Re: 392 Hemi

[Bill <Y1TopBanana73@xxxxxxxxx>]

${top_text_ad}
Dave,

I think you'll be kicking yourself in the a$$ if you pass on it. It's
a really good deal on an awesome engine!

Bill

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Dave64 <lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I agree - the Poly is a cool engine.  I didn't know much about them until I got this car a year ago.  I thought I wouldn't be able to get a big block into the car fast enough, but after driving it and working on the Poly, I'm cool with it being in there for however long.  And seeing what some members of our club have done with Poly horsepower, I've developed a real appreciation for that engine.  Mine starts and runs like a champ - a real joy to have under the hood.  I would definitely keep that engine if I pulled it.
>
> If I end up passing on the 392, I'll help anyone who's interested in it get in touch with the seller.
>
> Dave
>
> --- On Thu, 3/4/10, Bill <Y1TopBanana73@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> From: Bill <Y1TopBanana73@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: 392 Hemi
>> To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
>> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 11:10 AM
>> ${top_text_ad}
>> Dave,
>>
>> That's what we're all about here...pushing each other over
>> the edge!!!
>>
>> The uniqueness point is exactly why I'm sticking w/ a poly
>> 318 in my
>> 65 Coronet 'vert. I originally intended to buy this car and
>> "big
>> block" it...and sometimes I think THAT is over done too.
>> Even though
>> it's not nearly as cool as a 392, I constantly get
>> questions of "what
>> motor is that? I've never seen one before"...and I kinda
>> like that.
>>
>> NOW - if you want to flip that 392 for say...$1005, give me
>> a
>> call...I'll come get it right away! :)
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Dave64 <lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> > Bill and Ollie - you guys are pushing me over the
>> edge!  Thanks for your support - I think!  Ollie - I had
>> that same thought about how a 440 is no more correct for the
>> car than a 392, so why not?  The one thing with the 440 is
>> I could put the cross ram on it that I love the look of so
>> much.  But I'm not into the clone thing - more of a period
>> correct feel.  I always looked at my car as ending up to be
>> what I might have done with it in the late 60s if I had a
>> 318 car.  A 392 fits that criteria as well.
>> >
>> > And Bill - you hit on the other part that's pushing me
>> to do it - it would be different and unique - which really
>> sums up the life of the Mopar man.  I think that's why we
>> love them so much - there aren't as many of them around.
>>  My love of drag racing and drag racing history puts the
>> 392 on my list of iconic Chrysler engines - one of the early
>> foundations of Chrysler's dominance in fuel racing.
>> >
>> > Thanks, guys.
>> >
>> > Dave
>> >
>> > Dave,
>> > Here comes Ollie's 2 cents.....
>> > We all laugh about the 350 Chebbies in everything....
>> > You kinda come out the same with a 440 in our cars.
>> > Wish in second thought I had used a 340 in my 65
>> Satellite, rare engine and rare car.
>> > So no 440 in a 64 either so why not a 392?
>> > I like it.
>> > Ollie
>> >
>> > --- On Thu, 3/4/10, Bill <Y1TopBanana73@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Bill <Y1TopBanana73@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> Subject: Re: 392 Hemi
>> >> To: 1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx
>> >> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 9:54 AM
>> >> ${top_text_ad}
>> >> Dave,
>> >>
>> >> I LOVE the idea of a 392 HEMI in a 62-65 B! It's
>> probably
>> >> the ONLY
>> >> non-stock swap that I would do...just because it's
>> so cool
>> >> &
>> >> different. That's why I love Mopars...anyone can
>> & will
>> >> drop a 350
>> >> into anything. How many people put 392 HEMI's in?
>> GO WITH
>> >> IT! You'll
>> >> be glad you did and have one of the coolest rides
>> around!
>> >>
>> >> Bill
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Dave64 <lt7dave@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Nobody has talked me out of it yet.  I'm
>> still
>> >> conflicted between what I wanted to do with the
>> car and what
>> >> I think is realistic.  I wanted to eventually put
>> a 426
>> >> Hemi or MW in it.  But I don't think that's
>> financially
>> >> realistic for me in the foreseeable future - if
>> ever.  I've
>> >> been leaning toward plan B - a 440.  Much more
>> affordable
>> >> and realistic for me.  But that's a crapshoot too
>> - I see
>> >> some that are pretty cheap (but who knows what you
>> end up
>> >> with - could be junk), and others are up in the
>> price range
>> >> of this 392.  The uniqueness and cool factor of
>> the 392
>> >> along with the price puts it ahead of the 440
>> idea, in my
>> >> mind.  It's historic significance is also
>> appealing to me
>> >> (even though not correct for a '64 car).  I
>> wasn't planning
>> >> to buy an engine this soon (of course we're always
>> looking
>> >> ,aren't we?), so the timing isn't the best.  But
>> I can
>> >> swing it, and I have a gut feeling I'll regret it
>> if I pass
>> >> on it.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for all of your comments, and keep
>> them coming!
>> >>  I'll definitely let you guys know what I
>> decide.
>> >> >
>> >> > Dave

${bottom_text_ad}
----
Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person -- directly to that person.  I.e., send parts/car transactions and negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content signal to Mopar topic.  Thanks!

1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html and http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.

This email was sent to: ${recipient}

u/?bUrDWg.${encoded_sub_id}.${EMC}