Jump to content


AOAI Forum Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

VtMike's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges



  1. Not my cup of tea . . . especially the rear end treatment . . .
  2. Like the color, etc, and would be interested if not for those darn painted bumpers . . . too bad, but I guess there is no way to change them . . .
  3. Today I was surfing around the 'net and came across an article from the Pressreader dated July 19, 2018. It can be found here: https://www.pressreader.com/australia/unique-cars/20180719/282737702601107 The thing that caught my attention was that the writer claimed the R3 engine was available in two versions, and the second one had two 4 bbl carbs inside the Air Box and something like 430 hp. I know I am new 'round here but I never heard of this alleged dual carb version of the R3. Is this guy telling the truth? While I am asking questions, I will ask another one: I read somewhere that, when Andy Granetelli (sp?) built the R3 that Hot Rod magazine tested back in the early days, he didn't build it the way factory R3s were built. He did increase the engine from 289 to 299 cubic inches, but he did that by stroking the engine rather than boring it out. The suggestion in the article was that a stroked 289 would have more torque than one that was bored out, and Andy wanted Hot Rod to test an R3 that would perform as well as possible in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile tests. The article also suggested that such shenanigans weren't atypical of the time, and said GM provided Hot Rod with a 421 powered GTO rather than the factory 389. Sure enough, the Hot Rod mag GTO outperformed any stock GTO every built. So, anyway, I was wondering whether stroking a 289 to 299 was something that anyone else has done, and whether that is a practical approach to gaining more performance? Mike
  • Create New...