Look in the MP catalog.
Tate
-----Original Message-----
From: Mok, Alan (SPB Brentwood) [SMTP:AMok@spbank.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 1998 4:14 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: RE: DML: RE: Re: What's Hot Rod's deal?
Are there any aftermarket aluminum heads out there that will fit the
Magnums? Edelbrock maybe?
It would be awesome to take 50+ pounds off the nose and be able to add
6-8 lb of boost without retard.
Alan
'98 Dakota R/T (what? Not a Ford?)
'89 Mustang GT (347, Griggs, S-trim and the list goes on...)
'88 x-CHP Mustang LX (daily beatings from a teenager)
Ducati 916 (someday)
-----Original Message-----
From: Holloway,Frank T
[mailto:Frank.T.Holloway@KP.ORG]
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 1998 1:50 PM
To: 'dakota-truck@buffnet.net'
Subject: RE: DML: RE: Re: What's Hot Rod's deal?
Even though in the article they tended to put a negative
spin on the
Magnum.
Their points tended to be deadly accurate. You need to
do a lot of work
to get the
heads to flow, lifts over .400 inch don't net you much.
The intake
manifold tends
to be a real struggle. The rocker arms tend to be just
OK (below 5,000
RPM),
shafts tend to flex less and are good for high RPM
applications. On the
good side,
rod length, 6.123 in.(good for building power),
excellent block and
bottom end,
excellent fuel injection, and the best looking Trucks &
SUV's on the
market today.
I don't know about you, but I'll start with something
that's pretty
close to what I
want and just make it better.
Frank
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim, Donna, Erin, and Brian
[SMTP:leefam@wcc.net]
> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 1998 11:50 AM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: Re: DML: RE: Re: What's Hot Rod's deal?
>
> At 02:08 PM 8/6/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >> I got my Sept issue of Hot Rod the other day. In
the Magnum story
> they
> >> had, all they seemed to do was rag on the Magnum
motor and it's
> >> shortcomings (to them).
> >
> > OK, so what were the shortcomings?
> >
> > I like Petersen Publishing, but they have too many
damned models
> getting
> >in the way of the rods. ;)
> >
> > Ron
> >
>
> They said the heads only work well at low lifts and
didn't respond
> well to
> porting. I thought Magnum heads were some of the best
out there,
> ported or
> not. They also said that the rocker arm design was "a
giant step
> backwards" and that Chrysler changed from the shaft
design to the
> pivot
> design because of "AMC influence" (and to save $$)
from when Chrysler
> bought AMC. I saw that as pretty much saying the AMC
engineers were
> dumb.
> I thought the rocker arm comments were weird because
it's the same
> design
> that's used on the Viper, right?
>
> I didn't see anything about the Magnum's advantages.
Besides, if the
> Magnum sucks so bad, how come they're easy to hop up
and how come they
> can
> keep pace with the Mustangs and Camaros?
>
> Brian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:18 EDT