Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide!



Go Back   Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide! > Technical Forums > Performance Talk

Click here to search for Mopar cars and parts for sale.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-22-2012, 01:21 AM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default 440 redline??

i got a cast crank 440, with kb silv o lite pistons, stock boar stock crank journals and all, internal balance compression in 10.5 range about how far can i safely spin the bottom end?? can i live with say 6500?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-22-2012, 07:14 AM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

your valve train will limit you. with hydraulic lifters, max will be about 5500 rpm. I went to 6000 once on a 440 with the 484 cam, and bent a push rod. And I had beefier valve springs.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-23-2012, 07:51 AM
mopower04's Avatar
mopower04 mopower04 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Menominee/Michigan
Age: 38
Posts: 342
Default rpm

i agree, my 440 hits 6000 all day but i dont let it get there long, shift lights at 5500 and rev. chip is at 6000. i have hydraulic lifters & roller rockers and heavy valve springs as well.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-23-2012, 08:03 AM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

whats crazy was I bent a pushrod, then the associated lifter popped out, and oil pressure went to zero, while I'm toolin down the road. Think it was an intake rod, cause I did not notice any major change in engine power initially.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-23-2012, 08:38 AM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

not trying to sound like a smartass but how come they got hydraulic camshafts that the rpm range goes to 6500 and some higher?? and i read once in a magazine, think it wwas mopar muscle or engine masters, and it was talking about how the mopar vavle train is the best for rpm....

i know the valvetrain limits you, i'm just wondering how much the bottom end can live with?? so i can figure out if i can build the top end like i want to
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-23-2012, 08:47 AM
Mroldfart2u Mroldfart2u is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Amarillo,Texas
Posts: 69
Default

The BOTTOM end can take the 6500, if all is balanced correctly, so that said if you build the top end for revs you could safely take it there.... I have a signature on another forum that states "REDLINE!?!? Hell shift WHEN it QUITS pulling!!!" .. M2C
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-23-2012, 08:54 AM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

i had a 318 once in a demo derby car, and once the derby car was pretty much trashed and the engine got full of rain water and was burning oil and all i had no plans of using the engine again.... you'd be amazed at the rpms you can turn the 318, i had no tach but in neutral you could rev that sucker til you hear the valves float for a long period of time and that sucker never blew.... it'd smoke more afterward lol.... but i was trying to blow that engine, trying to blow a rod so i woulnd't keep wanting to keep the engine lol...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-23-2012, 09:07 AM
Mroldfart2u Mroldfart2u is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Amarillo,Texas
Posts: 69
Default

Well I said what I said for reasons that "you would have had to been around during the days" to believe... Way back in the day when Cleveland Fords ruled the small block ford guys,(unless ya had a boss 302 of course) I was the guy that did stuff a little different, and couldnt afford the Clev. I was messing with the 351 Windsors when Windsors wasn't cool... Guess some of you remember those days.. Anyways, literially THROW mismatched parts @ one and see what stuck and what would stay together. Literially 8000+rpm screams on a stock bottom end with NO balancing or machine work, solid lifter cams with double nutted non adj rockers (ran 2 nuts FOR adjustability) etc... I abused that poor ole motor for 8-10 years, ran a tach 1 time, and it scared me so i took it out and continued to drive it the only way i knew how.... wound up and screaming for mercy...lol
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-23-2012, 09:34 AM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mroldfart2u View Post
Well I said what I said for reasons that "you would have had to been around during the days" to believe... Way back in the day when Cleveland Fords ruled the small block ford guys,(unless ya had a boss 302 of course) I was the guy that did stuff a little different, and couldnt afford the Clev. I was messing with the 351 Windsors when Windsors wasn't cool... Guess some of you remember those days.. Anyways, literially THROW mismatched parts @ one and see what stuck and what would stay together. Literially 8000+rpm screams on a stock bottom end with NO balancing or machine work, solid lifter cams with double nutted non adj rockers (ran 2 nuts FOR adjustability) etc... I abused that poor ole motor for 8-10 years, ran a tach 1 time, and it scared me so i took it out and continued to drive it the only way i knew how.... wound up and screaming for mercy...lol
Guess the key in your case is the solid lifter cam?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-23-2012, 04:01 PM
John Kunkel John Kunkel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NorCal
Age: 80
Posts: 10,059
Default

