Tell me EXACTLY which part of what I wrote is opinion? I have a RAIV cam in my 77 400 with 5C heads. Is it a RA IV motor?

Give me a break.

If you have correct cam, heads and exhaust with correct carb and intake, yes, many builders will call it a "Ram Air Pontiac motor".

Yea, Jim, Edelbrock is on your side all right...More like you are on Edelbrock's side copying a proven design GM developed 40 years ago. It was the port design and the availability of the exhaust or headers to bolt up as to why Edelbrock designed them. Maybe you should have read that article in HPP about 10 years back.

But of course we strayed away from the TRUE issue which is the 348/611. Because that happened leads me to believe what I, StealthBird and Vikki asserted must have some purchase (validity).

Glad to give you guys some 'validation' any time I can....

And for the sake of correctness for anyone reading this, the Edelbrocks(RPM) still have the round port design which still has limited exhaust applications....

There is nothing "limited" about round port exhaust applications. Either buy original long branch round ports or R.A.R.E. modified reproductions or round port headers. Those are the same choices you have with D port, other than the low performance log manifolds. As for E-heads, it seems there should be some applications by now.

Nowhere in this thread did anyone question the improved design of the 1969 RA IV. It, like the 1968 RA II, was built with more performance in mind.

The 1969 "Ram Air package" was a toy to add to a 400 HO, which offered not much more than the standard 400 4bbl. It's not a "Ram Air Engine" by any performance benchmarks. Go back and read some road tests of the era.


None.

I own a set of Edelbrocks ported by Kauffman. I also owned a set of RAIV 722's and RAII 96's.Edelbrocks ARE NOT round ports as a RA II or IV. They are square with a convex roof.

http://i3.ebayimg.com/08/i/000/cc/e3/9f5e_1.JPG

Here is a "true" example of a round port head..exhaust ports are the SAME as a RAIV, chamber size is different as well as the spring pad depth.

http://i11.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/ce/7d/30ef_12.JPG

The exhaust ports with the RA II AND IV are different than the Edelbrocks. Edelbrocks also used 1.66 exhaust valves in their RPM head.

Now that you people have strayed, do I get validation too? LOL

And I'll let you know how the Edelbrocks(RA IV) perform....in the spring. So far, they like 93 octane fuel...

Mine made 618 HP and pushed my car to 10.20's.

Let's get back to the topic which is 69 Ram Air 3 W/O Inlet.

This thread has been 99% off topic and just opinion. The only real 'on topic' have been the invoices and the owner of the one.

99% opinion? Oh, yeah, I suppose by the post tally that you did make the majority of the posts.

+1

Oh yeah. I always lose somehow with you guys.... It seems to be your major goal.

See page 13 (printed number), top of page. That's page 14 on the scrollbar.

http://thefirstgensite.com/library/69pontiacoptions/69pontiacoptions.swf

Looks like that ends the RAIII debate.

RPO code 348 (69 Firebird 400 HO) with RPO code 611 (ram air induction) IS NOT a RAIII..It is a PERFORMANCE OPTION.

Standard on RAIV, available on GTO and Firebird 400 models...either the RPO code 345 W66 400 or the code 348 L74 400 HO.

So is a "RA III" a 400 (345) or a 400 (348) HO?

L67 was the ONLY engine option available for the first design (67 and 68) with ram air induction AND without necessitating adding/including the 611 RPO option code on the billing history or PHS.. If you look at 67 and 68 (and 69) L67's were all ram air 400 cars WITH ram air induction. The RPO codes for 67 and 68 with ram air INCLUDED the "hot iron" hopped up motor AND the ram air induction (open scoops/pans).

The RAIV L67 was the ONLY engine in 1969 to include the SAME package (as in 67 and 68-L67).

Without the addition or designation of R/A 400 WITH L67 in the billing history, with or without the 611 is nothing more than a 1969 HO.

I guess that depends on what RPO code is on the billing history... Any "R/A" on a billing history, without the RPO 347 (L67) is not a true Ram Air car. If you look at the 67 and 8 models, RA, RAI and RAII were L67 designations...As well the 1969 L67.

Case closed.

It's a compelling argument. But an unpopular one. And it will not be well accepted among the 348+611 owners. Let alone the 400R/A without 611 owners. I doubt you will ever convince an owner with an 400R/A invoice or a R/A Inlet invoice that their cars are not R/A. Regardless, the values are the same either way.

Same either way? Not really...

A 348 1969 400 HO with original ram air pans and scoops ($2000-3000) will sell for more than a 348 coded 400 HO without.

What is compelling is that the car, whichever way you slice it IS NOT a RA III car based on everything I have stated on the L67 production designator code.

