Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017122
06/20/11 07:31 PM
06/20/11 07:31 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
The 440 for the same reason as the one I gave in your other thread. ....as I said, it isn't rocket science: the 383 and 440 are very similar only the 440 is 15% larger. Not sure what more you need to know ....and PLEASE turn off your cap locks. Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DennisH ]
#1017124
06/20/11 09:18 PM
06/20/11 09:18 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
I'll be the "stand alone" here. Not knocking off the 440 at all, (I'm a 413 guy! ) but I'd go with the 383. It can go to 500hp, but it WOULD definitely need the better heads to start with. Other reasons for which many "may" say it's insane but: Less rotating weight (crank mass) in the motor. Strong rods (when NEW) proven to go OVER 6200-6500 rpms with a good safety margin to boot. Oversquare bore/stroke combo with a 1.89 rod ratio - great for HI-RPM HP, midrange to hi-end torque. Easy to obtain, cheap to build, but piston prices have risen lately! In otherwords, it's an overgrown 340!! Only drawbacks - it NEEDS a lightweight body to run really HARD to "coin" the sub 11 sec and faster brackets. Motor needs a "pro" type oiling system for the sub-12 sec brackets, which include enlarged main oil feed and return block passages and possibly external oil lines and filters. Helps make them live longer!! A little more work than whats needed on the 440, but they DO HAUL THE MAIL!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017125
06/20/11 09:28 PM
06/20/11 09:28 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,545 DC, MD Suburbs
440PURSUIT
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,545
DC, MD Suburbs
|
Try the 383 with a 4.25 stroke and good heads, 496ci. Mine did 648 horse under 6k RPM and under 10:1. Hydraulic roller.
1969 Hemi Charger R/T, 1970 Charger 472 Hemi 6 Sp 1969 Charger Pro Tour Project 1971 Barracuda Convert 1970 440 6pack Superbird, 1968 Fury I Police Pursuit 440 Super Commando 2 door sedan (Black/Blue) 1967 Barracuda Convert 1968 Barracuda Coupe 1972 Charger w 383 1972 Sebring Plus 440-6 Clone 1969 Coronet Pro Street 2009 Challengeer SRT8 stick 1992-1986 Body 2500 4x4 440 stick 1982 Ramcharger 318 Sniper- getting enhanced. 1997 Ram B3500 Van 5.9 1991.5 W250 Cummins- Big Chief
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: terzmo]
#1017131
06/20/11 10:17 PM
06/20/11 10:17 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,406 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,406
Kalispell Mt.
|
440 has bigger bore that helps un-shroud the valve and make more HP with the same heads. Also for the street the extra TQ is fun Any money you save buying a 383 will be lost when buying pistons. The differance in weight is minimal, not like the differance going from BB to SB and either big block build it is gonna be a pain to change plugs compared to the SB so the minimal differance in deck height don't really make it much easier. If the choice is 440 or 383 build the 440 every time. BTW after 67 the 440 and 383 used the same heads
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: terzmo]
#1017137
06/21/11 09:31 AM
06/21/11 09:31 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,905 U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,905
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
....read the want ads and for one example...you'll see..."mopar for sale...383 with 440 heads" If the thing was that great it would run it's own heads....
You see ads like that because the seller is UNEDUCATED about mopar big blocks ... FYI the 383 - 2bbl runs the EXACT SAME heads as the 440, only difference is the valve springs .
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: JohnRR]
#1017138
06/21/11 09:55 AM
06/21/11 09:55 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177 ill
dennismopar73
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177
ill
|
400 block, stoker kit ,make 500 cci, street/race, lighter block, be had cheap, set rpm heads, mid to low 11s, could be able run in the 10 without whole lot work, jmo
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017142
06/21/11 12:58 PM
06/21/11 12:58 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
http://www.arengineering.com/articles/sonicbig.html....15 lbs difference between a 383 and 440 shortblock. basically, you might find a 440 that is 30 lbs heavier than a particular 383 and you might also find one that is almost identical in weight......certainly a negligeable difference in any case and one that is more than offset by the difference in displacement. A change to headers or an aluminum intake is more significant than the difference in the block weights. Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017148
06/21/11 07:49 PM
06/21/11 07:49 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,039 ALBERTA CANADA
CUDA8U
OP
super stock
|
OP
super stock
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,039
ALBERTA CANADA
|
so how exactly would you build a streetable 440 that runs on pump gas that would rip up the streets?
Last edited by CUDA8U; 06/21/11 07:51 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DennisH ]
#1017149
06/21/11 08:14 PM
06/21/11 08:14 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
There is no replacement. For displacement. 440.
Not knocking displacement at all!! It's your choice. 440's do make great power, but they aren't the cure all for EVERY build or budget. If that was the case, 383's, 413's, 426W's and 361's (yes, there are a gathering of them too!) would be sold for scrap at premium prices. 400's being the renowned platform for the "stroker crowd", I give a warm reception for it. Great all-around motor, just needs a GOOD set of heads on it and then you can continue to build from there. I'm not beating up on 440's at all, I just care for a challenge and the non-popular motors are MY challenges. A 500+ inch six pack motor would make me , but a 390 inch (383-based) dual quad, hi-rpm screamer stuffed in a 3200 or lighter A body, "stripped" B-E body or even in an AMC Hornet, Pacer or Gremlin, would be just as exciting to hear as to see lay down a run!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017156
06/22/11 01:01 AM
06/22/11 01:01 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,905 U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,905
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
really? four four tee. $ for $ in will stomp any BB mopar. (that includes Hemis)
Wasn't it a little too early for you to be
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017157
06/22/11 10:06 AM
06/22/11 10:06 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,746 Ontario, Canada
Dodgem
master
|
master
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,746
Ontario, Canada
|
Nice +.030/.040/.060 440 with aluminum heads (Edelbrock) CNC ported if you can afford it!! Edelbrock 440 RPM Performer intake, 1 3/4 or 1 7/8 headers (maybe 2 " depending on where the build goes), 10.5 to 1 (9 to one with iron heads) 750 vac or DP holley (900 or 1000 if build goes bigger hp)will work quite nicely and a 240/248 @ .050 ish cam advanced a bit extra and a 3000 stall 4000 if you pass 250/258 @ .050. Easy to make 475 to 575 and good torque!! But and a big "BUT" by the time you turn' polish and balance your crank, rebuild or better after market rods, new pistons, rings, bearings a stoker hit will give you 493 to 512 cubes for the same price no hassle. "THERE IS NO REPLACEMENT FOR CUBIC IN DISPLACEMENT" Then up the cam to 250/258 ish @ .050 or 260/268 for more as bigger motors need bigger cams. and your easy hp goes to an 550 to 650 with much more torque at the same time!!!
