Why Is This Rare 1965 Chrysler 300L So Gutless? Ignition, Charging System, Kickdown Fixes, And More
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 11. 2023
- In this video: how to test vacuum advance units, how to adjust your classic Mopar's kickdown linkage, discussion of timing advance curves, tail light socket failure, charging system diagnosis, alternator replacement, and more!
On today's episode, we're back on Dick Hergert's 1965 Chrysler 300L. While this is a really solid car, more than a couple details are just a bit off - which as we've seen on other projects over the years can really add up to a car that just doesn't work right. Working through these little problems can make a big difference. - Auta a dopravní prostředky
That 413, was cranking out 360hp, 450 tq, enough to move that tank. Effortlessly.
Rare car, as they only produced 2405 htps, and 440 convertibles.
I've owned my 1968 300 since high school, over 40 year's, the women have come and gone, my 300 outlived and cost me less, and got more mileage and joy than ANY woman ever offered.
I own a '65 Imperial Crown Coupe. Same 413. What an amazing, smooth running engine! Takes forever to detail these interiors but it's a big plus when you do.
Man that’s a sweet ride you don’t see those cars anymore. Thanks Jaimie.
In the early 60s I was just a little kid, but I was already a mini Gearhead in a family that only drove Chryslers. My mom's side of the family all worked at the Chrysler Corporation all over the Detroit area. So I was totally in to Chryslers. In the early 60s we had Newports, 300s, New Yorkers and one 66 Imperial Crown 4 door hardtop. We had a 61 Newport, a 62 300, a 63 Newport and a 300, and a 64 300. I was very used to the early 60s styling, so when I started seeing pictures of the new styling of the 65s, and the changes that were coming like no more push button drive, and less gauges on the new dashboard I didn't think I would like them. The new square styling was a lot different than the 63s and 64s and I liked those. But I did like them, who wouldn't like headlights under glass, and much larger size. I liked your video, I learned a lot. In fact I think I should watch it again.
Ah, old cars, gotta love them.
Great work Jamie! You are my favorite go to guy for all things MOPAR. You have taught me all out!
Very cool ride! Never seen one in Australia. Gotta love the "Performance Indicator" in the centre console. Thanks for sharing!
Jamie. You sure did a great editing job, making that green car look light blue. Thanks! I'm so happy! Now, it's my turn to do something. I am currently gathering up pictures of my 3 Mo-cars, and 1 Mo-truck for you to be sent in an e-mail. Well, actually, it will take many e-mails, so get some rest. I love watching people go crazy when they see my customized fleet, but I can't be held responsible if you completely lose your mind over them. So remember... "Once you see them, you can't un-see them!"
Haaahaha. I can’t wait!
Love that car , really clean . Thanks for the great info , you know your stuff . I installed a complete modern universal harness in my ‘66 Belvedere II project because the stock replacement harness/ harnesses were way out of my price range . Added relays to the headlight harness too .
Your overall knowledge is wow Jamie. You are gifted. So interesting to see you go through an engine bay finding the problems
Thank you, Mike!
Elwood Engel's elegant styling shows well on this 300!
Great video as usual! I would really love to see a video or a series on fixing the steering system . Thanks
Somehow I hadn’t given that any thought to this point. I’ll see what I can do!
i like the space ship style dashboard.
Informative! Thank you.
That wonderful old battleship will never be classified as fast even with the 413 max wedge. It just goes.
Agreed. My experience was the same with the long ram dual quad 300 G. It… advances.
You're both incompetent; I had a daily driver 66 4-door hardtop 383 two-barrel with about 200,000 miles that would accelerate even with circa 1980s BMW 320s every time.