One can claim, based on the "billing" that it is a R/A car, but in reality, it is not.

Remember what was said about internal motor differences between the 67 RA, 68 RAI, 69 HO and the 69 Firebird "RAIII"? There is no performance or internal engine difference between the 68 HO, 69 HO and 69 HO or "RAIII" with 611.

The people who claim to have "R/A III's" are the losers and unhappy with this because they were DUPED into buying a 1969 Firebird HO (which was claimed to be a "RAIII") for $45k. When they could have bought a 1969 HO for $20k and the pans and scoops for an additional $2-3k and have had EXACTLY THE SAME CAR ecxept for the billing history.

A 1969 Firebird HO with 611 ram air pans is no different performance wise than a 68 HO, 69 HO or a 69 Trans AM RAIII (equally equipped w/same trans and rear gear)

I would bet anything of value that I own that if you ran (equally geared same trans) a 68 HO, a 69 HO, a 69 HO w/ram air package and a 69 Trans Am RAIII that the Trans AM would come in last and the first three, after 5 passes, mean value, would be exactly identical +/- a few percent.

You misunderstood. They have the same value whatever you decide is a real or true ram air car. People will buy what they want and pay what they want to pay regardless.

Banshee, I'm not sure why the Trans Am would come in last in your comparison? All things being equal, and granted we're talking FRACTIONS of a second here, but the 69 Trans Am would be the quickest. Better hood, better aerodynamics.

The 69 Trans Am was the best all around performance car Pontiac had made up to that point, only to be surpassed by the 70-up Trans Am's.

Nit picking, I know, but all things being equal in your example, the Trans Am would be the winner.

Base 69 Firebird 400 HO was 3455# wheras a mandated optioned 69 Trans am was 3700#.

That equals almost 3/10 of a second.

If comparing that across the board, weights versus available power and the same trans/rear, I am hard pressed to believe that in a 1/4 mile the aerodynamics would have any appreciable effect other than aesthetic.

Remember that the 69 HO 69 HO with 611 and the 69 T/A RAIII all had the same powerplant.

The weights would be nearly identical. The only thing that would be mandated on a Trans Am would be power brakes and power steering. Power brake booster adds 5 lbs, p/s pump and gearbox unit is 21 lbs heavier than a manual box. Adding 26 lbs to the engine area, and 9 lbs for a rear wing, The extra 35 lbs. is not going to be measurable on a dragstrip.

The aerodynamics of the 69 Trans Am were not cosmetic, they were functional. The front spoiler would add about 1-2 mph in the traps by keeping the nose down and air out from underneath the car, the side air extractors would relieve underhood pressure, and the front/rear wing combo would push about 75 lbs of downforce on the suspension at 100 mph, lowering the car about 1 inch through the traps. On top of that, the larger hood scoop openings, placed at the leading edge of the hood on the 69 T/A, pulled in far more air than the small scoops in the middle of the 67-69 hood.

Like I said, it's nit-picking, because I know your point was really about the engines, but in the scenario you listed above, the 69 Trans Am would win at the dragstrip. In fact, it would also win at the Bonneville Salt Flats, and on a road course.

BTW, I don't own a 69 T/A, but I recently got into an argument on another site with a GTO Judge owner that thought the 69 Trans Am was "cosmetic", as in nothing more a "wing and a set of stripes". So I corrected him ("Defender of the Firebird" that I am) saying that in fact it was The Judge that was actually a cosmetic package, while the 69 Trans Am was a true performance car.

Could you locate and post a few E.T.'s and 1/4 mile times for the 68 HO, 69 HO and 69 Trans Am? Of course not solid proofs, but ideally.

From what I have read in the past, according to Hot Rod and Car Craft (and from some GM paliterature) the 68 HO was faster than the others. I have yet to locate and RAI or II independant tests of non modified cars (Royal/Myrtle)

1968 Firebird 13.79@106 400 HO 335 four-speed HotRod 3/68
1970 Trans Am 13.90@102 400 RA 345 four-speed 3.91 HotRod 2/70

And the weights were base AMA specs for the 69 HO and the T/A..Not my figures.

I actually wrote a book (unpublished) on Pontiac road tests, about 180 pages worth. Back in 1999, I had a very primitive web page (it's still out there somewhere) with some summaries of a few of the more noteworthy road tests. The problem with original road tests is that there was no consistency between them. Weather conditions, driver ability, etc. all contributed to wildly varying times. Sometimes the same car was tested by 2 different magazines, and et's varied by half a second.

On point.