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: JohnRR]
#1017158
06/22/11 10:51 AM
06/22/11 10:51 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
Quote:
really? four four tee. $ for $ in will stomp any BB mopar. (that includes Hemis)
Wasn't it a little too early for you to be
really? go price a hemi and get back with me. For the cost of the valve train alone I can build a nice 440. Didn't say a wedge is a better engine, just that for the same amount of money..say 5k you can build a 440 that will run, nd for 5k you might have 1/2 of your hemi.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017159
06/22/11 11:20 AM
06/22/11 11:20 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
There is no replacement. For displacement. 440.
Not knocking displacement at all!! It's your choice. 440's do make great power, but they aren't the cure all for EVERY build or budget. If that was the case, 383's, 413's, 426W's and 361's (yes, there are a gathering of them too!) would be sold for scrap at premium prices. 400's being the renowned platform for the "stroker crowd", I give a warm reception for it. Great all-around motor, just needs a GOOD set of heads on it and then you can continue to build from there. I'm not beating up on 440's at all, I just care for a challenge and the non-popular motors are MY challenges. A 500+ inch six pack motor would make me , but a 390 inch (383-based) dual quad, hi-rpm screamer stuffed in a 3200 or lighter A body, "stripped" B-E body or even in an AMC Hornet, Pacer or Gremlin, would be just as exciting to hear as to see lay down a run!
Good points. I ran a 130mph trap speed with my 383 in a cuda, which is a bit more interesting than if it had been a 440. I gotta confess though, I didn't set out to build it, it came up as a good deal. my 500" stuff is sitting in the corner.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: dennismopar73]
#1017160
06/22/11 01:38 PM
06/22/11 01:38 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
How much for the 383?
shoot cant be worth much now!! they just said a 440 can out run it!! i dono , got about 750$ in the block 1100$ in heads, el-cheapo cam 300$ so throw it away ,hahah lol, i'am so scared to bring it out now ,with all them there 440 s going to beat me up
It's ok, you can calm down; nobody said that 383's can't run strong or make over 500hp. What I (and others) DID say is that if you built a 440 the EXACT same way, it WIll make more power.....it's not an opinion, it's simple physics.....not that hard to figure out really.
Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017161
06/22/11 01:39 PM
06/22/11 01:39 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
that compression ratio with 500hp rating will run fine on pump gas?
Yes, with aluminum heads (depending on the cam) you should easily be able to run 10:1 or a bit more.
Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017162
06/22/11 03:41 PM
06/22/11 03:41 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,376
dogdays
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,376
|
One thing no one has mentioned is size. For example, a B engine is a much happier fit in an A body than an RB. So a 4.25 stroke 383 would be my choice in a Dart.
About weight: I believe the stock weights between B and RB were heavily (!) influenced by cast iron intake manifold weight.
About compression: just be sure to get the pistons very close to or at zero deck to maximize squish. With the aluminum heads and everythign else in order you should be able to run 10.5:1 on pump premium.
R.
PS: By careful shopping you can take 200 grams out of each piston/pin combo which will make the 440 rev more like a smallblock.
PPS: Unless you already have crank and rods ready to go I'd say go stroker crank and aftermarket rods with 7/16" bolts.
Last edited by dogdays; 06/22/11 03:45 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017163
06/22/11 03:41 PM
06/22/11 03:41 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
EXACT same way, it WIll make more power.....it's not an opinion, it's simple physics.....not that hard to figure out really.
Dave
It may be physics..... but far from simple. Bearing speeds/loads Ring friction Rod/stroke ratio bore/stroke ratio Cylinder Head flow/ cubic inch ratio etc. etc. etc.
IIRC even Sonnys claims with bigger engines you get diminishing returns. I guess what it comes down to, is the 440 makes more low down torque, due to the long arm. If the 383 was .070 over, it should make more power at very high rpm. (4.320 vs. 4.320) Food for thought....
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017164
06/22/11 05:19 PM
06/22/11 05:19 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
EXACT same way, it WIll make more power.....it's not an opinion, it's simple physics.....not that hard to figure out really.
Dave
It may be physics..... but far from simple. Bearing speeds/loads Ring friction Rod/stroke ratio bore/stroke ratio Cylinder Head flow/ cubic inch ratio etc. etc. etc.
IIRC even Sonnys claims with bigger engines you get diminishing returns. I guess what it comes down to, is the 440 makes more low down torque, due to the long arm. If the 383 was .070 over, it should make more power at very high rpm. (4.320 vs. 4.320) Food for thought....
Yes there are lots of incidental physics but the big picture really doesn't change much: the 440 is 15% bigger and you can expect it to make roughly 15% more power than an equivalent 383....that's all there is to it.
The whole bore vs. stroke thing is largly an urban myth; there was a really good article I've saved somewhere (Hotrod?) that tested two Mark IV BBC's, both the same displacement but one had a much longer stroke and the other had a much bigger bore. The idea was to prove (or disprove) the theory that the long stroke motor would develop more low end torque and the short stroke motor would have more high RPM power......in the end there was only a couple hp difference between the two motors; a negligeable amount.
....yet still the urban myth persists in many circles. I WILL however concede that the 383 would have less friction losses, but in the real world it doesn't change the whole 15% thing a noticeable amount.
The bottom line is that 383's and 440's are very similar engines and using the same compression ratio, cam, heads, manifolds/headers, carbs, etc. will yield a difference in output VERY close to the difference in displacement. Of course if you use a carb that is too small (or any other missmatching of components), that will favor the smaller displacement motor.
Also, at the end of the day, even if I was wrong and the 383 is more efficient, it certainly wouldn't (and isn't) 15% more efficient and since the cost to rebuild the two motors is virtually identical, the answer to the original question remains....the 440 is cheaper to get to 500hp...no ifs, ands or buts about it.
Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017165
06/22/11 09:30 PM
06/22/11 09:30 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
I'll have to agree with the majority on this one.. A good graintruck 440 will make for tire frying fun.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017166
06/22/11 10:37 PM
06/22/11 10:37 PM
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,545 Downtown Roebuck Ont
Twostick
Still wishing...
|
Still wishing...