@@georgewetzel4380 Me? I'm incompetent? Ok... The E21 BMW, utilizing the most generous horsepower number I can find, has a power to weight ratio of .057. Meanwhile, your C body - using the 383 2 barrel rating I can find, which is probably a wildly inaccurate gross HP rating, is .063. So... yeah, even assuming the numbers I'm using are wrong (they probably are,) you should have been able to accelerate pretty evenly with an 80s BMW that only made 150 horsepower. It's probably unfair to compare that to something like a Hellcat with a power to weight ratio of .16. But in a world where a sporty Toyota Corolla makes 300 HP and has a P/W ratio of .09... it's just not that impressive anymore. And that's coming from someone who lives, breathes, and loves Mopars, and owns a 383 powered Charger that does block long burnouts and is awesome. It's just nothing like modern "fast." Good luck.
Thanks Jamie for the close look of this beauty.Reminds me of my Aunts 69 New yorker.Made a hell of an inmperssion on me.that and the Bullitt Charger made Chrysler my brand.
Que auto hermoso Me encanta el interior!!! Saludos desde Argentina 😊
This was my car for many years. I first bought it in 1982, restored it and changed the color in 1992.
That’s amazing! It’s a great car. I just redid the tail light sockets the other day, and we fixed a goofy power window or two. It’s definitely living the good life.
I had a 66 Newport. Pretty much the same car with the same problems!
Beautiful old car
Im so happy the slant is in BUT its almost winter. I envy you not having stupid cold weather and tons of snow. Maybe we will get lucky like we did last year and i only have to plow once
This car reminds me of my childhood 35 years ago, and a 383 69 Dodge Polara.
like every thing about the car, the interior looks good and the way they used to lay out the speedometer and instrument panel is so much better than a big screen, when a car was a car not a mobile computer, wasn't the J series that had the long ram intake,
Yes! I love it. Long rams were found on multiple years of the letter series. They were optional on the K (1964) and only available over the counter on the ‘65 L. Dual quads were a fixture on the 300 letter series in various configurations until they became optional in ‘64 and were gone for ‘65.
@@DeadDodgeGarage The 64 and older big Mopars had pockets in the inner fenders to accommodate the long rams. But not the 65 which was the first year for the "C Body." So it won't fit. I tried it on a 383, though it may have had more clearance with a raised block like a 413. Since the mounting surface would be about 3/4 on an inch farther from the opposite fender on a 413.
Right now there are probably 10 times as many long rams out there as there are the exhaust manifolds they require to mount securely. I would not bet that the exhaust will even fit a C body if you could find it. Typically , you would have to buy a complete car to get the manifolds.
Crossrams are too tall to fit under the hood. That leaves in line dual AFB's from cars around 1960. I have a 383 inline but really need a 413 inline. Of course there were a few aluminum aftermarket dual inlines but they are even harder to find than the factory iron dual AFB intakes.
There was an article where Car and Driver or Motor Trend tested a 62 "sport series" 300 with a 426 with in line dual quads. but it was never put into real production.
Awesome 👌🤜🤛
I love the 300L I'm completely drooling what an awesome car what a beautiful paint job man I think it's cool phrase the day new cars are just junk thanks for the inspiration have a great day old is best crush the rest
Great video!!!! Invaluable info! Got the same pinging issue with my 62 NY’er. Even with 92 octane, I had to back the timing off to around 6 or 7 from 10 with a very noticeable difference. Only way around this seems to be a drop in compression (larger chamber later heads, etc.).
In theory, 92 *should* be high enough octane to not do that… but as you’ve seen, your mileage may vary. A couple things in case you haven’t done so yet - verify your plugs are the correct heat range. Verify your fuel mixture is close to ideal (reading plugs,) as too lean a mixture can raise engine temperatures. Run some sort of additive through it to try and clean out any carbon deposits - this can be seafoam, berryman’s, another commercially available additive, or the careful dribbling of water down the carb while revving the engine a few times. Or both. I learned recently that oil consumption can also lead to pinging, so that’s another thought.
All great points! Heat range, check. Mixture, check (partial to the AFB). It’s still peppy but has miles (and the more than likely the carbon buildup thing). Maybe a good top end overhaul with some nice hardened seats? Now to hunt for your video cursing at Total Contact brakes….
I feel like shit on a stick today, will watching my friends new video help that at all? 100% no, but it sure is entertaining. Absolutely love that car, that thing with some kind of overdrive would be an amazing road trip rig.