"Back in the day" I used to shift my 426 Max Wedge at 7200 rpm...the bottom never complained but the valve springs went away in a hurry.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-23-2012, 06:39 PM
Mroldfart2u Mroldfart2u is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Amarillo,Texas
Posts: 69
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cudabob496 View Post
Guess the key in your case is the solid lifter cam?
Yes, I am assuming thats it... Was a really radical 289/302 cam, yes it will work, change of firing order is all... Was a General Kinetics cam .536 lift .310 dur 104 overlap... cant remember the exact specs, but didnt even degree it ( @the timedidnthave a clue what that even was lol) ran it staight up... with fmx trans, 3.00 rear gear car still loped @ 55 mph....
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-24-2012, 12:22 AM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mroldfart2u View Post
Yes, I am assuming thats it... Was a really radical 289/302 cam, yes it will work, change of firing order is all... Was a General Kinetics cam .536 lift .310 dur 104 overlap... cant remember the exact specs, but didnt even degree it ( @the timedidnthave a clue what that even was lol) ran it staight up... with fmx trans, 3.00 rear gear car still loped @ 55 mph....
sounds pretty radical for its day.
I got a Crower solid roller, 254/258 at .050, 106 centerline, .625 lift.
makes all the power I can handle, and friendly street manners too.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-24-2012, 01:42 AM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

so why do they make hydralic cams with the powerbands as high as 6500+ ?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-24-2012, 08:52 AM
Mroldfart2u Mroldfart2u is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Amarillo,Texas
Posts: 69
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldog426 View Post
so why do they make hydralic cams with the powerbands as high as 6500+ ?
That is assuming that all other valvetrain components are up to the task of spinning to 6500. Its not the cam itself, its the rest of the components that are the limiting factor.... ie:springs, rocker arms, etc..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-25-2012, 06:38 AM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mroldfart2u View Post
That is assuming that all other valvetrain components are up to the task of spinning to 6500. Its not the cam itself, its the rest of the components that are the limiting factor.... ie:springs, rocker arms, etc..
But still, I thought hydraulic lifters could not pump up as quick, in order to handle the high revs?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-25-2012, 12:10 PM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

i was watching powerblock a while back and they were building a 318 and it was talking about how the stock mopar rocker arms were good past 7k.... so with my 440 with proper valve springs and lifters could i spin to 6500??
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-25-2012, 05:21 PM
Mroldfart2u Mroldfart2u is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Amarillo,Texas
Posts: 69
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldog426 View Post
i was watching powerblock a while back and they were building a 318 and it was talking about how the stock mopar rocker arms were good past 7k.... so with my 440 with proper valve springs and lifters could i spin to 6500??
short answer ... yes
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-30-2012, 03:04 AM
mhenesian mhenesian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Livermore/CA
Age: 73
Posts: 171
Default

Sorry Cudabob496,

Something wrong in your old motor !

We shift our bracket racing 440's at 6300 RPM with the MSD Rev limiter on the Digital 6 set at 6500. This is with 440 Source heads (large Hemi style single springs with dampers), 5/16" comp pushrods, 0.509 cam, and heavy duty stock rocker arms and shafts. Stock Silvolite pistons, stock 440 rods, but with forged cranks. 8.5 or so compression ratio. Intakes that we have tested include the Performer RPM, Torker II, Mopar M1, CH-28, and TM7. Best Bracket Racing manifold is the Mopar M1, with the Torker II a close second. TM7 looses HP at the top end, but has best overall throttle response. TM7 might be the best manifold ever for a hot street machine in the 2000 to 6000 RPM range. Performer RPM and dual-quad CH-28 are "flat" at the top end. Not much to be gained by pushing the motor past 5500 RPM with these manifolds. The standard Performer 440 is even more of a dog. We haven't tested a Holley Street Dominator in our 440's. Should be close to the Torker II in power and RPM range. We tested an Edelbrock Victor when they first came out. To big a manifold for our "small" cam and low compression.


We have also bent an exhaust pushrod or two in each motor, over time, so I'm sure we are occasionally floating a valve. Probably when doing a vicious water burnout at the track. It helps to limit the ignition timing (max at 37 degrees), and have a relatively stiff mechanical advance curve (no vacuum !) to get the RPM's up. Modern roller rockers and 3/8" pushrods would be much safer, adjust for near zero lash !

Mark
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-30-2012, 06:20 AM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhenesian View Post
Sorry Cudabob496,

Something wrong in your old motor !