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 6,545
Downtown Roebuck Ont
|
Quote:
that compression ratio with 500hp rating will run fine on pump gas?
My 440 based 493 stroker is 8.97:1 and did 500hp 600 lb/ft. Runs fine on 87 regular. That is why there is no replacement for displacement.
Kevin
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017168
06/23/11 12:00 AM
06/23/11 12:00 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
EXACT same way, it WIll make more power.....it's not an opinion, it's simple physics.....not that hard to figure out really.
Dave
It may be physics..... but far from simple. Bearing speeds/loads Ring friction Rod/stroke ratio bore/stroke ratio Cylinder Head flow/ cubic inch ratio etc. etc. etc.
IIRC even Sonnys claims with bigger engines you get diminishing returns. I guess what it comes down to, is the 440 makes more low down torque, due to the long arm. If the 383 was .070 over, it should make more power at very high rpm. (4.320 vs. 4.320) Food for thought....
Yes there are lots of incidental physics but the big picture really doesn't change much: the 440 is 15% bigger and you can expect it to make roughly 15% more power than an equivalent 383....that's all there is to it.
The whole bore vs. stroke thing is largly an urban myth; there was a really good article I've saved somewhere (Hotrod?) that tested two Mark IV BBC's, both the same displacement but one had a much longer stroke and the other had a much bigger bore. The idea was to prove (or disprove) the theory that the long stroke motor would develop more low end torque and the short stroke motor would have more high RPM power......in the end there was only a couple hp difference between the two motors; a negligeable amount.
....yet still the urban myth persists in many circles. I WILL however concede that the 383 would have less friction losses, but in the real world it doesn't change the whole 15% thing a noticeable amount.
The bottom line is that 383's and 440's are very similar engines and using the same compression ratio, cam, heads, manifolds/headers, carbs, etc. will yield a difference in output VERY close to the difference in displacement. Of course if you use a carb that is too small (or any other missmatching of components), that will favor the smaller displacement motor.
Also, at the end of the day, even if I was wrong and the 383 is more efficient, it certainly wouldn't (and isn't) 15% more efficient and since the cost to rebuild the two motors is virtually identical, the answer to the original question remains....the 440 is cheaper to get to 500hp...no ifs, ands or buts about it.
Dave
Another great opinion. Would with it: Yes.. and NO!! Yes, the 440 may be cheaper to get to the 500hp level. NO, you cannot build the two motors identical since they produce power at two different rpm ranges - 440 at the stronger low end to upper midrange, 383 at midrange to topend (cyl head/carb flow limit). Different design characteristics that can only be compared equally by bore/stroke changes. Food for thought 57 cubes (440) vs an extended engine power peak rpm limit by nearly 1000 rpms (383).
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017170
06/23/11 12:16 AM
06/23/11 12:16 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Quote:
How much for the 383?
shoot cant be worth much now!! they just said a 440 can out run it!! i dono , got about 750$ in the block 1100$ in heads, el-cheapo cam 300$ so throw it away ,hahah lol, i'am so scared to bring it out now ,with all them there 440 s going to beat me up
It's ok, you can calm down; nobody said that 383's can't run strong or make over 500hp. What I (and others) DID say is that if you built a 440 the EXACT same way, it WIll make more power.....it's not an opinion, it's simple physics.....not that hard to figure out really.
Dave
Then I'll tell you this... DO not say the same exact way, but build BOTH to the 500 hp level!! THAT'S EQUAL, since you have a set hp limits. Comparing exact (identical parts and procedures between the two) builds and which motor's closest to 500hp isn't a contest at all!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017173
06/23/11 11:45 AM
06/23/11 11:45 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,406 Kalispell Mt.
HotRodDave
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,406
Kalispell Mt.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
How much for the 383?
shoot cant be worth much now!! they just said a 440 can out run it!! i dono , got about 750$ in the block 1100$ in heads, el-cheapo cam 300$ so throw it away ,hahah lol, i'am so scared to bring it out now ,with all them there 440 s going to beat me up
It's ok, you can calm down; nobody said that 383's can't run strong or make over 500hp. What I (and others) DID say is that if you built a 440 the EXACT same way, it WIll make more power.....it's not an opinion, it's simple physics.....not that hard to figure out really.
Dave
Then I'll tell you this... DO not say the same exact way, but build BOTH to the 500 hp level!! THAT'S EQUAL, since you have a set hp limits. Comparing exact (identical parts and procedures between the two) builds and which motor's closest to 500hp isn't a contest at all!!
OK so spend extra money on the 383 so you can get to 500 hp in the first place and still be down nearly 100 ft lbs of TQ no thanks.
I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HotRodDave]
#1017174
06/23/11 12:04 PM
06/23/11 12:04 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177 ill
dennismopar73
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177
ill
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
How much for the 383?
shoot cant be worth much now!! they just said a 440 can out run it!! i dono , got about 750$ in the block 1100$ in heads, el-cheapo cam 300$ so throw it away ,hahah lol, i'am so scared to bring it out now ,with all them there 440 s going to beat me up
It's ok, you can calm down; nobody said that 383's can't run strong or make over 500hp. What I (and others) DID say is that if you built a 440 the EXACT same way, it WIll make more power.....it's not an opinion, it's simple physics.....not that hard to figure out really.
Dave
Then I'll tell you this... DO not say the same exact way, but build BOTH to the 500 hp level!! THAT'S EQUAL, since you have a set hp limits. Comparing exact (identical parts and procedures between the two) builds and which motor's closest to 500hp isn't a contest at all!!
OK so spend extra money on the 383 so you can get to 500 hp in the first place and still be down nearly 100 ft lbs of TQ no thanks.
extra money, i dont think so its the same money ,if youre building 500 hp weather its 383/440 i personal know of 4 engines close to me 2 or 440 2 are 383 block motors, the 383 out run those 440 same builds, i also know of a 451 on a 400 plateform and a 452 on a 440 plateform and the 400 plateform out runs that 440 by 4 tenths , in a car that is 100 # heavier, so dont say its not cant be done oo by the way the 400 block was the cheaper build! same cam heads and comp ,
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: JohnRR]
#1017176
06/23/11 12:58 PM
06/23/11 12:58 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
Dwayne Porter made 504HP with a 383 +.030 with UNPORTED 906's and TRW flattop pistons with a CAST crank...
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: JohnRR]
#1017177
06/23/11 02:03 PM
06/23/11 02:03 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
Dwayne Porter made 504HP with a 383 +.030 with UNPORTED 906's and TRW flattop pistons with a CAST crank...