So how then can anyone conclude that an equally prepped 69 HO, 69 HO with ram air induction and a 69 RA III Trans Am be any faster or slower? (same engine, trans ratios and rear gear ratio)

All one needs is to compute the equation of mass/torque/gear ratio/hp and distance to estimate what a given car could do.

Like you said, too many variables to difinatively conclude any test.

Banshee, you had stated earlier that in this particular shootout, the Trans Am would lose. My point was that in a perfect world, all variables taken into account, you feed the hp/torque numbers through a simulator, everything is absolutely identical, then the car with better aerodynamics wins, and that would be the 69 Trans Am. If you yank these engines (400HO, 400HO with Ram Air, and 69 Trans Am) and place them on a dyno, they would be identical (Ram Air ain't gonna do squat on a dyno).

You can use the old formula (mass,torque,gear ratio,hp,distance) to calculate the et, and get the same et's for two identical powertrains. But installing those two identical engines in a 3,400 lb 57 Chevy verses a 3,400 lb. 71 Corvette would have dramatically different results at the dragstrip due to aerodynamic differences.

So all I was saying was that all things being equal (in your scenario), is that the 69 Trans Am would be the winner, not the loser.

In a perfect world, and according to GM specs, the Trans Am is 250 pounds heavier than a Firebird 400. I believe that nullifies the 2-3 mph that the Trans Am would have gained. You have the SAME motor, nothing extra. Sure the aerodynamics will assist, but there has to be accountability for the added weight. I am quoting GM's T/A and Firebird 400 weight figures.

2.5 to 3/10th's of a second en ET is close to or nullifying any aerodynamic advantage in the 1/4 mile. Longer distances, maybe.

Well, using AMA specs to determine vehicle weights is like using the manufacturers advertised hp figures ro compare Car(A) to Car(B). The manufacturers fudged the weights just as they did the hp figures to suit their needs.

The reason they show the 69 Trans Am being 250 lbs heavier is actually quite simple.

The 69 Firebird 400 weighed 3455 lbs. Top engine was the RAIV. In keeping with the GM corporate policy of 10lbs/1hp, they grossly underrated the RAIV at 345 hp.

The 69 Trans Am was supposed to receive the new RAV engine (as an option), which would have been rated at 370 hp in the Firebird, so Pontiac pushed the Trans Am weight up to 3700 lbs. to stay within corporate policy of 10lbs/1hp. The Trans Am never saw the RAV, the AMA specs remained.

There's absolutely no way a base 69 Trans Am could weigh 250 lbs more than a base Firebird 400. The 31 lbs. I listed earlier for p/s, p/s box, and rear wing are all that are different. If we REALLY want to nit-pick....

- The Trans Am side air extractors may add 1 lb
- The Trans Am front spoiler (rubberized plastic) may add 1 lb
- The Trans Am's thicker front sway bar may add 1 lb over the standard Firebird 400's.

Banshee, look at the 69 AMA specs, see how much MAJOR items add to the weight of a 69 Bird. Add in a/c, p/s, Turbo 400 trans, and maybe power windows (which most would consider "fully loaded"), and I'd bet it doesn't even equate to 200 lbs!

Now, for argument's sake, 69 Trans Am's DID come standard with posi-traction, which DOES add approximately 30 lbs, so at the very most, I could see a 61 lb. difference in the Trans Am. But try racing a Firebird 400HO or 400 Ram Air without posi, and I'll take the extra 30 lbs.

Good point. Traction is an important factor in the quarter mile. Does the 67 with factory traction bars hook up better than the 68 and 69 without?

O.K. I concede.

Would there be any major differences in the weight of the hoods?

FWIW, I've gained a lot of weight since 1969.

Having owned both(stock factory) at the same time(77-83), i can say definitely yes.
67(40k miles) 400-4 spd/3.36's got much better traction then my 68(68k miles)-400 a/t-3.23's.
The 67 would pull clear over center line dump'n the clutch off the line though. Leave tire marks though 1st, some 2nd and 3rd, and chirp 4th.
The 68 just smoked the tires.
Both had G60-14 goodyears.

I just saw this video on youtube with a full optioned 69 Firebird convertible. You might want to see when they zoom in on the PHS document, around 1.50 in the movie. It says:
* 348 F/B 400 HO
* 611 HD R/A INLET (I think, it is a bit blurry)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0c6kagoPtw

Ronnie Stensson
Sweden

Thanks for posting that up. I agree, that is one that today would be called a Ram Air III, but at the time was built as a 400HO with Ram Air hood option since the Ram Air III nickname did not exist.

The guy who owns that car also has a HT in similar condition 4 speed and every part is factory original or NOS. Both are very special cars and absolutely stunning.