mark L

Love it so far Mark,....Keep the pics and thoughts coming.
Steve

Thanks Steve, it's been easy so far. Just accumulating parts and letting the chassis guy do the front end. Damn, now I actually have to do some work, Hot Rodding is so much work, heh. mark L

Is it me or is the axle centerline too far forward?

6Grrrs, yes the axle line is forward one inch. The front fender is just laying on the car and not fully in position. That is helping to give the look that it is too far forward. When you do a beam or straight front axle you normally add an inch to the front axle line. The higher the front end the more the original front axle centerline starts looking like it is too far back, so you compensate by placing the axle one inch forward. Also the tire in there is just a junk 5 on 5 tire/rim to haul it around on. Once I get the disc conversion on it will be a 4 3/4 bolt pattern and I will be using a little smaller tire on the front. It will be even less obvious. Good eye. Mark L

You would get a lot more done if you were out in the garage instead of on here!!

Fantastic project, Mark!...glad to see a Darksider going this route! I would have let you experiment on my 65 if you had asked!

Are you going to have the springs rearched to get more height or leaving it alone? Just don't put lift blocks in between the axle and spring in it like the Chevy you posted.

Most guys add in a 55 chevy car arm on the passenger side on the top for the cross steering. It depends on what gear box your going to use. Looks like i'm going the same route. I have a Ford F1 straight axle, i'm going to get a arm from Speedway to add to the right side to convert it over to cross steer than reuse the original gearbox. Just make sure the draglink is as parallel as possible to avoid bumpsteer.

Though we mostly work with Pinto/Mustang 2, my partner has fit rack and pinion to straight axles. They were single cross buggy sprung though. You will need a few universals and a heim joint to support the steering shaft. You can keep steering wheel vibration down with a rag joint either right off the rack or before the first universal before any heim joint.

With your leaf spring arrangement I would think you may need some kind of slip yoke on the shaft to allow for POSSIBLE travel in the fore/aft direction.(the shakles will change exact wheel well center as the suspension moves btw) IMO double the amount of expected travel. Mopars from the 60's thru 70's have a slip yoke on the end of the steering column that could be fit to allow some travel. Well greased square tube on one end and with square bar stock fit inside(round the edges slightly) on the other end might be easier and cleaner .

THAT SAID you may be able to get by with just 2 u-joints and a heim joint !

Mark that fenderless 48 Austin I showed you some pics of, needed three heim joints for header clearance to get to the mustang 2 rack.(easier than rotating the rack) 1 center shaft had to run slightly up from the bottom of the steering column to eventualy get up above the rack then another short shaft down. The steering on that worked quite smooth though.(Felt like power steering even with car stationary.) The headers and frame hid the "ugly" well. We had a tilt column on it too!