Feel better soon!
Big block Mopar with an overdrive is very tough to do. I think starting with a GM 200 or 700 style is the only way to not have to butcher the floor since the Mopar types are too fat in the back and don't fit a big block even if they were tapered in the back.
@@auteurfiddler8706 I was thinking a Gear Vendors unit. The one they make for the 727 is roughly the same diameter as the factory tail shaft so fitting in the tunnel without modification should work. Get the driveshaft shortened and viola. Not a cheap piece though, $3200 US.
Looks like the steering box could benefit from a bit of a cinch up, the play reminds me of a 1950's Fordson tractor I used to use.
I was gifted a 1968 New Yorker 2-door fast top as a High School graduation present by my shop teacher. I foolishly traded it a year or two later for a '74 AMC Javelin, because I thought finding parts for the New Yorker was difficult. Merciful heavens did I open a can of whoop-ass upon myself. The NY'er was Silver with red interior, buckets, tilt & tele, power windows, seat, antenna and a secondary heater behind the back seat. I've only seen a handful of '68 2-doors since that car. It's been my only C-body and I would almost give anything at this point to find a similar one.
Dang it! That’s a bummer. I really like the ‘68 Plymouth fast top. Very similar machine.
I’d totally have a beautiful mid-sixties car like that one if I lived really close to your garage.
Brother owns. 65 Saratoga. Four door sedan. Owned since 82
My son has a 66 Newport Car has 20,000 actual miles its for sale Car is perfect.
I might know somebody who would be interested in that. Where is it located and how much is your son asking?
I have that same problem with my console latch. They usually fall apart. I mean the original ones. That said, I love the console and shifter in that car. I think it is far better looking than the 66 and newer. Interesting trivia: Although the 65 and 66 have similar looking bodies, the 65 shares a lot of parts with the 64 rather than the newer one.
I really like the setup too. I do have to say, the full length ‘66 Charger console is still my favorite…
It is hard to get a vacuum can at a reasonable price. At the parts stores, they cost almost as much as a new distributor. I had to buy a lot couple of one big block and two small block distributors to get two (both on the small blocks) vacuum cans that don't leak.
Yep. We just hoard everything. So there are options in the pile.
Go the dreadnought !! What a Beast
Pretty car
A friend of my mom's had a 65 Newport I think it was may have been a new yorker I was 5 so details I kind of don't remember but it was the same color.
It’s a beautiful car, I wish it was in my driveway. The replacement electronic ignition system could well be the source of driveability problems, not impossible to fix, but For the trouble, I’d restore the correct 65 distributor,, in the end, it will be a superior piece.
I completely agree. Not my call, but what I would do.
The drum brake situation is a tough one. Going to disks requires switching to 15 inch wheels and the hub caps were 14 inch only in 65. The factory C body disk brake system from 69-73 is the only real alternative. I had an idea to take the 78-79 smooth faced aluminum wheels and try to replace the turbine caps with turbine caps from a 67 300 hub cap. But the mounting for the caps is inadequate even for the factory turbine caps on those wheels.
15x7 is an ideal wheel size for these cars and 235 70 r 15 or 225 75 r 15 about the best tires, the latter still available as a whitewall.
I think the massive drum brakes (11x3 front and 11 x 2 1/2 I think rear) can bring the car to a very quick stop. Quicker than disks for the first stop at least.
The challenge is getting them to do so without a pull to one side halfway into the deceleration and getting diagonal to the road in and emergency stop. It would be interesting to see you work on this.
It’s the darting back and forth that really bothers me. The way this car is driven, I think the drums are perfectly adequate - but I’m not a fan.
Disk brakes and wire wheels is a fantastic and safe upgrade and good radial tires most are easy fixes and a very simple
Basic car by today’s standards
Nice 1965 car.
My dad had one of these when I was a kid, damn I'm getting old. Thanks for the trip down memory lane Jamie!
Good Ol' C-body content good stuff ....good content and pop tarts don't fit in DVD players either....thanks.
I’ll have to remember that one!
