The tiny air passages very often get plugged with carbon, so there is a good chance the passage is just full of carbon on your head. THe only purpose a hole was ever put in the head at that location was for air injection into the exhaust stream. Get the heat hot tanked and the passages and ports might reappear. They are quite small.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

But.... BUT... I do not want extra holes in my head.

Unfortunately, you already have them. Ignore them at your peril.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

There is not really a good reason not to plug or cap it. Maybe a $.60 plug?

_________________
2 Mopars come with Spark plug tubes. One is a world class, racing machine. The other is a 426 CI. boat anchor!

12.70 @ 104.6

I do intend to cap it off with a cover plate, sealer and bolt just to keep the crud and insect nests out of it.

I can tell you this:
The engine still had all its original accessories on it including alternator, PS pump and AC compressor and brackets and there was not an air pump, bracket or pipe which would normally be mounted to the AC compressor mounted on the water pump bolts.

If there was an air pump on this engine then; somebody removed it a long time ago including the brackets and air pipe on head and left the port wide open with no carbon in the port from what was likely a smoking engine due to cracked and broken valve seals.

Thank you all for the assistance. I do believe this probably is a 1975 engine.

I will start a new thread about the slant six test stand as more work is completed.

Kindest regards; Scorch.

_________________
Scorch G.D.

It might not necessarily ever have had an air pump. There was also the aspirator-type air injection setup, which had no pump involved—just a hose, with a check valve in, running from the clean side of the air cleaner to that port at the rear of the head.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Well; what can I say?

There is no accounting for what goes on in the minds of design engineers who "fix" things that are not broken.
Such as: Replace cheap, reliable mechanical controls with expensive, sensitive, unreliable and very complicated computer boards that do exactly the same thing.

Kindest regards;

_________________
Scorch G.D.

Well, except for three things:

• The air aspirator system was equally mechanical but cheaper than the air pump system, with fewer components to break and no belt drive (=more reliable), and it did not involve any computer boards.

• Many computer-controlled automotive systems are quite a lot simpler than the mechanical systems they replace. A fuel-injection system, for example, is a whole lot less complex than a carburetor. A whole lot more dependable, too; convenience stores have replaced service bays at almost all gasoline stations, because cars don't need tune-ups any more, they generally don't break down and leave us stuck roadside, and there are just about never any driveability faults to chase. All because of computerized systems, which…

• …work a whole lot better than the mechanical systems that went before, which is why cars no longer put out filthy exhaust and yet give us better-than-ever driveability, performance, and fuel economy for any given engine size.

Old cars aren't better than modern cars, by any objective measure; they never were. Some of them, like the Slant-6 Mopars we like on here, were unusually good in various ways compared to their competition at the time. If we're honest with ourselves, we like our oldies because we like them. That's fine; it's a plenty good enough reason. But let's not get carried away pretending the pinnacle of automotive engineering was in 1985 or 1975 or 1965 or whatever other time in the past.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I generally agree with Dan, but it is indisputable that automotive styling peaked in the period of 1958-1966. Anyone who has ever seen a 1961 Chrysler New Yorker, especially the instrument cluster, knows this to be true.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

Agreed. Of course; I was speaking in general terms regarding design engineering.

Kindest regards.

_________________
Scorch G.D.

Interesting collection of parts. That head was used from 1976 to 1979. The alternator bracket from 1960 to 1975. It looks like something I would but together from my parts stash.

Well, sometimes things do cross dates in manufacturing such as they were still using the 1975 bracket when assembly line started producing the 1976 vehicles and there are also special orders for fleet deals and whatnot.

IE: The 1969 dodge pickup I used to own was actually an earlier body style from 1966-1967 with round headlight doors.

It was sold to the city of Denver as a part of a maintenance fleet.
Was totally a 66-67 D100 with slant 6 and manual steering and looked like this example only with city park Yellow over forest Green paint BUT was VIN and TITLED as a 1969 vehicle.

_________________
Scorch G.D.

I am not responding to the thread in general, just to the meme... The engine on the left is a honda j35 v6 vtec engine without VCM. It was in odyssey 2002-2008?, ridgeline 2006-14, pilot 2003-2008, and maybe some of the acura side. Regardless of what the meme states that particular engine is every bit as reliable as a slant six. It is an engine that can absolutely do a consistent 300k miles with normal maintenance. T-belts every 100k or 8 years. Platinum plugs that never wear, at 200k they still have a normal 1.1mm gap. If you keep oil and coolant in the engine it will just run forever.

It is an engine that I would consider swapping into my valiant with a manual trans. Lightweight, compact, and decent power with NA 270 HP being easy and affordable.

I once saw one of those engines drive in WITHOUT A DRAIN PLUG off of the highway. His oil light came on so he drove it in. Not a drop of oil going highway speed with AC on in the 80+ summer heat. I personally installed a new drain plug, cleaned off the oil mess, and filled it up. That oil light went away and the engine ran fine. At this point you are all saying that the engine blew up 2 days later....nope. 10 years and 200k miles later he traded it in on a newer honda odyssey because it was burning oil and smoking at 285k miles.

I do enjoy the slant but some modern stuff is very good as well. I will say that the newer engines from brand H are far less durable than what they were in the 2005 era.

Against my better judgement, I'll respond to the memes, too:

• Everything mcnoople said, ×2.

• What exactly are we to pretend to have learnt about dependability, durability, or any other aspect of two engines by looking at pictures of them?

• Mechanics hate jobs that book out at numerous billable hours…?

• Modern starter motors last a long time. The starters themselves are better and more durable than they've ever been, and their job is easier than it's ever been; modern fuel-injected engines with modern oils start immediately every time, without any extended cranking. So the starter replacement job shown in this meme might happen once, but more likely zero times, in the life of a vehicle equipped with this engine.

• "Less complicated engineering that is inherently more reliable": Not necessarily, no. The complexity of a system is one of many factors that determine the reliability of the engine or car or whatever. Most "complicated engineering" has big benefits. My '14 Mazda has a 2.5-litre engine with 184 horsepower. It's zippy and zoomy and gives terrific fuel economy. It has 13:1 compression and runs well on regular 87 gasoline. I change the oil about once a year or 8,000 miles. It'll likely last well past my ownership of the car. Now take away all that "complicated engineering" and let's see if the magic still works. (it won't)

Yes, there are plenty of examples of needlessly-complex engineering that doesn't return much of any benefit to the user (VW-Audi, I'm looking in your direction, but GM, don't look so smug), but sweeping declarations that "complicated engineering" is putrid and yucky are just not on.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I created that meme and I have two of those Honda V-6 engines

One is packaged in my first generation 2004 Acura MDX SUV with 250k miles I bought after selling the 2006 Mercedes ML-350 SUV complete with hail damage and all its over bloated engineering, complication and high parts prices.

The other is packaged in my second generation 2009 Acura MDX SUV with 180k miles.

Both Acura MDXs are in great condition and, right after purchases; I did perform complete tune-up and maintenance on both including water pumps, timing belts, other belts, fuel injectors, plugs, coil packs, fluids and brakes all around.

The Honda OEM parts cost about HALF of what Mercedes charges for similar parts such as the $220.00 plastic air vent grill on the hood that likes to break after a few years under the sun or a hail stone hits it.

_________________
Scorch G.D.