ID A REAL 440 6 PACK FROM THE 60S

[Jim Curnane]

Hi guys a freind has located an engine for my 69 charger the guy claims its a real 440 six pack motor I have researched old post on this forum and have not found much to help me id it. Is there any thing I should be looking for beside dates and casting numbers. I am not sure what year it is but its supposed to be late 60s I am looking at it soon

[dodgecharger-fan]

Hi and welcome.

For starters, it would have to be a 69 date code since the 6-pack/6-bbl was not available until mid-69. So, if you see anything other than 69 or later, then keep looking - or use it as a bargaining point to get your price down.

The other thing is - and this might not matter to you at all - that the 6-pack engine was not an option for the 69 Charger.

So, there's two ways to think about this, in my opinion:
A. it's cool to have a 6-pack in any Charger - then forge on and good luck to you. I'd do it too if I had the opportunity.
B. a date correct engine is cool in it's own right even if it's not a 6-pack engine. So maybe it's still worth getting but don't pay 6-pack prices for it.

Al that said, I've read different things about the difference between a 6-pack and non 6-pack engine and I'll be honest and tell you I'm no expert. So, I'll let the experts chime in on that. And those responses should help with tips to identify the engine...

[TylerCharger69]

I just learned something...i had no idea a 6-pack wasn't available in '69.

[Dodge Don]

The six pack was only available mid-69 on the A12 option Superbee and Roadrunner cars. The six pack was available in a Charger beginning in 1970.

A factory six pack engine block cannot be identified by any markings on the block...unless you can match the VIN sequence stamping to a real six pack car. The differences were primarily internal upgrades.

[dodgecharger-fan]

The differences were primarily internal upgrades.

That's what I was eluding to but just didn't have the specifics to make a confident statement. Thanks for addressing that.

[maxwellwedge]

Also, 69-1/2 motors pretty well had the same parts (rods, heads etc) as all other 440's in 69 except for minor differences in valve train and pistons and the obvious induction system. A 70 six-pack had the "six-Pack" rods and external balance harmonic balancer....although a lot of '70-up 375 horse (if not all) 440's had that stuff as well.

[hemigeno]

If the block doesn't have a VIN stamping with "9Axxxxxx" then it could never have been a 1969 6-pack engine.  There have been A12 blocks with late 1968 casting dates, but all of them would have engine assembly dates going from sometime in February '69 through June (?) or so.

Like Jim/maxwellwedge stated, there is no significance to being an ex-A12 engine block - unless you happen to own the chassis that matches that block's VIN.

[472 R/T SE]

How late in the year did '69 have the full VIN stamped?

[hemigeno]

How late in the year did '69 have the full VIN stamped?

I've seen St. Louis plant VINs fully stamped a couple of weeks into January '69, but I'm not sure about Hamtramck or the pertinent plant for A12 cars, Lynch Road.  They're probably not a whole lot different than St. Louis, but could vary by a few weeks.

[Musicman]

I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time), but I read somewhere that the 6-paks were stamped with an "HP2" on the pad. 

[Blown70]

I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time), but I believe the 6-paks were stamped with an "HP2" on the pad. 

I had thought that too, however, I was informed that was NOT the case in not such a nice fasion..... but they too could have been wrong.... I personally dont care if its HP or HP2.... not as much into the numbers game myself.

[maxwellwedge]

HP and HP2 are the same - the 2 denoted 2nd shift. Now if someone showed me an HP3 I would be impressed!

[Dodge Don]

HP and HP2 are the same - the 2 denoted 2nd shift.

Correct. The old books and magazines back in the 70's/early 80's perpetuated that myth before the science of Mopars was better understood.

[472 R/T SE]

Hi guys a freind has located an engine for my 69 charger the guy claims its a real 440 six pack motor I have researched old post on this forum and have not found much to help me id it. Is there any thing I should be looking for beside dates and casting numbers. I am not sure what year it is but its supposed to be late 60s I am looking at it soon

I would take whatever numbers are stamped on the rail & run them by Dave at the A12 Registry.  If it's "A REAL 440 6 PACK FROM THE 60S", it's one of 1000 or so.  You might be able to make someone very happy.
Also the casting dates should be pretty late.

[69CoronetRT]

Also, 69-1/2 motors pretty well had the same parts (rods, heads etc) as all other 440's in 69 except for minor differences in valve train and pistons and the obvious induction system. A 70 six-pack had the "six-Pack" rods and external balance harmonic balancer....although a lot of '70-up 375 horse (if not all) 440's had that stuff as well.

