School me on '61 409s and L89 Novas, please!

[442w30]

This is a two-part question, although unrelated:

1) All 1961 409 cars I've seen have been Impalas (presumably SSs). I know the SS was a package that can easily be faked. But the 409 was available in other lines, so it's possible to have a Bel Air 2-door sedan with the 409, right? Is there any way to tell its pedigree from the body or it requires paperwork as well?

2) This weekend, I saw the black 1970 L89 Nova at the Greenwich Concours d'Elegance. I know there's been some controversy regarding this car, so can someone make an objective attempt to tell me what the deal is? Is it an issue of the owner using deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion that it's an L89 car, while there is no paperwork to prove it, not to mention that the fact that it's a 1970 (versus 1969) car makes it all the less likely that it's an L89 car? I'd like to hear an attempt at impartiality regarding this car . . . and my apologies if it may appear like a rehash from a previous thread.

Thanks, Chevy folks! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/3gears.gif

[Xplantdad]

As far as the Nova POP was shown in the mags not too long ago

[ORIGLS6]

Verne can set us straight on the '61 09s but I thought they were only available with the SS option..... and only as a single 4 bbl version (340 HP?)

A '61 '09 Biscayne would be http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gifx10!

[PeteLeathersac]

[ QUOTE ]


A '61 '09 Biscayne would be http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gifx10!

[/ QUOTE ]

You know it!!!
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/drool.gifhttp://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/headbang.gif

A '61 Biscayne 9'er has been near the top if my long wanted list for too long...right behind a W-powered '61 Canadian Poncho Strato Chief!. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

I have an old pic somewhere I had hanging on my wall for years of Dyno Don or da' Grump's original '61 Chevy Batwing that was supposed to be a factory car and have always understood a few of roughly 150 09's built in '61 were Post cars..

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/burnout.gif
~ Pete

[Hylton]

Why didn't Chevy keep going with the 409? Wasn't the engine reliable? Surprised they would push the 396 vs. the 409.

[Verne_Frantz]

A lot of magazine articles have stated the '61 '09s were all in the Super Sports, so many people believe that. The SS option didn't appear until Feb. but the first '09s showed up in Dec.(1960). They could be ordered in any full-sized body style.
It's probably near-impossible to tell if a restored '61 was originally an '09 without paperwork - unless some mistakes were made. And there aren't many clues on an un-restored body either.
As far as the engine itself, another UN-proven rumor is that some 2x4 cars were built near the end of production. Several of the top name racers back then showed up in July with 2x4s and the big heads, but they were put into OS/S (Optional SuperStock), which was the predecessor of FX. Those parts were supplied over the counter. All production '61 409s seem to have had a single AFB and were rated 360hp.
Hope this helps. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[Verne_Frantz]

Hylton,
One thing comes to mind: The engines were considerably "over-square", with a 4 5/16" bore. Those huge pistons weighed in at just under 2lbs ea. so the engine was rpm limited. It never did that well in NASCAR with sustained high rpm use, or on the drag strip in '64.
The MK-II (mystery motor) design showed it's tremendous potential in '63, and that engine morphed into the MK-IV.

(I still like the '09s though http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif)

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ORIGLS6]

You never let us down! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

[COPO 70 RS/Z28]

Im I correct in noting the the 61 ss production was somewhere in the range of 500 or so

[442w30]

Yeah, the number is somewhere between 400 and 500 - I kinda recall 458 from my memory.

So, if the Nova has the POP, why has the car been so controversial?

[Verne_Frantz]

453 '61 Super Sports is correct. The number 458 has shown up in print a few times. 142 is the total number (in cars) of production 409s in '61. A total of over 200 engine assemblies were produced before they shut it down due to problems with the castings. Before then, attention was turned to a newer (better) casting for '62 (the 068 block). http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/flag.gif IT had none of the problems of the '61 623 block.

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[Bill Pritchard]

OK, as long as we're on the topic here....do I understand correctly that the heads and intake from a '61 '09 will not interchange with the 62 and later pieces? I am thinking I read that info in the book on 'The History of Super Stock' (which I can't seem to find anywhere after we moved http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif )

[ORIGLS6]

Hmmmm. Good question Bill. And how about the interchangability between 348 and pre/post '62 409 parts? http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dunno.gif
The floor is yours Mr. Frantz. http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/scholar.gif

[Dog427435]

If you like the 348/409 cars - this is a cool site to see.

It doesn't offer a 1/10 of what Verne can tell you - but it's worth the read.


348-409 (http://www.348-409.com/)

[ORIGLS6]

Cool stuff Glenn.

[Verne_Frantz]

Bill,
The heads and intake must be matched. All 348s, '61 409s and '63-65 409-340hp used a smaller intake port design, therefore the intakes had to be configured to match the heads. Although the '61 '09 had a hi-rise aluminum intake, it still had the small port design. When '62 came along (not counting the service parts released around July '61) the heads were different castings with taller (bigger) ports. The only intakes that will bolt up to those also have to have the taller ports. Visually, it's easy to see the difference; the upper bolt hole between the ports is nested between the ports (small port) and the casting goes around the hole. On the large port heads (690s and 583s) the ports are square on top and the bolt is above the pair of ports.
The exhaust side is essentially the same and ANY 348-409 exhaust manifolds will interchange. And both 348 or 409 heads will bolt to any "W" block. Except for the early '58s (which had no provision for plug cooling holes) all the water passages and bolt holes are in the same place.
So, the simple answer is any "W" head can be put on any "W" block, as long as the intake matches the head.
Sorry, I get carried away.... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Xplantdad]

Great stuff Verne! I won't remember it in about five minutes...but great stuff anyways! http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Bill Pritchard]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I get carried away.... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you do.....and we love every word of it http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif Thanks!

[BUIZILLA]

I've got a pair of heads, tri power intake and carbs and been trying to figure out what I have... I also have a block and crank.

[ORIGLS6]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I get carried away.... http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you do.....and we love every word of it http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif Thanks!

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beers.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/worship.gif

[Verne_Frantz]

Typical of most Chevy parts, the intake will have a casting date on top in front of the distributor; the heads will have casting #s and dates and so will the block. The block should also have an assembly date stamp and suffix code for it's original application. The 348-409 site is a good source to look up those numbers.
BTW, no 409 was ever produced with tri-power, although it could easily by installed on any engine with the small port heads.

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif

[indyjps]

I just heard about a '61 409 SS dual quad car in central Illinois, My uncle has known the guys for years and the owner never mentioned it until this summer and showed it to him. Owner bought it new, raced for a few years and has had it stored mid 70's, clutch went out and it was parked. Im trying to get more info but doubt I ever will.

[Verne_Frantz]

Get the cowl tag info and I might be able to tell you something about it.

Verne http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif