When it comes to collector cars that were heavy on decals and stickers, few brands were better at putting together a stripe kit than Mopar. This 1971 Plymouth Duster is a real-deal Twister survivor, complete down to the original graphics that are somehow still attached in fine condition. The Duster is completely original, according to the seller, and you’ll find it here on craigslist for $13,500.
The Duster Twister packaged featured the side stripes you see here, along with the Twister logo on the rear quarters. Available on both six- and eight-cylinder cars, this is a 318 model paired with an automatic transmission. Other Twister features included the blacked-out hood seen here, along with the fake hood scoops.
You also got the 340 grille and deluxe seat trim, which looks a bit tired in this photo. Still, it’s a minor complaint, and that beautiful crack-free dash with an original radio is wonderful to gaze out on. Like so many other special editions, the Twister gave shoppers the look of a genuine 340 without the fuel consumption or insurance penalties.
Mileage is just under 80,000, and the seller points to the Duster’s incredibly rust-free condition as one of its major selling points. Leave it as-is or do a very light restoration, the choice is yours – but I don’t really see any point to disturbing what has survived for years as an impressive survivor. When’s the last time you saw a Duster Twister this nice?
Nice car, but without a 340 4 bbl and a 4 speed, it’s really just a gussied up Valiant. Aside from Twister graphics, someone sure was frugal when ordering this car ( no PS or PB) so that leaves Granny out. Sure looks nice, tho.
Many couldn’t afford the 340 insurance (trust me on that one) nor wanted to have to buy premium gas or have it be used twice as fast. The 340 was wonderful, but the 318 was truly the sweet spot in the line up. Almost as efficient as the 225, just as reliable, but with much more oomph. My only caveat, and it is a minor one, would be that a 3 or 4 speed would really be great here. Oh yes, I have always hated those useless non functional fake air scoops. A pair of bucket seats and air with a stick, and this could have been my car.
I have this car now. I picked it up on 3/2/19. The car has power steering but not power brakes. The car is very clean and not a spot of rust any where. I am trying to find out how many of this car was made. Not sure if I want to leave it and drive it the way it is or rest or it. Maybe even stroke the engine. Do you have any input on this.
It may have given the shoppers the look of the 340 but that’s where it ended. Not picking on the reliable 318 here, but the 340 was in a different world. Always liked the reference to these hoods as featuring “dummy” scoops.
Really a well taken care of car here, I find it amazing how long ago this car was built and how well it still looks. Years ago a car like this would have normally been souped up and driven to early grave. Sweet!
Mine was B5 Blue with white buckets and white stripes. It was also a 318 with no PS or PB, but I did have the 3 speed. With the AM/FM, the sticker was $3218. I miss that car
340 was a design flaw, hence the 360! Crhysler realized that a piston over 4″ in diameter was just a waste of fuel.
The 360, introduced in 1971, was nothing more than a smog motor and was relegated to use in C-bodies. The owners manual for the 1971 Fury listed the 225, 318, 360, 383, and 440 motors as options. 340s were only available in A and E bodies. I cant recall seeing any 340 Road Runners back then.
When it was introduced in 1968, the 340 made big block power in a small block package and was seen as a serious challenger to the SBC. It was vastly underrated at 275 listed horses, the same as the 383 2bbl, but any car with a 340 was able to effortlessly walk away from anything with the 383 2bbl. I know because I owned a 66 Sport Fury and got dusted by a Duster.
Lower compression smog motors like the 360 and 400 were introduced as a result of rules promulgated by the new EPA that also introduced low-lead gas. Nowadays, the 360, or 5.9, is the go-to crate motor for those looking for respectable Mopar power in their restomods. A common mod of the era was a “318 with 340 heads and cam”. The 340 had the same stroke as the 318, if I recall.
A very nice design flaw, evidently.
340 was a design flaw?
Something isnt right with thew scoops. I had them on my 340 and they were two piece with a chrome accent on the front. They had holes in the hood under them, so although they didn’t go to a airbox, they did provide some cooler outside air. In addition, the blackout on the hood looks painted, it should be vinyl decals. My guess is the decals faded or tore and someone rattle canned the hood and scoops.
This is a nice car, and although I cringe at 10K Valients, I like this one with the V8. In real life, the 340 was a HUGE upgrade over the 318, especially with a purple stripe cam, 3×2 carbs and headers. The 318 was always the family motor.
