Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide!

Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide! (http://www.moparchat.com/forums/index.php)
-   Performance Talk (http://www.moparchat.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Car Crafts 383 to 443 stroker build up? (http://www.moparchat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88516)

djswwg 02-08-2005 06:06 PM

There are more reasons why the 383/400 engines are 35-40 lbs. lighter than the 440's than just a smaller block. The crank looses a lot of weight because the mains are machined much smaller and so are the counterweights. Also, everything else being equal, the the B engines use a shorter and therefore lighter piston. If underhood space is a concern, stroke a 400, you can actually get 499 cubes with readily available pistons @ 4.375" bore and a 4.15" stroke crank. However, you can't use a rod longer than a stock length 440 rod so the rod ratio is reduced to 1.63. If you use a 440 block it's easy to get 511 cubes with a 4.25" stroke and still use a 7.1" rod, resulting in a 1.67 rod ratio, and lots of room for a taller piston. So it really depends on how many cubes you want versus how much hood and header room you have. I personally would never stroke a 383 because it will cost the same to do a 400 and you will always have more cubes with the 400 block. That does not mean it won't be a good engine, and if you have a 383 block allready, why spend more to buy a 400? Another reason to stroke a 383 would be if you have say a pretty much stock 383 Road Runner and you want to blow away the competition (Flords, Chubbies) and have them throwing fits trying to figure out how you're doing it. Now that would be fun!!!!!! And you would still have your numbers matching block............djs

23T-Wedge 02-09-2005 11:05 AM

DJSWWG,

Thanks for clarifiying that, I guess my advancing age and a myriad of too many numbers floating through my head for too many years had me thinking there was that big of a difference in just the block weight alone......sorry about that....my bad..... :whack:

cutting torch 02-09-2005 12:45 PM

This is a little off-topic, but when I built my 408/360 stroker, I weighed the crank, rods, and pistons, and found that the combo was ELEVEN POUNDS lighter than the stock 360 stuff! Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised.

torch

OriginalB1 02-09-2005 02:03 PM

Have you guys ever read the "451 Manifesto"?

Maybe someone has a link..or just search for it by name.

In it, he sites all the reasons..in his opinion..why a stroked 400 is a better race engine than a 440.

beepbeepsrule 02-09-2005 02:09 PM

I have no problem with the 400/451 being more efficient geometrically. I had issues with how the mag crew got there, why a 383, etc. especially when the 400/451 combo is almost a purchaseable combo already with parts designed for that exact application. And the question was "What do you think of Car Craft's....".

I like all the info available now on the 400/451 combo and would not like to see it dilluted with the parts and methods Car Craft is showing.

zilla1 02-09-2005 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OriginalB1
Have you guys ever read the "451 Manifesto"?

Maybe someone has a link..or just search for it by name.

In it, he sites all the reasons..in his opinion..why a stroked 400 is a better race engine than a 440.

Is this it?


http://www.arengineering.com/articles/articleframe.html

OriginalB1 02-09-2005 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zilla1

Yup. Here's another link I found talking about the 400 vs 440 blocks:

http://www.440source.com/blockinfo.htm

MOPARHOUND! 02-09-2005 06:39 PM

If you want 440+ cubic inches, start with a 440, both from a longevity and economy standpoint. Unless you are racing a space limited A-body race car, making 1/4 mile passes and tearing the engine annually or bi-annually.

The following needs to be stated:

The low deck B intake is inferior to the RB intake. It is physically smaller, and will not flow the air volume. There is no "ideal" intake, outside of a tunnel ram, for the engine. One guy ported an Indy 383-13? intake to max wedge size with decent results. But so much for the "economy" of the build. Mopar Stage VI heads will allow the use of the RB intake, but they are $$$.

The 2.625" B crankshaft main journal is inferior to the 2.75" RB crankshaft main journal. Align bore/hone the block ($$$) to the RB size??? Which goes first in a 451, the block or the crank? Which goes first in a 440, the block or the crank? When the RB engine with it's greater displacement was designed, Chrysler's engineers increased the main journal size for a reason. One report from a drag racer from Arizona, "7 different guys used the cut down 440 cranks in 400 blocks, 5 got tired of breaking cranks, and 2 change the cranks yearly." Cut down 100,000+ mile cranks would not be the way I would go. New would = $$$.