The ground strap from the body to the engine is always good to check. The first time I encountered that was on a 75 W200 I had, and it had all these weird intermittent electrical problems, and then one day it wouldn't start. Yep, the ground strap was broke. Fixed that and all was well.
I have seen many, many classic Mopars running and driving just fine without the ground strap. It’s definitely something you want to have, but… it shouldn’t have caused your no start. That’s really interesting.
@DeadDodgeGarage If the body doesn't have a good ground, the CDI box can't make spark.
@@DeadDodgeGarage I think it was because of the electronic ignition module mounted on the firewall losing its ground. At least that's my theory, but all I know is once I fixed the ground strap, it started right up. That being said, in the process of troubleshooting (and before fixing the ground strap), I also cleaned both battery terminals, the main ground cable connection on the engine, and just about any other connection that I thought might be questionable. The thing is, the starter cranked just fine, but it just wouldn't fire (no spark), and the coil was ok, etc.
What I have found is that grounding issues can cause a helluva lot of weird problems. I have an older Bobcat skidsteer and the lights were acting really weird. At first I thought it was the switch because sometimes the lights would turn on, and sometimes not. Then, sometimes the rear light would come on but not the front. After much troubleshooting, it turned out that the 2 front lights were not self-grounded and the ground wire had a bad connection somewhere, or the wire was broke somewhere. The rear light was self grounded, that's probably why it would come on sometimes when the front lights wouldn't. I never quite figured that out, but just running a new ground wire to the front lights from a good ground point fixed it.
Great video! What's up with the green mopar station wagon in front of the 300?
1970 Dodge Monaco with a 440 I built. I did a video on that one some weeks back too.
Great vid pbj belongs anywhere lol
Hi! Just wondering which engine is in this ride!? Sounds good! The car I got married in was a '73 Plymouth fury with a 400. It had the 4 barrel thermoquad but it was so heavy it wasn't very fast! My first car was a '68 Plymouth fury with a 318 2 barrel. That little gal would run up to a hundred with ease! Thanks for all the good Mopar content!! Love from South Texas!🇨🇱☺️
This has the 413 engine - very similar to the 426 wedge, or the 440, but with a smaller bore. Thanks!
The alternator field wire is dead to ground. That is why the ammeter needle is following the engine. Replace the voltage regulator and that problem will be fixed. Also, the wheel cylinders probably are semi frozen and need replacing. My 65 New Yorker needed them too.
I *did* replace the voltage regulator. In this video… That only made it “follow the engine” more - one possible contributor to this is a slightly discharged battery due to the prior inadequate charging. No, it is not shorted to ground. Well, actually, this is a “single field” alternator which is controlled by a varied voltage input, not a varied resistance ground - so technically one brush is indeed grounded. If it were full fielded, the gauge would fully peg out and stay there when the engine is revved. It didn’t. It climbed, then pulled back and flickered as the regulator lowered the charge output. It was still a higher reading than I would expect. I would like to repeat this test with the battery fully charged. All of the wheel cylinders - like everything else in the braking system - are new.
Those 65' 66' chryslers I love that interior and that dashboard always have.
I've had a few old Chryslers a few old Fords and a few old Pontiac's and so many things,, just so many different little things on mid sixties Chryslers break it's ridiculous, it never stops.
Meanwhile my well equipped 67' Galaxie 500 fastback never breaks.
I'd still rather have a nicely loaded 65' 66' Chrysler 2 door though...
Beautiful. But not exactly known for the quality of their components or assembly techniques… I still love ‘em though.
I practiced for my driving test in the old and worn 67 Ford Ranch Wagon and I liked the front end and the dash. I like the fastback style of the 500 and XL fastback. When I sat behind the wheel of a 68 Chrysler 300 a few years later, I felt right at home. The difference was that the Chrysler didn't wallow around on the road. And, "yes, it was a fast top". (shout out to the late Ricardo Montalban)
I like the acorn style steering wheel on the 67 Ford and Mercury. One of my 68 300's, probably an early production one, has that steering wheel. I could use a red one, too. By the way.