And I bet he could make over 600 w/a 440...so what's your point?
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017178
06/23/11 02:42 PM
06/23/11 02:42 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,905 U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,905
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Dwayne Porter made 504HP with a 383 +.030 with UNPORTED 906's and TRW flattop pistons with a CAST crank...
And I bet he could make over 600 w/a 440...so what's your point?
He has , it's in the archives.
I'm not getting into the pissing contest of bigger is always better , it's old and boring because it's always the same regurgitated and .
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: dennismopar73]
#1017179
06/23/11 03:39 PM
06/23/11 03:39 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
extra money, i dont think so its the same money ,if youre building 500 hp weather its 383/440
and THAT's where you're wrong; you can get the 383 to 500hp but you HAVE to spend more money to do it than you would with a 440. Just the way it is. SOMETHING has to be done to make up for the 57 cubic inches.
Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DCM71cuda]
#1017183
06/23/11 07:15 PM
06/23/11 07:15 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177 ill
dennismopar73
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177
ill
|
Quote:
....I bet now somebody will tell me that they can build a 340 and outrun a 360......
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017184
06/24/11 11:45 AM
06/24/11 11:45 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 957 Heart of Ohio
4boxers4
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 957
Heart of Ohio
|
Some humorous replies here. First...alot depends upon what YOU want out of your application. I have built both. Many parts are similar. The 375hp versus the 335hp factory rating(which HAS to be pretty accurate because of the way the gov't makes car companies validate their vehicles)...is self explanatory. 40 extra hp to start with just makes it easier(sorry, I live in a 'common sense' world). The 383 is a fine motor, make no mistake about it. It will also rev higher but high revs usually causes more wear on parts.
Persistance is omnipotent
Durability Engineer, Chair and Couch division...
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: 4boxers4]
#1017185
06/24/11 11:48 AM
06/24/11 11:48 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,886 Lost and Spaced
bboogieart
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,886
Lost and Spaced
|
Quote:
Some humorous replies here. (which HAS to be pretty accurate because of the way the gov't makes car companies validate their vehicles)...
Speaking of funny replies. You are kidding right.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DCM71cuda]
#1017186
06/24/11 12:16 PM
06/24/11 12:16 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 22,873 Chicken coop
dustergirl340
Chicken Little
|
Chicken Little
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 22,873
Chicken coop
|
Quote:
....I bet now somebody will tell me that they can build a 340 and outrun a 360......
LMAO. But I've built a 340 that outran a 383.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: dustergirl340]
#1017187
06/25/11 10:34 AM
06/25/11 10:34 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,489 west kentucky
gomangoRTSE
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,489
west kentucky
|
Quote:
Quote:
....I bet now somebody will tell me that they can build a 340 and outrun a 360......
LMAO. But I've built a 340 that outran a 383.
________________________________________________________________ Well some people have built the bigger bore shorter stroke 340 that could outruns 360s. Mostly that was years ago before 340 parts because scarce. For sometime now parts and alternatives have been developed for 360s to produce more power. Its easier to find, purchase and build 360s than back in the 1970s.
As for the 383, Im simply not a fan of the power it produces. Yes it can produce power if stoked. But otherwise based on dollar for dollar money the 440 will produce more power. And I think this is especially true if your working on a working mans budget.
You have your 383 guys who will vehemently defend them and find the exceptions to the rule examples sure, but some would say they would rather stroke a 400 motor than a 383. This I cant speak about, perhaps someone else could address.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017188
06/25/11 10:41 AM
06/25/11 10:41 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 768 Maryville tn
67coronetman
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 768
Maryville tn
|
My 440 is making 580 hp & 600 ft tq with only 448 cid.! Stock crank & rods with KB pistons. Where i get my power is the Indy heads and TTI headers & comp solid lift cam.
Old car are me......
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: 67coronetman]
#1017189
06/25/11 10:56 AM
06/25/11 10:56 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
My 440 is making 580 hp & 600 ft tq with only 448 cid.! Stock crank & rods with KB pistons. Where i get my power is the Indy heads and TTI headers & comp solid lift cam.
doubt the TTI headers give you any advantage over any other brand of header. But I'm with you I have a stock crank/stroke 440 w/ ported Stage VI heads and a comp 588 solid roller making around the same #'s...maybe a tad more.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017190
06/25/11 11:10 AM
06/25/11 11:10 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285 Pacific NW USA
CompSyn
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,285
Pacific NW USA
|
Reading through this thread I found it consistent with past street racing around my area. Yes, some folks whipped up on a 440 with their 383. Others whipped up on a 383 with their 340. Yep! In many instances, the 440 cleans house too. This would seem to indicate that a well matched engine build, a balanced drive train, a fresh tune-up, and someone who knows how to drive their car can easily break the gap to any advantage 40-to-60 cubic inches can have. But regardless of actual performance, the bragging rights the 440 yields always wins out simply because it’s the biggest passenger car production engine Chrysler built. Bigger is always better, right!?!?
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: 67coronetman]
#1017191
06/25/11 11:37 AM
06/25/11 11:37 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,309 Prospect, PA
BSB67
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,309
Prospect, PA
|
Quote:
My 440 is making 580 hp & 600 ft tq with only 448 cid.! Stock crank & rods with KB pistons. Where i get my power is the Indy heads and TTI headers & comp solid lift cam.
Nice. What does it weigh, and what is the et and mph?
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CompSyn]
#1017192
06/25/11 11:50 AM
06/25/11 11:50 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,935 Holly/MI
Dean_Kuzluzski
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,935
Holly/MI
|
Everyone keeps talking about the bigger HP the 440 makes BUT it's the big TORQUE that moves a car better at a lower rpm that makes a 440 better.
Torque is king on the street. The short stroke 383 is more sensitive to its combo to really work, the 440 is more forgiving.
R.I.P.- Gary "Coop" Davis 02/09/68-05/13/04
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017196
06/25/11 01:36 PM
06/25/11 01:36 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,808 Kirkland, Washington
Pacnorthcuda
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 21,808
Kirkland, Washington
|
Quote:
Quote:
Nothing like BB low end grunt rumpity rump. From the basement. 440. Otherwise you're just "explaining.
Let's look at this from the TOP(end that is). Nothing like the HI-RPM scream (6000rpm or MORE) going thru the gears. Rev to the stratosphere. That's the 383, baby! Otherwise, YOU'RE just all "TORQUE" (talk)!! And YOUR basement door slams shut AT 5-6000rpm.
