"(why does wendlings ra iv bird not approach ra ii category?)" Pat is in F.A.S.T class now and runs 11.80's easy ------------------ Someone asked about this RAIII....was a d-port motor, basically a slightly hotter than standard cam with Ram Air induction....was previously known as a 400 HO This is not alot faster than standard GTO engines. ------------------- The RAII and the RAIV's I would say are very close: RAII's were in somewhat lighter 68 firebirds RAII's exhaust flowed better, I have Pete's book too...but I think its about a tie RAII's Iron intake flows better....yes it does again marginally so. RAIV's higher lift due to rocker arms. RAIV Intake ports definitly flow better than RAII's RAIV's Intake is lighter aluminum and you can discard the heat crossover, and even cut off the water crossover without much trouble. all of it = cooler intake charge, and that plus the Ram air induction of a 69' Trans Am would make up for any small intake flow difference. Like Dan I think they are pretty evenly matched, I would give the very slight nod to the RAIV in the 69' Trans Am over a 68's bird...... but ever so slight. I run 10.5 compression, stock cam, heads,rockers,exhaust, no honing etc in my 69' Judge and it weighs 4070 with me in it. Ran 12.86@107 but not at a F/S meet. Best there was a 12.96@107. ---------------------------------------------- I must thank Dan for encouraging me about 5 years ago when I emailed him about a RAIV round port Pontiac I was just purchasing. Thanks Dan, I have been able to hold my own over here on this side of the pond. (east coast) --------------------------------------------- Also I believe Jim Mino's car ran a 12.30 something @ 118 mph back in the day!! GEEZ ------------------------------------------------ AS far as Elephants and Rats: In un-modified street form, in a street race under 90 mph, give me a RAIV any day. I street raced extensively here on Long Island for years and took every stock Hemi I could find, the Big Rats were a bit tougher. I would rather have a 440 + 6 on the street then a Hemi.....back in the day.
Mark, I know what a heater delete is but a radio delete? o No: uzzled: Heard the name but am stumped as to its application. If there was a delete option on the radio how come I had to pay about $50 or so for the am in '71? :Brow: Please clarify. :laugh: Maybe I need to get Pontiac to refund my money. By the way this is tongue in cheek as we have a tendency to use words that do not describe what something really is but it gets repeated until everyone uses it improperly. Actually, I just love to stir the bucket. :Brow: :Comp: I really did know what you were talking about. Hello Dan and Dennis. Fenders are coming off in the next 2 months. Engine put back together this winter. Enjoying the thread.
All Things JLP it is a bit of a misnomer. You have to pay for a radio that otherwise would not be there but if you do not get one you get a radio delete plate yet no radio was deleted... Joe, yes Jody is my friend. He just came up for Woodward and stayed with us. Joe you can email me on the RA II motor at mlweymouth@ameritech.net. Joe do not be surprised if the Hemi makes a lot more power than the RA II on the dyno. The RA II can match it on the street due to lower weight, better weight distribution etc. When Bob and Randy were dynoing some Hemi's not long ago as I recall the numbers were substantial. If I recall Bob said both tq and hp were north of 500. I know my '70 Challenger is stout. But most Hemi's on the street were poorly setup. My Challenger motor is 15K mile original. All we did is put in fresh bearings, new rings, valve springs and hone the cylinders as it had sat since 1972. It is worlds stronger then the '68 which is an unrebuilt original. Joe I have been the same way lately. I pull the numbers motor. These things have just gotten to valuable. I long for the days when you payed 10/20 grand for Hemi's, RA IV's... and you could drive them anywhere without fear. The market is pricing most of us out. I luckily got married late and bought a few early in life. People thought I was nuts buying these cars. Now I look a little less deranged. Mark
beer help I must be doing something wrong. I have been working on the Noel's Pace Car for two months and haven't even seen a beer cap maybe Casey has some advise for me. :ball: :ball: :beer :ball: :ball:
"People thought I was nuts buying these cars. Now I look a little less deranged" Our friends must know each other, I used to get the same reaction, ""you paid what????? Are you crazy???"" :spank: ""Now its, Hey your not thinking of selling that car are you? Because I would buy it for what you paid for it"". gee thanks p
There are no dumb questions Dave... and guns don't kill people. uzzled: The exact historical (and still hotly debated) answer to this question is more complicated than is worth setting out here. Ram Air I was never officially called that by PMD; it was simply Ram Air (makes sense, right?). It began essentially as a warmer cammed open-air breathing engine option based on the D-port head casting #670 or #97 in 1967. This option remained available through 1968 as well using head casting #16 or #31. Ram Air II was the result of a design exercise based on round-port exhaust experimentations of the day (Dave you're probably more familiar with this historically than I am). PMD made it available in mid '68 as a performance option based on the #96 round-port head and dubbed it R/A II. For '69, the evolution in round-port heads led to the #722 casting round-port head with slightly larger intake ports, the aluminum intake and the 1.65 ratio rockers. Dubbed R/A IV by PMD, it replaced R/A II for the 1969 model year. Ram Air III (like R/A I) was not a PMD designation. The engine option is actually L74 and represents the continued D-port head design (#48 or #62) with the H/O cam (just like the "Ram Air I"). If the separate open air induction feature was part of the application, it became the base "Ram Air" engine. Because the R/A II and R/A IV designations existed, popular useage defaulted to calling the D-port application in this year "R/A III." PMD sources only later may have adopted the reference out of convenience. (If you read the hoods on those optioned GTO's / Firebirds you'll notice the decal only says "Ram Air", while in '69 the IV cars are marked "Ram Air IV" accordingly. There's more, but that my friends was the simplified story as I have come to understand it. I am sure some tweaking can be made by others more knowledgeable to address pre-'67 and post-'69 applications. ... must rest now.
Thanks, RDL. I see I made a typo in my original question and meant to say all the talk is about RAII and RAIV, not RAIII. Makes sense why they called the initial one just Ram Air, and not Ram Air I. Buick obviously used a different theory using the Stage I designation. Of course, calling it a Buick "Stage" might have brought some chuckles from the rival divisions. That must have been an RAIII prototype that the Olds engineers suckered in at GMPD in the Fall of 1967. Doubt they would have taken on a RA II or RA IV with the Olds 350 (and certainly not the 400). It was a total setup as Olds had a maxed out Ramrod with open headers, slicks and a 5.00 rear end in it (Otherwise stock W31 package)cruising around the track during that demo by Pontiac. I think the Pontiac people took the bait thinkng Olds was going to use a 442 with the small bore 400. Corporate politics used to be fun. :Brow: :Brow: Will be interesting to see Tom Miller's car next year. Based upon what Jeff Sawruk does with his Custom S, it should fly. Also think there's a RAIV coming from Canada this year..Maybe yes, maybe no..............
Stage 1 Joe a Stage 1 was dyno'd back about six issues ago in Musclecar Enthus. Dan did the article of a fellow racers motor. Mark