We shift our bracket racing 440's at 6300 RPM with the MSD Rev limiter on the Digital 6 set at 6500. This is with 440 Source heads (large Hemi style single springs with dampers), 5/16" comp pushrods, 0.509 cam, and heavy duty stock rocker arms and shafts. Stock Silvolite pistons, stock 440 rods, but with forged cranks. 8.5 or so compression ratio. Intakes that we have tested include the Performer RPM, Torker II, Mopar M1, CH-28, and TM7. Best Bracket Racing manifold is the Mopar M1, with the Torker II a close second. TM7 looses HP at the top end, but has best overall throttle response. TM7 might be the best manifold ever for a hot street machine in the 2000 to 6000 RPM range. Performer RPM and dual-quad CH-28 are "flat" at the top end. Not much to be gained by pushing the motor past 5500 RPM with these manifolds. The standard Performer 440 is even more of a dog. We haven't tested a Holley Street Dominator in our 440's. Should be close to the Torker II in power and RPM range. We tested an Edelbrock Victor when they first came out. To big a manifold for our "small" cam and low compression.


We have also bent an exhaust pushrod or two in each motor, over time, so I'm sure we are occasionally floating a valve. Probably when doing a vicious water burnout at the track. It helps to limit the ignition timing (max at 37 degrees), and have a relatively stiff mechanical advance curve (no vacuum !) to get the RPM's up. Modern roller rockers and 3/8" pushrods would be much safer, adjust for near zero lash !

Mark
What are specs on your valve springs?
Mine were the Mopar double springs, but don't remember spec.
With stock Mopar hydraulic lifters, and stamped steel rockers,
anything over 5500 was risky I
was told, and I found out that was true.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-30-2012, 06:59 PM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

thinking i'm gonna bolt on my torker 2 on my 440, i have comp lifters, lunati valvesprings matched to my cam, and like i said i've seen a few 318 builds in articles and they would build em to be high revving engines, and they would say the stock rockers were good for 7k plus, even read one article that said they were good above 8k... and can't you actually spin a cast crank higher than a forged because of it's lighter weight?? when balanced properly?? and i also know the lighter crank helps put out a few more hp because of less strain for the engine to spin the crank, but too much hp can also kill a cast crank, so each has their benefits and their downsides... i'm running stock ibeam rods, cast crank and dome silvolite kb hyperutectic pistons, moly rings, file fit and a race balance on my complete rotating assembly, the crank, rods, and pistons have all been balanced... but i'm more than likely running the 60303 voodoo cam that goes to 6200 rpm and i may degree the cam to bring that up a little bit, or i may exchange it for the 60304 cam that has a redline of 6400 and leave it on stock degreeing... so it's either but the offset cam key to use the 60303 or pay the shipping to exchange for the bigger cam, or just use my 60303 as is, but don't think i'd be taking full advantage of my higher compression, and my port work i'm doing on my heads and my torker 2 intake...
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-06-2012, 10:00 AM
Rich Kinsley Rich Kinsley is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Omaha/Ne
Age: 80
Posts: 760
Default

I just finished a new upgrade on my 318 poly in my '64 Dodge 4dr. I finally got it together and tested it yesterday. In previous form, stock heads and 264deg cam, it would turn 6500rpm just fine. Now with my major ported and big valve heads plus a 284deg cam it is passing 7K and pulling very hard still. I expect it will work to 7500rpm's.

It has solid lifters, stock, and when calculating the redline solid lifters have a lower redline than hydraulics. I don't recall exactly but I think it has something to do with the shock absorber effect of the hyd compared to the solids. My calculated redline with my old combo was 5280rpm. Baloney! It loved it up to 6200 and would tolerate the 6500. I wanted to include the formula but dang it I can't find it right now.

My 318 poly is .040" over w/ stock forged crank, balanced, coated pistons, major headwork, 2X4 intake, TTI's, Mopar electronic, 3000 stall, 3:90 sg rear, oiling mods, 727 pushbutton trans w/kit, etc, etc..