A 440 will be two car lengths ahead of the 383 before it even gets to 5000 RPM!
And LOTS of 440's are pulling strong well past 6000
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Pacnorthcuda]
#1017197
06/25/11 01:45 PM
06/25/11 01:45 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
I know this is just rehashing most of the posts above but for a street bruiser with a set amount of money invested, and an equal build, in the engine the 440 will be the champ EVERY TIME. EVEN is the engines make the same peak HP (which they wont)
Area under the curve!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Contrary to your BELIEFS.... which HAVE some merit, SET COSTS are not part of this equation. YES, the 440 has MORE cubes which gives it a distinct COST advantage. There is less cash outlay and ingenuity to reach 500 hp. The 383, as I stated before, can reach this 500hp level, but due to the less cubes a "bit" more money spent in the right areas can net a VERY capable street/strip motor with great power. If it was a question of money spent or saved (main reason to go with the 440!!) then the 440 definitely GETS the nod. But a 500hp 383 make cost a little more, but can net you excellent performance. You want to toss 'em away, good, more for me to build and develop power on!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CompSyn]
#1017200
06/25/11 02:55 PM
06/25/11 02:55 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Reading through this thread I found it consistent with past street racing around my area.
Yes, some folks whipped up on a 440 with their 383. Others whipped up on a 383 with their 340. Yep! In many instances, the 440 cleans house too.
This would seem to indicate that a well matched engine build, a balanced drive train, a fresh tune-up, and someone who knows how to drive their car can easily break the gap to any advantage 40-to-60 cubic inches can have.
But regardless of actual performance, the bragging rights the 440 yields always wins out simply because it’s the biggest passenger car production engine Chrysler built.
Bigger is always better, right!?!?
Bigger motor + less cash outlay to put in more power = winning strategy!! Nice formula!! But... sometimes it's not, depends on how well ANY given combo is put together (parts matching and TUNING)!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Fat_Mike]
#1017206
06/26/11 10:49 PM
06/26/11 10:49 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Well, there are a few who like to on this topic, I guess. Can't do too much about that.
Last edited by HYPER8oSoNic; 06/26/11 10:50 PM.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017210
06/27/11 11:20 AM
06/27/11 11:20 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
This post is about what will do reall good burnouts on the street. I think we all agreed. And Mr yuck your Charger is an extremely strong machine.
thanks... hope to get the new trans in after vacation and see what it will run on an all-put hard pass.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017211
06/27/11 11:36 AM
06/27/11 11:36 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,703 Mohnton, Pa
DodgeCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,703
Mohnton, Pa
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nothing like BB low end grunt rumpity rump. From the basement. 440. Otherwise you're just "explaining.
Let's look at this from the TOP(end that is). Nothing like the HI-RPM scream (6000rpm or MORE) going thru the gears. Rev to the stratosphere. That's the 383, baby! Otherwise, YOU'RE just all "TORQUE" (talk)!! And YOUR basement door slams shut AT 5-6000rpm.
A 440 will be two car lengths ahead of the 383 before it even gets to 5000 RPM!
And LOTS of 440's are pulling strong well past 6000
Are on the PIPE!! 60-120 ft past the tree 383's have been known to hit 6000 (or better) rpm (gear depending) and "step out" on 440's in 2nd and 3rd gears. At the 660-1000 ft mark, a "good" lightweight 383 car WILL outleg a 440 car to the finish, driver depending. Your "2-car advantage" has been either eliminated or "switched around" to the 383 car at the finish!! 383's been campaigned in Super/Stock regularly back in the early 60 - mid 70's and turned rpms in excess of 7500 rpm, reliably! They also ran and still run brackets and Stock Eliminator classes. The "rage" of the newer engine technology, has allowed the onslaught of STROKER motor combos to be MUCH stronger but at LOWER streetable rpms. Excellent technology and science by far, as well as being cheaper to build than a stout 383. As I said "440 is CHEAPER power, but not the CURE-ALL"!! Never any HATE, just a strong DEBATE!!
There is no replacement for cubic inch displacement. I was turning my 440 with self ported 906 heads above 7000 rpms back in the early 80's. I would never consider a 383 over a 440. I have moved up to a hemi and would never go back to either. But between the two the 440 is far superior.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: CUDA8U]
#1017214
06/27/11 10:41 PM
06/27/11 10:41 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 903 Oregon
rtplumcrazy1
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 903
Oregon
|
seems to me these posts just end up being a big pissing match (my dad can beat up your dad kind of thing). Seems to me the people could just give the facts of their personal combination-and let the original poster decide what best suits his needs/budget
Put a big block 4 speed Scat Pack Dodge in your garage.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DodgeCharger]
#1017217
06/27/11 10:56 PM
06/27/11 10:56 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nothing like BB low end grunt rumpity rump. From the basement. 440. Otherwise you're just "explaining.
Let's look at this from the TOP(end that is). Nothing like the HI-RPM scream (6000rpm or MORE) going thru the gears. Rev to the stratosphere. That's the 383, baby! Otherwise, YOU'RE just all "TORQUE" (talk)!! And YOUR basement door slams shut AT 5-6000rpm.
A 440 will be two car lengths ahead of the 383 before it even gets to 5000 RPM!
And LOTS of 440's are pulling strong well past 6000
Are on the PIPE!! 60-120 ft past the tree 383's have been known to hit 6000 (or better) rpm (gear depending) and "step out" on 440's in 2nd and 3rd gears. At the 660-1000 ft mark, a "good" lightweight 383 car WILL outleg a 440 car to the finish, driver depending. Your "2-car advantage" has been either eliminated or "switched around" to the 383 car at the finish!! 383's been campaigned in Super/Stock regularly back in the early 60 - mid 70's and turned rpms in excess of 7500 rpm, reliably! They also ran and still run brackets and Stock Eliminator classes. The "rage" of the newer engine technology, has allowed the onslaught of STROKER motor combos to be MUCH stronger but at LOWER streetable rpms. Excellent technology and science by far, as well as being cheaper to build than a stout 383. As I said "440 is CHEAPER power, but not the CURE-ALL"!! Never any HATE, just a strong DEBATE!!
There is no replacement for cubic inch displacement. I was turning my 440 with self ported 906 heads above 7000 rpms back in the early 80's. I would never consider a 383 over a 440. I have moved up to a hemi and would never go back to either. But between the two the 440 is far superior.