Tyler installed a Pertronix distributor on his 66 300.
This one has been updated with a Chrysler electronic ignition. It works fine for the application.
Premium gas when that was built was over 100 octane!
The a/c was freezing cold. After spending the afternoon in the city pool the ride home left my teeth chattering.
I feel like there was a beginning to this story that didn’t make it into the comment…
Carefuling...
Caaaaaarefulling!
Don’t tell Uncle Tony that drum brakes suck, he said everyone should be cheap and never ever upgrade the brakes on a car. I remember going down a steep hill and not having brakes after that mountain pass.
My current 86 Monte SS he told me the stock brakes are fine, I then told him that my wife and her family are all obese and let me tell you having 1,300lbs in my Monte the brakes even though all new and stock didn’t work well at all. Wife 250lb, me 190lb, her two daughters 220lbs, 365lb and daughters boyfriend 250.
I’m divorced now so brakes should be ok for me and man’s best friend
Your ‘86 Monte started life with disk brakes, so I think the problem might have been something else… anyway, glad it worked out.
@@DeadDodgeGarage yes, it’s always had disk brakes but having a bunch of obese people in the car it wouldn’t stop. The other car was a 4 drum brake car(Impala)and it’s not good for going up and down mountain passes.
Moral of the story : don’t date or marry a woman who’s gonna eat you out of the home and be too lazy…your car won’t stop. Put 1275lb in your Charger and drive around see if it stops. This is why especially when you double the horsepower you should change brakes out. I know many guys who add a 700hp engine and keep the stock brakes and suspension, don’t be cheap, your life is valuable
That's not good advice, not changing to discs 😕.
Plus that car should have come with discs 🤯.
@@christianheidt5733 best advice is don’t marry obese women who have two daughters who are 200 and 365lbs. With just me and my dog in the Monte it stops perfect, when you add 2000lbs of blubber of course no brakes
@@christianheidt5733 when you take a car from the 60s and add 3-4 times the horsepower you should really upgrade the brakes and suspension. That was my point originally, I made the comment in the video with the guy who had a 1500hp car with stock brakes and he crashed with a brake failure.
Giving me a true love/hate relationship with old cars. Sheesh....
That’s *exactly* how I feel… I truly hope a big takeaway from my videos is that it ain’t all roses and puppy kisses. Often it’s a headache, a knuckle ache, and pissing away cubic dollars - but to me, it’s worth it for the reward at the end when a car kinda does what it’s supposed to.
You definitely showed me why you are chasing the steering wheel so much when you are driving down the road.
Yep… it’s bad
@@DeadDodgeGarage Red Head in Auburn, Washington is a great source for having the steering box rebuilt. I had them redo, the steering box on my '56 Buick. Having that done finally cured the wander that car had, and I had already rebuilt or replaced everything else, king pins, wheel bearings, pivot pins, tie rod ends, the works.
@@mikemullay5622 Red Head is great. We use Firm Feel for Mopar boxes. But it's not the box - the junction block is either extremely worn, or more likely put together wrong, and the rag joint is on its way out of the building as well.
@@DeadDodgeGarage I could see both of those issues in the video. When the rag joint lets go, then things get VERY interesting!
Fourteen million dollars later....
YES, I LOVE MY OLD CHISELERS.
They all have minds of their own, huh?😂
Hi jamie. I'm donny, Big wrench tech. VCR PBJ 😂😂😂😂
Take away #1: At 1:33, when you rev it up, I can hear that it's running rich.
Take Away #2: The disconnected Engine Ground. I definitely LOL'ed at that.
Take away #3: All modern charging systems (ie: Not using a Generator) should produce between 13.7 and 14.2 volts at 750rpm.
Take away #4: For a car as old as I am, it's falling apart like me. :)
Take away #5: Check the float levels. It sounds as if they are staying open too long, hence dumping too much gas, even at WOT. A stock camshaft won't know what to do with the extra fuel, hence the black smoke.
I agree. This carb was treated to an OE restoration… Which is why I’m almost 100% sure the floats are set wrong. I have already spent *hours* fixing other restored but not correctly checked out or set up carburetors.