Of course perhaps my 340 was different, as seen in this ad where the Twister had blacked out Scoops and no chrome trim.
People have told me i’m crazy, but I recalled back around 78′ I seen a Twister with a 340 2bbl carb and the fender sticker said the same. I was looking for a 340 for my van and was afraid to by it because of what the fender sticker said. I did not at the time craw under the car and check the block casting, again because of what the fender sticker said. Don’t believe back then you could buy reproductions of fender tags or stickers. Not sure, but i believe it may of had the chrome exhaust tips as the 340’s did. Wish someone could confirm that i’m not crazy.
I do not claim to be a MOPAR expert, but I am about 99.99% certain that the 340 was never offered with a single 2 barrel carb, as there was never a “low performance” version of the 340 like with other MOPAR V8s.
Steve, I agree with you 99.99%, I saw what I saw.
Terry, what you have to remember is that a manifold and carb from a 318 would bolt right on to a 340. They never came from the factory like that but who’s to say that someone didn’t change it in response to the 1973 Arab oil embargo?
Dave, I would agree that could be done, but the fender sticker said 340 2 bbl. as stated earlier. Possible a misprint or I must of read it wrong. Not sure how I couldn’t tell the difference between 318 and 340. The owner was not there, but his wife showed the car and said that’s how he bought it when I question her. I do agree with all your comments.
There were several years when Chrysler painted standard motors a turquoise color and hipo motors were red, but the letter in the 5th spot of the VIN will tell you what motor should be there. Then comes the fender tag. Last is the stamped code on the block itself. It doesn’t help that the “A” series motors, 273, 318, 340, and 360 all look identical.
I don’t believe Chrysler products (or any other) EVER highlighted ‘2 barrel’ on the engine emblems or stickering. What would the point of that be? Maybe they could have also added ‘single exhaust!’
Mopar highlighted ‘4 BARREL’ and ‘Six Pack’ but never ‘2 barrel’.
Addendum, I took this as some sort of external labeling on the car, i.e. emblems, not a manufacturer info sticker on the fenderwell. In any case I do not believe there was ever a 340 2 barrel.
340 was not a design flaw.
The 360 was developed as a truck engine.
Take that
Yup. It was designed as a ‘torque’ motor. From the get-go the 340 was designed to be an “Over square” rev-motor. It’s nickname in Chrysler Engineering was “Baby Rumble Guts”- they did benchmark the 350HP 327 for inspiration…but unlike GM, Chrysler never made a mild version of the 340.
I always thought the 360 replaced the 340 to try and make up for a bit of the lost power due to smog regs, but the 340 was to the 318 and 360 what Chevy’s Z/28 302 was to the 307 and 350. It was always and ever a performance engine and I have never heard of it being supplied with a 2 barrel carb any more than a Z/28 302 would have been.
R S, you are correct!
Del, never thought of it that way, but I agree with your analogy, because many vans and trucks came with them, including with the “J” heads. The longer stroke cranks would give a little more torque for pulling or hauling.
And the longer stroke was often part of making the engines run cleaner for smog regulations. Probably that was also what turned Chevy’s 283 into the 307, which happened in 1968 with the start of early smog requirements.
RS, you may of misunderstood. The sticker(decal) with the 340 2bbl was on the enter finder, next to the battery, as all mopars that year. Not on the outer fender as the 273 4 bbl was in 65′ – 67′. Again I must of not read it right. I was just hoping that someone would of sided with me, that it could of been possible. I know all the repair books and manuals say no or not mentioned.
Never impressed with the 340’s, my 351 in my 1967 Mustang coupe ate them for lunch all day long. The only Mopars that beat my car had to be a big block and I even gave them a run for the money. While I know the 318 wasn’t as tough as the 340, it was a great engine for what it was… Sort of like the 289, it was a great engine for what it was.. BTW, I like this car!
Okay adding in late for the record. I had a 1970 challenger RT 340 4speed pistol grip with a 391 rear end. So as a young Mopar kid, the 340 set up kicked serious ass, my buddies has the challengerTA and hemi cudas so 318 and 340 cast block is the same basically . The 360 was a beefed up similar block. So 318 was 2bbl but had a 4bbl option. 340 was 4bbl with a 6 pack option. Adder, the 360 had a police interceptor option for law enforcement. When they could no longer put it in cars, due to smog regs. They created the little red express truck and warlock in 1978 these had the leftover interceptor motors.