Good for you, and I respect your opinion. I love the underdog motors, that's MY opinion!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mike H]
#1017222
06/28/11 12:21 AM
06/28/11 12:21 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 11,632 SHELBY TWP,,MICHIGAN
72N96RR
I LOVE WEDGIES
|
I LOVE WEDGIES
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 11,632
SHELBY TWP,,MICHIGAN
|
I just base my opinion on experience as a younger man..I had a 72 Road Runner with a 400 4 speed in it back in 1979...EVERY and I mean EVERY 383 I ran against was no match for my car..Especially in a Charger body...Then one day I went up against a 68 Road Runner with a 440 and we left even but that dang car acually lifted up both front and back and launched like it was shot from a gun...I was amazed...Another car that smoked me was a Torino with a 428 that could smoke the hides at 40mph...Cool memories as a kid...But all those races left a bad taste for anything with a 383...In a Dart maybe but thats about it...Gimme the 440... The 72 RR/GTX I have now has some seriously sweet stock power..From a 5 mph roll I can stab it to the floor and it will roast em on into second gear until I let off..I love these old cars..
1972 Road Runner / GTX 440 4spd Dana 3.54 Just about to turn 26K original miles..
A boat, a GMC truck, some Craftsman Tools, LOTS of Zombie Protection, and a few Goldfish..
If you love someone set them free.. If they come back it means nobody else wanted them either..!!
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: dennismopar73]
#1017223
06/28/11 12:24 AM
06/28/11 12:24 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 11,632 SHELBY TWP,,MICHIGAN
72N96RR
I LOVE WEDGIES
|
I LOVE WEDGIES
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 11,632
SHELBY TWP,,MICHIGAN
|
Quote:
400 block, stoker kit ,make 500 cci, street/race, lighter block, be had cheap, set rpm heads, mid to low 11s, could be able run in the 10 without whole lot work, jmo
Thats a seriously cool set up but you are talking what,, 8 to 10 grand to buid it right???
And the OP wants 500 hp from his motor which will be a whole lot easier to achieve from the 440 than the 383 and cheaper too..IMO...
1972 Road Runner / GTX 440 4spd Dana 3.54 Just about to turn 26K original miles..
A boat, a GMC truck, some Craftsman Tools, LOTS of Zombie Protection, and a few Goldfish..
If you love someone set them free.. If they come back it means nobody else wanted them either..!!
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017225
06/28/11 10:54 AM
06/28/11 10:54 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
I'm sure there will be some out there. There's one at our track, its a tough little motor....
440s are just plain fun to beat. I kind of enjoyed roasting my buddies 69 440 cuda this weekend. Not by alot, mind you, but the #'s don't lie.
and how much more do you have in your 383? What is the rest of the set-up? yours and his? apples and oranges. Nothing better than putting a Small block talker on the trailer w/ his "giant killer"
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017227
06/28/11 12:06 PM
06/28/11 12:06 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm sure there will be some out there. There's one at our track, its a tough little motor....
440s are just plain fun to beat. I kind of enjoyed roasting my buddies 69 440 cuda this weekend. Not by alot, mind you, but the #'s don't lie.
and how much more do you have in your 383? What is the rest of the set-up? yours and his? apples and oranges. Nothing better than putting a Small block talker on the trailer w/ his "giant killer"
Flat tappet cams, alum heads (within few cfm, same bench) same pistons, same carb, ...... He has glass frontend, no aprons, little car. Mine is all factory steel, at least 400 lbs more. I found some issues with mine too, I'm barely getting 3rd gear with my bigger tires. It goes thru at 5900~ 6000, and I only make power between 6 and 7. I mean it bogs at 5 grand on gear change. I think a 5.13 should be in order.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017228
06/28/11 12:10 PM
06/28/11 12:10 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
Nothing better than putting a Small block talker on the trailer w/ his "giant killer"
Funny thing is, its smaller than most small blocks these days... Its in its "own class" I believe the fastest 383 cuda stocker was Dave Wrens at 9.70.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017229
06/28/11 12:57 PM
06/28/11 12:57 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
Quote:
Nothing better than putting a Small block talker on the trailer w/ his "giant killer"
Funny thing is, its smaller than most small blocks these days... Its in its "own class" I believe the fastest 383 cuda stocker was Dave Wrens at 9.70.
I hear that... 440ci is small these days
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: 4boxers4]
#1017231
06/28/11 01:42 PM
06/28/11 01:42 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Some humorous replies here. (which HAS to be pretty accurate because of the way the gov't makes car companies validate their vehicles)...
Speaking of funny replies. You are kidding right.
No...it's actually alot of work to certify a car in the real world. I work for an OEM and am somewhat familiar with that activity. I know what we do in the dyno rooms as well. It is really unbelieveable to what length your data has to be accurate, for alot of reasons. Maybe my response sounded like I was dependant on the gov't but that needs clarified. The OEM has to be very accurate with their data so a statement like 'it's hp was overrated intentionally' is somewhat unbelieveable to me because of the ramifications against the OEM from class actions etc
That was then and this is now. Back in the '60's, it was common to underrate motors for a variety of reasons including corporate rules, insurance, etc. There are dozens of examples.
....that is unless you believe a 455 Stage I Buick really only had 360hp or a 455 W30 had 5hp over the base 442 engine, or an L88 427 only had 5hp over an L72 or a 428SCJ really only had the same hp as a 383, or......well you get the point (or I hope you do, anyway! )
Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017232
06/29/11 10:32 PM
06/29/11 10:32 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
To make the motors competative at the same hp level you have to allow for weight. At 383 at 500 hp is not going to have the "grunt" at the low end of the dial. However, the 440 ISN'T going to buzz to nearly 6800 rpm to make it's 500, either. My point is that they are both capable, but with the HEAVIER weight of the cars the motors are being put in, the 440 with its' torque moves the mass much better. On average, for example, 440's are usually in chassis of 3700-4400Lbs (mostly B-bodies), with the "all-outs" BELOW 3600 total weight. That still doesn't make it better, just an EASIER choice to build for street usage.
Last edited by HYPER8oSoNic; 06/29/11 10:53 PM.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Fat_Mike]
#1017233
06/29/11 10:44 PM
06/29/11 10:44 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Clearly both "can tear up the streets." But he's not building a vehicle around a motor (which is irrelavent anyway), so forget about body weight and all the other speculative responses. Yeah, sure there are plenty of well built 383's that can beat up on lesser built 440's. But as said above, with COMPARABLY BUILT MOTORS, a 440 will always out perform its little brother...the 383. No?
