Operation install or have side draft carbs on 66 dart 235 cu. slant

get away from existing intake and exhaust... Had two side drafts on my 70 VW Karman.... It was easier to dial up with unisenc now need to install on my 66 Dodge Dart Wagon!

 

SU carbs? Or Webers? I vote for Webers. You cannot get two Englishmen to agree on what oil is best for an SU damper.

 

I wouldn't bother what Englishmen are still left, with such questions. Nowadays, they have real big existential problems, as it is.
The oil should be similar to that used in motorcycle forks and automotive shock absorbers, in that it shouldn't change viscosity, throughout seasonal temperature change. There are special oils available which are even tailored for either winter or summer. Of which the latter would be best. Since anything which would ward off temptation to winter driving would be best for the car.
I had one of those SUs on my Morris 1800 and two of them on my TR3. Both cars ran impecable with them, since they're strictly vacuum-operated. I couldn't ask for better drivability, except until fuel injection happened along. I would rate the SUs somewhere between downdraught and fuel injection. Even, Mercedes, Volvo and Saab were using them, without complaints. I found the Weber on my Honda civic to be fussier, since it was an on demand carburetor which needs to be paired up meticulously to what you'll be using for headers and camshaft.
I don't understand the poll. Evidently, nobody else did either. Otherwise, they would have voted

 

https://www.shop.cliffordperformance.net/Mopar-225_c8.htm

 

The big name in aftermarket intakes for the slant six is Clifford. Hooks the engine up with a fairly small 4-barrel. Another route, but fairly rare and pricey, is a long-ram factory manifold. Good luck finding one, though.

Here's the Clifford setup:


Here's the factory long-ram, I think. They called it the 'Hyper-Pak'


TRIPLE Webers!

 

I'd go with the Long Ram. You'll get plenty of low end torque, when you combine that with headers. Those Webers work at a different power band. For using them, you'd have to get a rough idling cam grind, in order to compensate for not having either larger- or multiple valves. The Long Ram is simpler and dependable for every day use

 

The limiting factor on this engine is the head.
I love this engine and have stories to tell about it's durability but at the end of the day it's a dinosaur, not even a cross flow head.
Multiple carbs will look neat and have better fuel distribution v. a single carb but unless some other work is done internally will only be window dressing, harder to tune and vastly more expensive window dressing.
Multiple SUs? Kill me now.

 

The only solution would be to cast a dual cam aluminum cross-flow head. In order to make such a project feasable, there would have to be enough Slant Six owners left for dividing development costs. Club members of an old rear-engined NSU once pitched in for CNC reproducing an extinct oil pan for these. But, that's something elementary, compared to designing a new cylinder head. If Chrysler had contracted Cosworth for this, way back when this engine was still manufactured, we wouldn't now be debating on how to deal with this relic. There's plöenty of room for an exhaust header, on the right side and a camshaft-driven distributor on the head would save plenty of cussing, during a tune-up

 

Cosworth would have had a good laugh at this engine but perhaps still cashed the check.
Even if they did make it breath it is still has under square dimensions better suited to agricultural implements than high performance.
They are tough little buggers though.
So, where is the OP?

 

Anyone ever compare the bore spacing on the Slant Six vs. something like a BMW inline six? The head might be a closer fit than you think.

 

Also a slant six. And even if you can't adapt the head, there's your induction system for the Chrysler.

 

It would be much easier to just drop in a 4.5 liter BMW slant six from the 745 Turbo

 

I’m a big BMW fan. Every time I’ve worked on one it’s has been surprisingly easy and efficiently designed. I can’t speak for all of them just the few. One example Off the top of my head is the ingnition coils on a...I don’t early 2000’s? You just undo a clip and then bend the whole thing back like resetting a breaker and it not only releases the coil but kind of lifts it out. BRILLIANT! I did a transmission swap on one and the most difficult part was the puzzle of a heat shield which I THINK...covered the driveshaft as well. That last part might be completely made up

 

And what continent of Bizzaro Planet do you hail from?

I've found that newer Beemers have more stupid problems pertaining to driveability, emissions and engine cooling than I can shake a stick at. Once, I had to chase down a 'random misfire' within the first 500 revolutions. Turns out, three of six coils required replacement to solve the problem. Sorry, but that's bad engineering in my book. An old 2002 VAF dial-in is easier than the diagnosis on that crap.

 

The older ones like that one pictured were indeed super easy and reliable, as Grizz wrote. I was a mechanic at a BMW dealer, for a short while, and there's nothing difficult on any of the older ones that I had to encounter. Audis were only relatively easy, just after VW had bought them and started dropping their own drivetrains into them (The Fox model and even the bigger ones with longitudinally-mounted engines). This was short-lived, though, and Audi went back into making things difficult to get at again. Nowadays, the only new car I would think of owning would have to be electric-powered