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 )

Plymouth 301
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forward Look Technical Discussions -> General Technical Discussion and TroubleshootingMessage format
 
Kenny J.
Posted 2008-03-21 11:02 AM (#121482)
Subject: Plymouth 301



Inactive by user's request

50001000
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada		I was looking over the Plymouth 301 engine which graces our back patio.

I was trying to find the rationale for this one year only displacement of the A engine.

I was wondering if it was a case of logistics......................Chrysler Corporation had leftover 277 cranks and simply used up inventory by installing 277 cranks into 318 blocks.

Does anybody know why Plymouth just didn't make the jump from 277 to 318 in 1957?

K.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
dukeboy
Posted 2008-03-21 12:07 PM (#121491 - in reply to #121482)
Subject: RE: Plymouth 301



Expert 5K+

Posts: 6203
50001000100100
Location: Big pimpin'		By that logic, why would Chevy build a 327 Chevy by installing a 283 crank in a 350 block?
(327 same bore as 350)....

Why would chevy build a 302 C.I. Small block?
Why would Chevy build a 427 using 396 Crank in 454 block?

I think they just needed some hot rodder to tell 'em that "Hey! we can get about 318 C.I. out of this thing, IF we retool the crank for more stroke"........

My only wish would be that Chrysler had realized that they needed a 440 back in 1962, and by the late 60's, we'd have had a 500 C.I. engine....
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Kenny J.
Posted 2008-03-21 9:59 PM (#121593 - in reply to #121491)
Subject: RE: Plymouth 301



Inactive by user's request

50001000
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada		I guess I was wrong. There is such a thing as a stupid question.

K.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
dukeboy
Posted 2008-03-22 1:35 AM (#121616 - in reply to #121593)
Subject: RE: Plymouth 301



Expert 5K+

Posts: 6203
50001000100100
Location: Big pimpin'		Nah, I often wondered the same thing Kenny....Some feel that the reason was that They (Chrysler) needed a "Base" engine and they did use up all the 277 cranks for this "Base" engine...The 318 was availible in '57 in the Fury I think...
Top of the page Bottom of the page
MOPAR-TO-YA
Posted 2008-03-21 5:29 PM (#121554 - in reply to #121482)
Subject: Re: Plymouth 301


Expert 5K+

Posts: 5139
500010025
Location: cornpatch county, Southwest IOA		Don't know what year a mopar 301 is , but I can tell you that Chebby came out with the 302 cu in. Z 28 engine ( I think a 283 crank in a 327 engine) to comply with a cu inch restiction in some racing rules. . Seems like that was also the reason behind the Mopar 340....................................MO
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mopar1
Posted 2008-03-21 5:48 PM (#121558 - in reply to #121554)
Subject: Re: Plymouth 301



Expert

Posts: 3033
2000100025
Location: N.W. Fla.
MOPAR-TO-YA - 2008-03-21 4:29 PM

Don't know what year a mopar 301 is , but I can tell you that Chebby came out with the 302 cu in. Z 28 engine ( I think a 283 crank in a 327 engine) to comply with a cu inch restiction in some racing rules. . Seems like that was also the reason behind the Mopar 340....................................MO
301 is '57. The Brand X 302 was a result of Trans Am racing engine size.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
57belvedere
Posted 2008-03-22 6:14 AM (#121635 - in reply to #121482)
Subject: RE: Plymouth 301



Extreme Veteran

Posts: 406
100100100100
Location: Voss,Norway		The Plymouth 301 replaced the 277 in 1957. It was a 299.6 in³ (4.9 L) engine with a larger 3.91” (99 mm) bore. Note that these dimensions are entirely different from the 1955 Chrysler 301.

Also heard rumors that they couldnt call the engine 300 cause it shouldnt get compared to the chrysler 300.



Top of the page Bottom of the page
Kenny J.
Posted 2008-03-22 9:53 AM (#121645 - in reply to #121635)
Subject: RE: Plymouth 301



Inactive by user's request

50001000
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada		Was the 301 a mid-year 277 replacement? Or was 277 and 301 production concurrent for a while?

K.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
57belvedere
Posted 2008-03-22 4:06 PM (#121691 - in reply to #121482)
Subject: Re: Plymouth 301



Extreme Veteran

Posts: 406
100100100100
Location: Voss,Norway		According to this allpar site the 301 replaced the 277 completly for the 1957 models.
Take a look.

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/a-engines.html


Top of the page Bottom of the page
chrycoman2
Posted 2008-03-25 6:16 PM (#122277 - in reply to #121691)
Subject: Re: Plymouth 301


Member

Posts: 14

The 277 engine was the base V8 engine for the 1957 Plymouth Plaza and Savoy. The 301 was the base engine for the Belvedere and optional on the Plaza and Savoy. It was not uncommon in those days to have the cheaper series use a smaller engine.

Similarly, increases in engine sizes were done gradually from year to year.

Although the chart on the right side of the Allpar web site shows the 301 as a 1956 only engine, the second chart, placed in the centre of the discussion, show the 301 as available for 1957. The 318 was a Fury-only engine in 1957, just as the 303 was in 1956. Just added a little extra for the money.

Bill
Vancouver, BC
Top of the page Bottom of the 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)