Sure it would! Equal parts, tuning and SAME chassis and a 57 cube advantage - VERY unfair, but an advantage. For sake of equality, trade off 57 cubes for 570 pounds LESS total car weight w/383 and the comparison just got a lot closer!! 440's are better to put into a mid to HEAVY chassis due to the torque they produce.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017234
06/29/11 11:50 PM
06/29/11 11:50 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 957 Heart of Ohio
4boxers4
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 957
Heart of Ohio
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Some humorous replies here. (which HAS to be pretty accurate because of the way the gov't makes car companies validate their vehicles)...
Speaking of funny replies. You are kidding right.
No...it's actually alot of work to certify a car in the real world. I work for an OEM and am somewhat familiar with that activity. I know what we do in the dyno rooms as well. It is really unbelieveable to what length your data has to be accurate, for alot of reasons. Maybe my response sounded like I was dependant on the gov't but that needs clarified. The OEM has to be very accurate with their data so a statement like 'it's hp was overrated intentionally' is somewhat unbelieveable to me because of the ramifications against the OEM from class actions etc
That was then and this is now. Back in the '60's, it was common to underrate motors for a variety of reasons including corporate rules, insurance, etc. There are dozens of examples.
....that is unless you believe a 455 Stage I Buick really only had 360hp or a 455 W30 had 5hp over the base 442 engine, or an L88 427 only had 5hp over an L72 or a 428SCJ really only had the same hp as a 383, or......well you get the point (or I hope you do, anyway! )
Dave
I am not that familiar with those motors or ratings as I have been absorbed in Chrysler products for 30 years so I will take your word that those ratings may seem suspicious. What I do understand is that alot of stories about how OEM's work vs actual situations is also inflated greatly, whether then or now. I have heard alot about ratings inflated and deflated but I have also seen dyno reports showing those very engines to be awful darn close to advertised. Since I am a data driven individual, I am usually forced to be somewhat skeptical until I see some provided to lend credence to that disparity. Again, I am not trying to be a jerk, and your opinion is valued...I just tend to want to see supporting info if someone feels the factory rating was disingenuous. Thanks for the input.
Persistance is omnipotent
Durability Engineer, Chair and Couch division...
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017235
06/30/11 12:55 AM
06/30/11 12:55 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,454 oklahoma
forphorty
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,454
oklahoma
|
Quote:
Clearly both "can tear up the streets." But he's not building a vehicle around a motor (which is irrelavent anyway), so forget about body weight and all the other speculative responses. Yeah, sure there are plenty of well built 383's that can beat up on lesser built 440's. But as said above, with COMPARABLY BUILT MOTORS, a 440 will always out perform its little brother...the 383. No?
Sure it would! Equal parts, tuning and SAME chassis and a 57 cube advantage - VERY unfair, but an advantage. For sake of equality, trade off 57 cubes for 570 pounds LESS total car weight w/383 and the comparison just got a lot closer!! 440's are better to put into a mid to HEAVY chassis due to the torque they produce.
Why does your 383 car get to weigh 570 pounds less? Maybe a 225 slant 6 in a 1700 pound roadster would be better? 383s typically get better fuel economy than 440s. If that is important to you, then maybe a 383 makes sense. People have their preferences for a variety of reasons; underdog status, sentimental value, nostalgia, etc. Looking at it practically, if the choice is between two engines within the same family (yeah i know, ones a B and the other is an RB) the one with 57 more cubes offers much more bang for the buck. It may take a lot of money spent on that 383 to make up for its displacement disadvantage. The old adage goes " The only substitute for cubic inches is cubic dollars or light weight".
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: forphorty]
#1017236
06/30/11 01:21 AM
06/30/11 01:21 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,832 Fort Morgan
1OFNONE
Has been a member for quite a few years, so relax.
|
Has been a member for quite a few years, so relax.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,832
Fort Morgan
|
"Tearing it up on the streets was the quote, Correct ?
If a guy wants to tear it up on the streets it doesent matter how much horsepower or cost of the build is. Its traction.
Want to blow the tires off ? or fry them for an 1/8th mile yet drive on the interstate at 75 mph all day long ? 440
IMO truely to many variables from money available to car weight, gear and tire size.
Honestly, I feel bang for the buck is 440. But to be different and like to hear RPM ? 383 but you will need gear and converter to do the 383 which costs drivability.
My opinion only.
So the bartender says to the horse " Gee, Why the long face?"
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: forphorty]
#1017238
06/30/11 05:57 PM
06/30/11 05:57 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Quote:
Clearly both "can tear up the streets." But he's not building a vehicle around a motor (which is irrelavent anyway), so forget about body weight and all the other speculative responses. Yeah, sure there are plenty of well built 383's that can beat up on lesser built 440's. But as said above, with COMPARABLY BUILT MOTORS, a 440 will always out perform its little brother...the 383. No?
Sure it would! Equal parts, tuning and SAME chassis and a 57 cube advantage - VERY unfair, but an advantage. For sake of equality, trade off 57 cubes for 570 pounds LESS total car weight w/383 and the comparison just got a lot closer!! 440's are better to put into a mid to HEAVY chassis due to the torque they produce.
Why does your 383 car get to weigh 570 pounds less? Maybe a 225 slant 6 in a 1700 pound roadster would be better? 383s typically get better fuel economy than 440s. If that is important to you, then maybe a 383 makes sense. People have their preferences for a variety of reasons; underdog status, sentimental value, nostalgia, etc. Looking at it practically, if the choice is between two engines within the same family (yeah i know, ones a B and the other is an RB) the one with 57 more cubes offers much more bang for the buck. It may take a lot of money spent on that 383 to make up for its displacement disadvantage. The old adage goes " The only substitute for cubic inches is cubic dollars or light weight".
