The Forward Look Network
The Forward Look Network
Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums | Chat | eBay | Calendars | Albums | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

301 vs 318
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forward Look Technical Discussions -> General Technical Discussion and TroubleshootingMessage format
 
johnfin
Posted 2017-02-09 12:10 PM (#533605)
Subject: 301 vs 318


Veteran

Posts: 100
100
Do the 301 valve covers only have 2 bolts to hold them on vs. the 3 on the 318?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
CaprockClassics
Posted 2017-02-09 12:49 PM (#533607 - in reply to #533605)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Elite Veteran

Posts: 618
500100
Location: Lubbock, TX
They are the same valve cover, if we are referring to the A Series Polyhead 318 used up till 1966. LA-318 is a totally different engine.

~Peter
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rodger
Posted 2017-02-09 1:42 PM (#533612 - in reply to #533605)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318


Expert

Posts: 1506
1000500
Location: Colo Spgs
Hola John

The first series of the A-277 to A-318 ( 1956 to 1966 ) Engines have a Three Hole Valve Tappet Cover. After a while it was realized that Two Holes would hold the Valve Tappet Cover to the heads and the 3 hole design --- went away.

The bolts used are: 5/16 x 18 x 2 . They all use a little Flat Washer - with a Rubber Seal.

-----------
The "newer cover's" have The Wiring Loom Spot Welded vs being bolted.


----------------
Every set of heads still have The Thread Bolt Holes.





Rodger & Gabby
Colo spgs
Top of the page Bottom of the page
kenbiello
Posted 2017-02-09 5:53 PM (#533638 - in reply to #533612)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318


Veteran

Posts: 121
100
Attached pic is a 1955 Chrysler Windsor 301.
Three (3) fasteners per valve cover



(1955-301-poly.JPG)



Attachments
----------------
Attachments 1955-301-poly.JPG (114KB - 180 downloads)
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rodger
Posted 2017-02-09 6:11 PM (#533639 - in reply to #533605)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318


Expert

Posts: 1506
1000500
Location: Colo Spgs
Hola

Ooopp's --- Even tho I read 301 --- my mind clicked on The Plymouth "Poly". Thank You for not raising a fuss of what I did.



Rodger & Gabby
COS


Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mopar1
Posted 2017-02-10 11:20 AM (#533681 - in reply to #533639)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Expert

Posts: 3027
2000100025
Location: N.W. Fla.
One needs to be specific when mentioning a 301, but it would seem natural when comparing one to a 318 to assume it's the Plym poly.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
johnfin
Posted 2017-02-11 9:03 AM (#533747 - in reply to #533681)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318


Veteran

Posts: 100
100
one on bottom is a 318 poly, 2 bolt on top is off a documented 1957 american made 301 poly. No provisions for 3rd hole in cast head.



(IMG_20170209_132149621_HDR_01.JPG)



Attachments
----------------
Attachments IMG_20170209_132149621_HDR_01.JPG (125KB - 178 downloads)
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Powerflite
Posted 2017-02-11 11:11 AM (#533750 - in reply to #533747)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Expert 5K+

Posts: 9604
500020002000500100
Location: So. Cal
I think you have it backwards. The 3 hole is the earlier style. My original '56 Plymouth 277 has 3 bolts, and it was produced only 1/2 year before the 301.



(DSC02504_small.JPG)



Attachments
----------------
Attachments DSC02504_small.JPG (105KB - 191 downloads)
Top of the page Bottom of the page
johnfin
Posted 2017-02-11 2:28 PM (#533764 - in reply to #533605)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318


Veteran

Posts: 100
100
I that 3 bolt i showed you is a 1962 318 poly. 318 came after 301 right. The 2 bolt is an original 57 301. I think what we are seeing is different factories using up parts.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
1961plymouthfury
Posted 2017-05-07 2:07 AM (#539588 - in reply to #533605)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318


Expert

Posts: 2631
200050010025
Location: Minor Hill, TN
My '57 savoy had a 301 and I still miss her I would of owner her for 32 years this past April 30 th.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
56D500boy
Posted 2017-05-07 1:10 PM (#539608 - in reply to #533750)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Expert 5K+

Posts: 9855
5000200020005001001001002525
Location: Lower Mainland BC
Off-topic but sort of related: When did the valve cover ventilation begin? Seems like 1956 would be too soon. Is this a later retrofit?

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Powerflite
Posted 2017-05-07 1:39 PM (#539610 - in reply to #539608)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Expert 5K+

Posts: 9604
500020002000500100
Location: So. Cal
That's a California pollution control requirement that was installed on it.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
56D500boy
Posted 2017-05-07 1:56 PM (#539611 - in reply to #539610)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Expert 5K+

Posts: 9855
5000200020005001001001002525
Location: Lower Mainland BC
Powerflite - 2017-05-07 1:39 PM
That's a California pollution control requirement that was installed on it.


Okay. A "C.A.R.B." requirement. Do you know whether that was done at the factory or after the factory? Regardless, I guess only for California-destined cars.

Edited by 56D500boy 2017-05-07 1:57 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Powerflite
Posted 2017-05-07 7:37 PM (#539633 - in reply to #533605)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Expert 5K+

Posts: 9604
500020002000500100
Location: So. Cal
The PCV system requirement was put into effect in 1963 in California, and the older vehicles were retrofitted with it. PCV systems were required on new cars in the rest of the United States in 1968.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Greg P.
Posted 2017-05-17 4:41 PM (#540259 - in reply to #539608)
Subject: Re: 301 vs 318



Elite Veteran

Posts: 769
5001001002525
Location: Oley, PA
56D500boy - 2017-05-07 1:10 PM

Off-topic but sort of related: When did the valve cover ventilation begin? Seems like 1956 would be too soon. Is this a later retrofit?


PCV valve was first offered by Chrysler for the 1961 model year. It was standard equipment on all new 1961 model cars sold in California and offered as an option in other states. By 1964 it was standard equipment in all 50 states.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

* * * This site contains affiliate links for which we may be compensated * * *


(Delete all cookies set by this site)