@@DeadDodgeGarage But, for me, since we're both 58, I'd put the timing back to where it had optimum power. As long as the car starts up normally, not the rr....rrr...rrr like they do with too much advance, it'll be fine.
I had a 1965 300L convertible back in 1969 till 1977. I bought it from the original owner with only 48000 miles on it original top and it was always garage kept. I sold it for $550.00 not knowing at the time Chrysler only made 440 of them. Kick me you know where.
Ouch…
Big old boat! Does it come with an anchor? Jk, definitely a sweet ride!
Pretty sure it needs two…
I got a 1966 300
I love that car
feel free to ship it to me when your through with it
You’d have to take that up with the elder Hergert, who is in no hurry to get rid of it 😅
@@DeadDodgeGarage 😭
What are the pros and cons of a 323 gear versus 355 help me choose
Really depends on what you’re doing. 3.23 is a great compromise. Good take off and decent highway cruising. Very happy with that in my Charger. 3.55 gives a bit better take off and trades away some cruisability with a higher RPM on the highway. You *can* cruise with 4.10s… but it’s not fun. At 3.55 you still have a pretty usable car.
@@DeadDodgeGarage what rpm are you turning at 65 mph with the 3.23?
I did the math : ratio x speed x 334 divided by tire diameter
At 65 it should be 2600 rpms
My 65 was the dimmest lit car I ever drove. I would have to put it in neutral when stopped at a light at night to keep the revs up so you could still see the car from the rear and I could still see the road ahead. At cruise, it kept up ok. I still had (have?) the single field alternator. I think any dual field alternator would probably work better. I could not tell if you had the dual field. Since it was not a square back, it could be either one. If I upgrade, I will go with a dual field, ground the second field and possibly replace the V R with a transistorized one the same size, but maybe leave the original.
Oh, I tried tail light LED's to take some load off, but the ones you could get at an affordable price back then were horrible and unsafe. They are the ones you still see on the part store racks, actually. I think you have to special order high quality ones, but they are ten times the price.
Yep. I tried those bulbs years ago. Never again. There are bright incandescent bulbs available that work fine, and good electrical system components do the rest. We came to the same conclusion - this system (single field) just can’t do much more at idle.
Checking for vacuum is a whole nother video...
👊🏼
It might need some cross ram intakes and dual carbs
Fairly confident that would fix everything wrong with it 😅
Old cars give car doctors a lot of job security!
nobody gonna mention the first gen heading the other way at 12:36 ?
I sure noticed it…
@@DeadDodgeGarage Nice , I have a '93 rust free but patina'd paint first gen myself .
When I was 9 my parents had a 4 door '65 Chrysler 300 . I remember sitting in the back seat on the way to church and I'd watch the cold light on the dash click off in the same place enroute every time .
The alternator is there to maintain the battery charge, NOT act as a battery charger. With the amp meter pegged like that you risk burning up the gauge.
I don’t need you to explain this to me. 🙂 also, it did show a high reading, but it was *not* pegged. You may or may not have noticed my concerned sounds when it was just showing a very high reading, then the regulator started to lower the charge output and the needle moved downward. Not a full field condition.
Jamie. I'm still chasing a tail light,turn signal light on the drivers side of my Bee. Frustrating.
I am going to do a video on those lights coming up here that may or may not help you. I think that will come next week.
I'm confused. The linkage seemed correct at the start. Also, you pushed the rod back in this video but pulled it forward in a previous video on trans linkages.
That last 3/4 inch was just movement in the linkages. I bet if you looked at the lever on the side of the trans, it did not move much if any.
The Mopar Bible mentions when part throttle down shift was added to the Torqueflite. I believe it was around 1970. So, don't expect much on this much older car. They offered a kit to convert, but I think it did fit a 65 trans.
The linkage *appeared* to be correct because a spring was pulling it forward and taking the slack out of the linkage - and there is also extra forward movement in the transmission valve / lever assembly. Correct on part throttle kickdown. That’s the beauty here - you know I got it right because it works at full throttle. That means the carb is getting full throttle, and so is the kickdown / throttle input on the transmission.
