This one is for you MOPAR gurus out there... I am planning on upgrading an unmolested '61 Imperial, equipped with the tired original 413 & cast iron push-button auto. I would really appreciate some input regarding things I may not be expecting (large or small). Scroll down for the broad strokes of my plan. Thanks in advance. Here is a picture of the subject vehicle: Here's what I want to do: Swap in (and detail to look original) a '67 440 from a 69k mile Imperial that I have on a stand. Swap in a '63 727 torqueflight (aluminum, pushbutton with a park lever) from a complete Imperial parts car that I own. Swap in a later 8 3/4" rear from a '66 Imperial that I have, in order to get away from the stupid early axles with shims & tapered keyways. Here's what I think I will run into: I expect numerous large & small items will have to be swapped from the original engine for mounting, as well as the exhaust manifolds, etc. I expect some fabrication will be required to mount the later transmission, but maybe not. I plan to use the '63 converter/flange/linkage, etc. I also expect that the shifter cable connection will be relatively easy to adapt. I plan to attach the park lever/cable control to a separate control cable. The differential has the same suspension (spring & link) connections as the earlier car, as the frames were close to identical. I will have to adapt the later style parking brake cables up to the original pedal, but that should just take some head scratching. The differential & carrier bearing assembly will likely need to be modified, but the one in the '61 has been rebuilt, and I have a good original still in the '63 as well as an extra on the bench. Should be enough parts to work with.
I do not think it will be to hard , with having all the parts cars on hand. If the 61 is a lever type park you should have no problem .The kick down linkage from the donor car will bolt right up.
If it's unmolested, is everything working ok now? From that one picture it looks to be in fantastic shape. I haven't seen one in years and wouldn't think of changing anything if it's ok or repairs keeping original as possible. I like it better as is! Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk
That is the main difference. '62 was the 1st year of the modern style 727. Either '62 or '63 was the 1st year for the cable operated park selector. I will not be swapping that mechanism to the interior of the '61. Either the existing e-brake pedal or a relatively disguised cable will actuate the park selector (if at all). The whole thing seems easy, right?? Thanks for your comments! Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Well, the 413 purrs but it is VERY tired, and has at least one burnt valve. I saw & heard the donor 440 run, and it is very tight and crisp...not to mention it will be indistinguishable to the average looker. The cast iron transmission has been rebuilt twice, and has a history of being a major leaker with inactivity. Again, a change none will notice & will really help long term enjoyment. The rear ends thru '64 are tough to deal with, IF you can find someone who knows how to shim the axles. By swapping in a physically identical (but more modern) version, parts are more readily available & easily serviced. What I didn't mention is the front disc brake kit that I have for it, as well as the plan to change over to a Vintage Air set-up. We got the '61 from the original owner's estate almost 35 years ago. This car is family, but I want it to be the best version I am able to make it. Thanks for the comments. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Do not fear the front u-joint (ball and trunyon) . They were used on Super Stock cars with no problem of breakage.
I know that this info isn't in your questions but may help to give some extra options if need be..........I have a 1962 Oz Chrysler 318 Poly and an originally push button cast iron torqueflite attached to it.........after putting up with the push button assembly for a couple of yrs I installed a late 60's Oz Valiant Console and shifter that I modified to accept the push button cable.........all that was required was to sit the cable against the area where the movement of the cable to select the various gears and neutral postion was then fabricate a couple of brackets and mount a pin on the spot of the shifter that was above the shifters pivot and the shifter as pictured operates the cable.............I have made a quadrant that the spring loaded button operates thru and it has worked fine for the past 45 yrs........of course the gearbox still doesn't have a "Park"the shifter does still show that spot but it works o/k for me..........dunno if this helps at all.........and yep......the cast iron Torqueflites do have a tendency to mark their territory...........lol..........andyd.
Everything looks great, except the passenger has to do all the work. Move all that stuff over to the other side! Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk
Great looking adaptation. Though I am sticking with the original dash controls, it's encouraging to know that the units accept modifications without too much complaining.
Good to know, and thanks for the info. the u-joint I use will most likely come down to which one works with the final combo. Likely out of the '63 parts car. Thanks for your input.
About the only one I can share right now...totally rust free, lots of paint touch ups from bruises by the original owner, but an honest car that has been in the family forever. It sure fills up my 20' trailer... Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
If you can, I'd love to see more photos of the car, out & inside. My assumption was that Imperial was Chryslers top of the line. My Granddad had an 1959 Imperial. My thought is how much and how far will you drive it? If just to local shows, etc., I would still want it original as possible. As time goes on you see fewer original examples of all cars in general. Please no offence to anyone but at any car show I gravitate towards the different, original ones. Last year my wife sold her parents home they bought brand new 1932. We walked through after new owner completely renovated it, "nicer"(?)...but nothing 1932. Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk
I understand your POV, but please understand my intent here. I intend to drive this (as my Dad did when I was a kid). While slightly more modern components are being swapped in, the appearance will remain virtually identical to a 100% stocker. I am also installing a front disc brake kit, and make no apologies for it. I have personally done the brakes on this car twice in my life, as well as on our '59, my '62, and a friends '64. The cast iron transmission, drum brakes, etc. do not like intermittent use. It will look, sound, and feel like a stock example. The components will make this a more trouble-free, serviceable car both for myself & hopefully my kids to enjoy (or whoever ultimately ends up with it). I appreciate your comments, but the benefits of these modifications are acceptable concessions to strict originality, as far as I am concerned.
Just came across this thread. I have a 61 Imperial and a 727 with park brake drum out of a 63. How was the swap? Did you come across anything you weren't expecting?
Ultimately, what I have decided to do (and am in process on) is a bit of a departure from what I had originally planned. I am rebuilding the '67 440, but but am using an early 8-bolt RB crankshaft to facilitate the use of the original transmission in my '61. Ultimately, I decided that keeping the (good, already rebuilt original) transmission would save a ton of unnecessary work & adaptation. I did buy a '66 Imperial 8 3/4 rear end, which has the same suspension mounts but will get rid of the tapered axle/keyway set up of the early rear end. It's a work in process, but I am currently balls deep on the engine rebuild. Sent from my SM-G970U using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
I ended up selling the first '67 440 to someone who wanted it way more than I did, then I bought yet another running '67 440 from a New Yorker...then realized it wasn't as good as it appeared. It's getting a complete rebuild with the early crank. I'll never have to think about it again, I hope. (By "not as good as it appeared", the rear main had spun on the crank AND in the block, destroying the rear main journal. Wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it. So now it has '67 heads & a '68 block). Sent from my SM-G970U using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
The Jalopy Journal