This may help identify the parts that were different between a 69 6bbl car and a normal 440 HP engine.

For 1970, the 'six pack rods' were found in 4 and 6bbl HP 440's while the non HP 440-4 used a different rod.

[hemigeno]

Also, 69-1/2 motors pretty well had the same parts (rods, heads etc) as all other 440's in 69 except for minor differences in valve train and pistons and the obvious induction system. A 70 six-pack had the "six-Pack" rods and external balance harmonic balancer....although a lot of '70-up 375 horse (if not all) 440's had that stuff as well.

This may help identify the parts that were different between a 69 6bbl car and a normal 440 HP engine.

For 1970, the 'six pack rods' were found in 4 and 6bbl HP 440's while the non HP 440-4 used a different rod.

One thing to add to the (very cool) list that Doug just posted, is that even though a different part number is listed for the connecting rod, they were the same as a regular or HP 440 except for the fact that they were magnafluxed to ensure no inherent deficiencies in the parts.

[Ghoste]

So ALL 1970 and 71 440 high performance rods are the heavier ones?  (that is correct no, the so called six pack rods were heavier?)

[hemigeno]

To my knowledge, that's the case.  Non-HP 70-71 engines still received the lighter 2406770 used in the entire '69 440 lineup.  70-71 HP engines, whether 4bbl or 6bbl used the heavier 2951906 conrod, commonly called the 6-pack rod.

[Ghoste]

Does it follow then they all received the same crank and damper for 70-71? (69 too for that matter)

[hemigeno]

Does it follow then they all received the same crank and damper for 70-71? (69 too for that matter)

Don't hold me to this, as it's been a while since I plowed through the intricacies of the 69.5 6-pack engines, but I think the "6-pack" cranks were essentially the same as any other 440 crank - with the caveat that the 3512036 '69 6-pack cranks were to have been shot-peened.  1970-71 6-pack 440 cranks show the same 3512036 part number in the parts book as the 1969 6-pack cranks, and you'd think that means they too were essentially "regular" 440 cranks that had just been shot-peened.  For 69-71, the 440 HP and non-HP engines received the same 2536983 crank. 

Vibration dampners were a slightly different story, as the 69.5 6-pack engines got the same 2658457 dampner as the other HP and non-HP 440s.  '70-71 dampners on non-HP engines got the same 2658457 as the '69 & earlier piece, where as the HP 440s (which all got the heavier connecting rods, don't forget) received a 3512017 dampner.  I don't have any comparison photos to post, but for some reason I remember seeing a Moparts thread years ago with some good side-by-side shots.

[Jim Curnane]

Hi Thanks guys for all the replys I am waiting to see it I will post any info when I get it.

[Musicman]

HP and HP2 are the same - the 2 denoted 2nd shift. Now if someone showed me an HP3 I would be impressed!

If that's true then where are the HP1 & HP3 blocks, and why would you need to stamp the shift on the pad... every block has a "Shift Clock" on it already? I guess you would need to ask the experts over a 6-Pack / 6 barrel.

[Blown70]

HP and HP2 are the same - the 2 denoted 2nd shift. Now if someone showed me an HP3 I would be impressed!

If that's true then where are the HP1 & HP3 blocks, and why would you need to stamp the shift on the pad... every block has a "Shift Clock" on it already? I guess you would need to ask the experts over a 6-Pack / 6 barrel.

I think the Assumption is that HP did not need the 1, HP2 just for the second shift.  I don't know if they ran a third shift or noted that IF they did.

I have had two "regular" HP, both just had the HP stamp
I have had two "six pack) motors, both were HP stamps,  SURE this is conincidence

[hemigeno]

HP and HP2 are the same - the 2 denoted 2nd shift. Now if someone showed me an HP3 I would be impressed!

If that's true then where are the HP1 & HP3 blocks, and why would you need to stamp the shift on the pad... every block has a "Shift Clock" on it already? I guess you would need to ask the experts over a 6-Pack / 6 barrel.

There is no correlation between the Shift Clock cast on the block and which shift the block machining work was performed.  Often, several months or longer would pass between the casting date and the machining date - and the latter is the reference point for the ID pad stampings.

Oh, and no one that I know of has seen an HP3 stamping (if there is one, it's probably a mistake) - maxwellwedge was being a bit facetious there. 
HP = first shift
HP2 = second shift

This isn't something that we've just made up - there is official Chrysler paperwork to show this very thing.  See the red box highlighted below, taken from my 1969 TSB book:

[Musicman]

Thanks guys 

Black and White is always better than rumor