I just got it on the road again May 24th. I'm anxious to get down to the 1/8th mile but will have to wait till about the second week in July. It's a nice sleeper with the 4drs. I do have my stock hood also to add extra stealth :-)

I was completely surprised at how much more streetable this combo is than the original milder version with the 2x4's. My engine temps are almost cold now as opposed to how hot it ran before. I can idle for long periods and barely reach the 180 mark. I have had it on a couple 100 mile journeys and several car shows including the Hot Rod Nationals in Lincoln, NE on May 26-27. I am extremely pleased with all performance parameters. WooHoo!!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-06-2012, 09:26 PM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

thought solid cams had a higher redline than hydraulic??
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-06-2012, 09:27 PM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

wow, given all the great alternatives out there, I wouldn't be using the stock stamped steel rockers. We're not exactly dealing with high quality control here. Especially for all you guys spinning your motors past 6000 rpm.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-06-2012, 10:50 PM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

yeah but that 500 bucks or so for a set of rocker arms is kinda steep.... and the stock rockers were actually pretty good look up junkyard jewel 318 or one of the other ones where they built 400hp 318s on a budget and used the stock rocker arms and were spinning high rpm... and the old adjustable rocker arms like rich's engine has is what alot of your aftermarket non-roller rocker arms are based on, the isky rocker arms in my stroker don't look any different than the old adjustalbe stock ones...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-07-2012, 03:35 PM
Mroldfart2u Mroldfart2u is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Amarillo,Texas
Posts: 69
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldog426 View Post
yeah but that 500 bucks or so for a set of rocker arms is kinda steep.... and the stock rockers were actually pretty good look up junkyard jewel 318 or one of the other ones where they built 400hp 318s on a budget and used the stock rocker arms and were spinning high rpm... and the old adjustable rocker arms like rich's engine has is what alot of your aftermarket non-roller rocker arms are based on, the isky rocker arms in my stroker don't look any different than the old adjustalbe stock ones...
Ok the thread kind of got side tracked, BUT i will say this again, IF you are wanting to spin yer motor to 6500rpm, Yes its doable providing
  • 1. Your valve train is up to task..(it is normally the 'top end' of motor that IS the limiting factor).
    2. The bottom end is professionally balanced.
    3. Are you going to e spinning it this way ALL the time, and why?
    4. If its a "driver" the time spent @ 6500 is going to be very limited to just the few times you have blasted it there, and the normal driving is going to be @ a much lower rpm.
    5. If you are HAVING to spin it that fast for max power the combo of parts are more suited as a drag/race car than a street car...

M2C again...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-07-2012, 05:50 PM
Rich Kinsley Rich Kinsley is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Omaha/Ne
Age: 80
Posts: 760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldog426 View Post
thought solid cams had a higher redline than hydraulic??
================================================== =========

I thought that too BUT apparently that isn't the case. I wish I could find the formula. I'm thinking maybe it was the solids will bounce eventually???
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-08-2012, 12:01 AM
cudabob496 cudabob496 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Richland, WA
Age: 71
Posts: 2,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mroldfart2u View Post
Ok the thread kind of got side tracked, BUT i will say this again, IF you are wanting to spin yer motor to 6500rpm, Yes its doable providing
  • 1. Your valve train is up to task..(it is normally the 'top end' of motor that IS the limiting factor).
    2. The bottom end is professionally balanced.
    3. Are you going to e spinning it this way ALL the time, and why?
    4. If its a "driver" the time spent @ 6500 is going to be very limited to just the few times you have blasted it there, and the normal driving is going to be @ a much lower rpm.
    5. If you are HAVING to spin it that fast for max power the combo of parts are more suited as a drag/race car than a street car...

M2C again...
Also better have strong quality parts in your rotating assembly (crank, connecting rods, pistons, bolts, pins, main caps, etc). No cheapy stuff.
Some of the old 440 parts are really heavy, and that puts a lot of stress on parts when at 6500 rpm.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-08-2012, 08:59 PM
bulldog426's Avatar
bulldog426 bulldog426 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sippi
Age: 37
Posts: 868
Default

yea i'm putting a 440 in a dart that's gonna be a "street" car, more-less something to ride around and wait for the camaro or other "hotrod" to pull up next to me and i show em how it is... occasional dragstrip like once a month or so, gonna be running 10.5:1 compression, ported 452 heads, torker2 intake, 3:91 gears super stock springs, headers msd ignition voodoo cam, not sure what size cam yet, was looking at the one with the rpm range that goes up to 6600 or the 6400,
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
340 redline? Questions Performance Talk 2 12-19-2002 11:34 PM
redline ? YELLOWRT Dakota Truck Forum 5 04-16-2001 08:23 PM
Redline oil is it? kirkyg Ram Truck Chat 1 11-28-2000 12:28 AM
V8 redline? *Ng* Ram Truck Chat 3 08-07-2000 10:52 PM
Ram Redline? *Ng* Ram Truck Chat 1 06-21-2000 09:06 AM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
. . . . .