The B engine with a 440 crank puts the wrist piston so high in the piston, stability in the bore and thus longevity becomes an issue. I have read more than one report of premature oil burning (most recently a report by the owner of a Road Runner featured in a nationally publicated Mopar Magazine). Do the math, what stroke in an RB block would require the use of a 451 piston? One solution offered was a piston with 360 degree skirting, but once again, $$$.

Lastly, in theory, the 400 block would appear to have less cylinder distortion, given the shorter cylinder length. In real world reality, the 400 block's cylinders distort more than the 440.
Quote from a prominent engine builder from Florida, ".... the "theory" about stiffer cylinder walls is pure bologna. I've done random sampling on no less the 25 blocks and found that when removing the torque plate after honing, the lowdeck shows more cylinder distortion by more than .001 every time. typically we see the RB walls move about .0016, the low decks have moved as much as .0031. That's a huge difference. It's not a scientific test, since very few of those blocks were sonic checked, but since the head bolt pattern is the same for both, you explain the difference..."

Another quote by a guy who discussed a 4.15 crank in a B block versus a RB block, in response to the quote above, "Dan Dvorak (another respected builder from the southeast) would not even build my 493" out of my nice 400 block for this very reason (distortion)."

Some issues to ponder........

dkn1997 02-09-2005 08:49 PM

from reading that article, I got the impression that they were pretty impressed with themselves for being able to use all stock parts, ie: no custom pistons.

I was not impressed with their conclusion that the excessive rod clearance was nothing to worry about. Not being an engine builder, and not totally understanding what effects excessive side clearance can have, I was still skeptical of thier logic that since it did not blow up on the dyno, then it's all good. A street car engine, as I understand it, should last more than a few dyno pulls, no?

It bothers me that they build a motor knowing one of the specs is way off and just gloss over the potential problem with what amounted to a "yada yada"

Fast One 02-09-2005 09:55 PM

The Manley rod was PN 14279, with 6.765 inch length, 2.20 inch journal with Mopar pin size

JL 02-09-2005 10:15 PM

But you get 12 cu in and genuine CHEVROLET rods. WOW real CHEVY rods. OH BOY REAL CHEVY RODS. And if you want to sell magazines something has to say the magic word. CHEVY RODS. They must be good. Walk the local drag strip. There are pieces everywere. Very popular.

rumblefish360 02-10-2005 12:38 PM

MOPARHOUND, I gotta cut this quote up some to address it and ask questions on it, so hang in there ....
Quote:

The 2.625" B crankshaft main journal is inferior to the 2.75" RB crankshaft main journal. Align bore/hone the block ($$$) to the RB size??? Which goes first in a 451, the block or the crank? Which goes first in a 440, the block or the crank? When the RB engine with it's greater displacement was designed, Chrysler's engineers increased the main journal size for a reason. One report from a drag racer from Arizona, "7 different guys used the cut down 440 cranks in 400 blocks, 5 got tired of breaking cranks, and 2 change the cranks yearly." Cut down 100,000+ mile cranks would not be the way I would go. New would = $$$.
Quote:

The 2.625" B crankshaft main journal is inferior to the 2.75" RB crankshaft main journal.
Why?

Quote:

Align bore/hone the block ($$$) to the RB size???
I say no way dude. Don't do it. I don't think it's a good thing to do since the "B" block is a little more beefy down low. You would give up that advantage.

Quote:

Which goes first in a 451, the block or the crank? Which goes first in a 440, the block or the crank?
Ummmm, I don't get the question.

Quote:

When the RB engine with it's greater displacement was designed, Chrysler's engineers increased the main journal size for a reason.
From here you should say why. Nevertheless, the bigger bearings in a race arena are something to avoid. But thats just racing. Street is fine and a nominal amount of HP loss.

Quote:

One report from a drag racer from Arizona, 7 different guys used the cut down 440 cranks in 400 blocks,
That in itself is a problem. But you said it best,
Quote:

New would = $$$
True, but it would be the best way to go about it now. Cutting down RB cranks isn't a bad way to go, but to start racing on old cranks like you said and now that I think of it, did they heat treat them again or just run them as is? There is yet another problem.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:58 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.