@@DeadDodgeGarage So, it was not downshifting before but it was after the adjustment? Well, I guess it (the rod) did need to go back.
@@auteurfiddler8706 Think it was '71 for PTK. You can get the retrofit kit from A&A Transmission-along with anything else for a performance TF. They are great people and do a lot of the NHRA stock and S/S cars. I really liked the way the PTK worked on my '72 Charger 400. The trans I built for my '65 300 is still going strong 32 yrs later. Pro Trans was very helpful with advice also and I bought parts from both. Pro Trans also does a lot of NHRA type stuff.
Lead additve
Never
Cool old grocery getter.
383 or a 440?
413?
@@johneckert1365 Thanks, John. Mopar from birth but I get confused on the year differences.
Yep John got it. I had mentioned it was a 413 in the first video, but kinda glossed over that detail in this one. 😅 it was the only engine available in the letter car for some years.
You youngsters want excitement? Forget the twin turbo big block... try a panic stop with poorly adjusted drum brakes when you only have one finger on the steering wheel lol
Damn right! 😅
@@DeadDodgeGarageoh yeah
Those cars needed at least 99 octane. So, yeah, retarding the timing enough to not ping on 93 is going to leave a lot of power on the table.
99 octane was a regularly available thing in the 60s? This is the first I’m hearing of that.
@@DeadDodgeGarage Oh hell yeah, I’m thinking late 50’s to early/mid 70’s… maybe later. I remember seeing 102 available at the pump. I remember reading an owner’s manual for a ‘66 Cadillac that recommended “at least” 99. If you had to run 98, it was recommended retarding the timing a few degrees. You were not to run on anything less than 96 octane, ever. Big, luxury V8’s, like your 413, from the late 50’s up to 1970 came from the factory with 10 - 10.5 compression ratios. High performance engines had up to 11-1, and definitely needed 102 octane. Smaller, “economy” V8’s and sixes came with 9 - 9.5 compression ratios and could run on 92-94 octane, which was considered “regular gas” at the time.
And to think they’re going to build electric cars. Chryslers and electricity.. now what could possibly go wrong, lol.
Chrysler doesn’t actually exist anymore. This Chrysler isn’t that Chrysler… for better or for worse. It’s probably quite a bit of both.
The only way that car is
Gonna be fast is if you
Push it off a cliff, or put
A Hellcat engine in it!😅
(Don’t push it off a cliff)
That car is real clean…
I’m not looking for fast, but for it to run like it should. It’s much closer to that now.
Watered down, ethanol blended gasoline... :(
Nope! The tank is full of ethanol free premium. So… yeah.
@@DeadDodgeGarage Here in the Carolinas, we have issues with retailers selling ‘something’ and labeling it 93 E0.
South Carolina only checks for octane ‘as invoiced’. SC does check for contaminants and ethanol content.
NC actually checks for octane levels but is slow to prosecute scofflaws.
The good news being both states will send full test results of a particular station to anyone upon request.
I know of one station in SC whose 93 E0 isn’t and their paper trail is laughable. On a recent trip to Memphis, Tn , I bought 93 EO at the same station going in both directions that wasn’t.
I reported the station to the TN Ag Consumer division and received multiple replies but not the results of any investigation. I won’t buy fuel from that station again until I receive test results.
Mmmm deer poop.
Oh. Bother.
Your scat recognition is bad. Those were CLEARLY cow elk turds.
MUCH too large for deer AND, if it was bull elk poop the turds would be dented on the end....THE MORE YOU KNOW.....
Hey, I’m just glad we’ve got someone in the crowd who knows this *shit!*
@DeadDodgeGarage Very clever reply my good man.....👏 👏
Is it me or is the tach working backwards? The needle moves down instead of up. A Chrysler peculiarity or not wired correctly? Curious minds would like to know.
I’m assuming you’re looking at the Performance Indicator in the center console. It’s not a tach - it’s a vacuum gauge. Haha.