Being a Mopar fan I like the idea of the Duster. Although a 73 is out of the super cool range. I owned and built a 70 H (340) code four speed Duster340. It was pretty dang quick.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Questions about the Early 70s Muscle Car Experience
- Thread starter SgtHulka
- Start date
And then there's the downside!
My muscle car bucket list is exactly one item long:
1968 Camaro SS
If it's a 68 SS red convertible, then put me on that list too.And then there's the downside!
My muscle car bucket list is exactly one item long:
1968 Camaro SS
Sounds like the old Crane Fireball cam. I had one in a low buck 30 over 350 and never got anywhere near 6500 rpm out of it.
yeah, at 7000 RPM.....that's no fun..Now they make cars with small, turbocharged engines making lots of horsepower. The current Audi RS3 has a 2.5 liter (152 cubic inch) engine that puts out 400 bhp.
I never owned a muscle car, as I was a bit too young, being born at the end of 1956 made me 13 in 1970, but as the mid 70s approached, I had graduated high school, and always had friends that were a little older than me.
Three of them had muscle cars. No real names, I will describe them by numbers.
Friend 1. Owned a stock 1972 340 Duster.
4 speed stick, 3.23 rear end gears. Crazy fast car. Not so much off the line, but once the car got to about 20 miles per hour, very few cars could catch it. Scary top end. Do not underestimate smaller V8s when in a light weight car like a Duster.
Friend 2. Owned a 1970 340 Duster which had some work done to it.
Headers, a small cam and 3.90 rear. Extremely fast off the line, and good top end. Not as fast at top end as friend 1's car, but they never raced each other. Friend 2 raced a Hemi Cuda one night, and pulled very far ahead of him, until the Cuda caught traction, and passed us as though we were a family car. 340s are fast, but a 426 Hemi driven by someone with experience destroys almost any car.
Friend 3. Not really a friend, but an acquaintance from the neighborhood. Perhaps 10 years older than me. He owned a 1970 Hemi Roadrunner. I never got a ride in the car, but he beat just about everyone he raced. He burned out for my friends and I once.
For about 2 seconds all the car did was spin the tires, then when it caught, it was a city block away before we realized it. It was scary.
Youth.
Mike
Three of them had muscle cars. No real names, I will describe them by numbers.
Friend 1. Owned a stock 1972 340 Duster.
4 speed stick, 3.23 rear end gears. Crazy fast car. Not so much off the line, but once the car got to about 20 miles per hour, very few cars could catch it. Scary top end. Do not underestimate smaller V8s when in a light weight car like a Duster.
Friend 2. Owned a 1970 340 Duster which had some work done to it.
Headers, a small cam and 3.90 rear. Extremely fast off the line, and good top end. Not as fast at top end as friend 1's car, but they never raced each other. Friend 2 raced a Hemi Cuda one night, and pulled very far ahead of him, until the Cuda caught traction, and passed us as though we were a family car. 340s are fast, but a 426 Hemi driven by someone with experience destroys almost any car.
Friend 3. Not really a friend, but an acquaintance from the neighborhood. Perhaps 10 years older than me. He owned a 1970 Hemi Roadrunner. I never got a ride in the car, but he beat just about everyone he raced. He burned out for my friends and I once.
For about 2 seconds all the car did was spin the tires, then when it caught, it was a city block away before we realized it. It was scary.
Youth.
Mike
Gaolee
Official leathers tester and crash dummy
I currently have a '68 Camaro convertible. It is a garage ornament for the time being. With any luck, I'll get it running this summer. Or not. Who knows. At any rate, as much as I like it, it's just a big, ponderous, inadequate old car by modern standards. When running, it's powerful for its era. It has OK brakes and handling (Z-28 disk brakes and steering gear conversion) for an American car of the late '60s and even up through the '80s, but it's not exactly agile by comparison to much of anything built now. So, it's all about just driving it within it's mediocre capabilities and enjoying the noise, commotion, vibration, and harshness. Plus, the top comes off. What more could you want?
Well, in my case, it would be pretty nice if it moved under its own power, but that's up to me getting around to it.
buldog5151bass
Kibble, milkbones, and P Basses. And redheads.
Driving an old car is not about comfort, nor, unless it is a real high priced performance model, about performance driving. It's about the S.E grin you get when you slide behind the wheel. Every time I drive my Ghia, I get comments from people. I just enjoy being in it.
Camaros/Firebirds (F-bodies) and Mustangs (pony cars) aren't muscle cars by definition. Neither are Corvettes.
Ha!
An S.E. Grin!
So true!
That's what it's all about.
As far as I'm concerned.
Collecting/restoring older cars is a nice hobby, if you can afford it.
Mike.
An S.E. Grin!
So true!
That's what it's all about.
As far as I'm concerned.
Collecting/restoring older cars is a nice hobby, if you can afford it.
Mike.
This is what I want. I don't need handling. I just want to cruise knowing I'm in a car I love, I have enough power to enjoy the exhaust note, and get a thrill on straight away acceleration. The sound of the engine to me is more important than the handling.
Also those seats are very comfortable to me and I very much like the lack of the middle waterfall Style divider in the car. I like letting my legs hang loose being able to hang them all the way to the side and having a lot of legroom sideways as well as straight away. In a lot of ways it's more comfortable for me then Contour bucket seats and Lumbar supports and whatever else you can come up with.
Last edited:
By the way, I hadn't read any posts here when I wrote mine.
It's nice to see all the appreciation for The Mopar 340 engine. And it's nice to see our stories pretty much match up.
For the record, my father bought a 1972 Malibu in 1972 with a 350 two barrel carb. It was fast for a family car. It had an 010 block.
This was the four bolt main block the 350 LT-1 engines had. They were 350 cubic inches with 350 horsepower.
Why did it have a high performance block?
One mechanic who worked on the car said once Chevy realized muscle cars were on the way out, they just got rid of the high percormance parts as quickly as they could.
A few guys wanted to buy just the engine.
Mike
It's nice to see all the appreciation for The Mopar 340 engine. And it's nice to see our stories pretty much match up.
For the record, my father bought a 1972 Malibu in 1972 with a 350 two barrel carb. It was fast for a family car. It had an 010 block.
This was the four bolt main block the 350 LT-1 engines had. They were 350 cubic inches with 350 horsepower.
Why did it have a high performance block?
One mechanic who worked on the car said once Chevy realized muscle cars were on the way out, they just got rid of the high percormance parts as quickly as they could.
A few guys wanted to buy just the engine.
Mike
buldog5151bass
Kibble, milkbones, and P Basses. And redheads.
Then I would look for the right car the same way you would look for a good used bass. Check them out until you find a car that seems "right" to you.
When I was younger, I had a '72 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme (not the 442). It certainly isn't one of "name" cars of the era, but it was beautiful, and certainly had plenty of power.
Saw a totally bitchin Super Bee this morning, orange with a flat black hood and scoop. Just dont see alot of these around much anymore
By the way, I hadn't read any posts here when I wrote mine.
It's nice to see all the appreciation for The Mopar 340 engine. And it's nice to see our stories pretty much match up.
For the record, my father bought a 1972 Malibu in 1972 with a 350 two barrel carb. It was fast for a family car. It had an 010 block.
This was the four bolt main block the 350 LT-1 engines had. They were 350 cubic inches with 350 horsepower.
Why did it have a high performance block?
One mechanic who worked on the car said once Chevy realized muscle cars were on the way out, they just got rid of the high percormance parts as quickly as they could.
A few guys wanted to buy just the engine.
Mike
The 3970010 (or 010 block for short) was produced from 1968 ish until 1979 and was the most popular 350 casting ever. Not all were 4 bolt main, though. The only way to tell was to pull the pan and see.