Thanks for your post. It's what I have been saying all along. 440's are cheaper to build, but not neccessarily the better motor. ANY motor can be made to run WELL, it's just a matter of preference and how much money you're willing to SPEND, as well as the chassis it's going in. FWIW, 383's have very little low end torque to move an average B-body as well as 440 would, hence the 383 NEEDS gears and some weight trimming to equal the performance. Smaller motors -lighter weighted cars, for example: 340 Dusters, Demons, Swingers and Darts.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017239
06/30/11 06:25 PM
06/30/11 06:25 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Thanks for your post. It's what I have been saying all along. 440's are cheaper to build, but not neccessarily the better motor. ANY motor can be made to run WELL, it's just a matter of preference and how much money you're willing to SPEND, as well as the chassis it's going in. FWIW, 383's have very little low end torque to move an average B-body as well as 440 would, hence the 383 NEEDS gears and some weight trimming to equal the performance. Smaller motors -lighter weighted cars, for example: 340 Dusters, Demons, Swingers and Darts.
blah blah blah,,,, a 440 in a dart will beat the drum out of an equally preped 340. A mild 383 in a 3800lb b-body w/ 3.91 gears will run mid 13's at best. The same 440 build will have you well into the 12's. Have had both and done both. I'd NEVER do a SB or 383 in a B-body. Even if it came w/ a "400hp" SB.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017240
06/30/11 08:01 PM
06/30/11 08:01 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
blah blah blah,,,, a 440 in a dart will beat the drum out of an equally preped 340. A mild 383 in a 3800lb b-body w/ 3.91 gears will run mid 13's at best. The same 440 build will have you well into the 12's. Have had both and done both. I'd NEVER do a SB or 383 in a B-body. Even if it came w/ a "400hp" SB.
400hp SB? Like a Chebbie? A. If you can get past the TRACTION PROBLEMS. B. Everybody knows that a "mild" 383 and a 12sec 440 are two dissimilar motors. C. It's GOOD that you have "stepped up" to a 500 cube - 440 based combo for your 70' Charger. Definitely NOT putting it down and it does run really HARD. If I had a CHOICE for that body style and car weight, I would setup the SAME way and maybe add a few more pony-inducing items on it!! D. 440 Darts were/are kinda hard to hook, without traction aids, so I don't think a 340 would have problems with it from the tree. It may be close after the 660 but 340's ARE capable of handing 440's a beatdown. FWIW, I DID get by a few strong 340's and the same ones even whooped upon some 383's. Never knocked the "smaller" motor since I didn't know what they were carrying! E. with ya on the SB or 383 in a B-Body, But I'd chance a 383 in a "stripper" B-chassis or a good A-body. Hands down, 340's are BEST (ok, dustergirl, you can stop jumpin' ) in the A-Body for street/strip. 3800lbs is kinda heavy for a 383 to push around, I would go no higher than 3500-3600 (incl. driver) absoulute! 3800lbs, is right for a "warm" 440. Just my own opinions said out loud!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017241
06/30/11 08:20 PM
06/30/11 08:20 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 22,873 Chicken coop
dustergirl340
Chicken Little
|
Chicken Little
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 22,873
Chicken coop
|
Quote:
Hands down, 340's are BEST (ok, dustergirl, you can stop jumpin' )
I agree! (Okay, I'll stop jumping now )
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017242
06/30/11 09:29 PM
06/30/11 09:29 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
blah blah blah,,,, a 440 in a dart will beat the drum out of an equally preped 340. A mild 383 in a 3800lb b-body w/ 3.91 gears will run mid 13's at best. The same 440 build will have you well into the 12's. Have had both and done both. I'd NEVER do a SB or 383 in a B-body. Even if it came w/ a "400hp" SB.
400hp SB? Like a Chebbie? A. If you can get past the TRACTION PROBLEMS. B. Everybody knows that a "mild" 383 and a 12sec 440 are two dissimilar motors. C. It's GOOD that you have "stepped up" to a 500 cube - 440 based combo for your 70' Charger. Definitely NOT putting it down and it does run really HARD. If I had a CHOICE for that body style and car weight, I would setup the SAME way and maybe add a few more pony-inducing items on it!! D. 440 Darts were/are kinda hard to hook, without traction aids, so I don't think a 340 would have problems with it from the tree. It may be close after the 660 but 340's ARE capable of handing 440's a beatdown. FWIW, I DID get by a few strong 340's and the same ones even whooped upon some 383's. Never knocked the "smaller" motor since I didn't know what they were carrying! E. with ya on the SB or 383 in a B-Body, But I'd chance a 383 in a "stripper" B-chassis or a good A-body. Hands down, 340's are BEST (ok, dustergirl, you can stop jumpin' ) in the A-Body for street/strip. 3800lbs is kinda heavy for a 383 to push around, I would go no higher than 3500-3600 (incl. driver) absoulute! 3800lbs, is right for a "warm" 440. Just my own opinions said out loud!!
again a 440 any-body will walk a 340 any-body. I said it outloud. $ for $ I'll give you 2 lights. both can be fast however if you are starting from square 1 and one guy/gal has a 440 mill and one has a 340 and both spend the same amount of money/buy the same parts...the 440 will ALWAYS win. (1/4 mile anyway)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: dustergirl340]
#1017244
06/30/11 11:44 PM
06/30/11 11:44 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
I spent $1,800 on my 340 including the purchase price and ran a 12.40, so I'm happy with that, lol.
GOOD DEAL!
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017245
07/01/11 06:56 PM
07/01/11 06:56 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
again a 440 any-body will walk a 340 any-body. I said it outloud. I care to diagree!! Lighter bodies + loads of low end torque (440) = bad 60ft times/traction problems, UNLESS you have a GOOD chassis setup!! Not enough top end hp/too much low midrange (440), 340 WILL out-leg it!! $ for $ I'll give you 2 lights. I wouldn't race against YOUR car with 2 lights (lengths) start in a 340, it be a SLAUGHTER match, unless I'm running a "stroker 408 or larger" SB motor. both can be fast however if you are starting from square 1 and one guy/gal has a 440 mill and one has a 340 and both spend the same amount of money/buy the same parts...the 440 will ALWAYS win. (1/4 mile anyway)
Parts wise and expense, 440 gets the nod, not as much for power output/chassis weight comparisons. Again, depends on the chassis they are in for the race to be fair!! Go by power to weight figures, say 10 to 1 for both. 375/440 should be in 3750lb B-body (approx), while the 275(335 actual hp approx.)/340 should be in a 3350lb A-body (approx). Makes sense to me!!
Last edited by HYPER8oSoNic; 07/12/11 11:25 PM.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017248
07/03/11 10:37 PM
07/03/11 10:37 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
Quote:
Hey, uh, is this 383-440 thread, gonna go as many pages as the girls love the mopars thread?.....before it goes away?
Well..um..we can always RESURRECT the 413 vs 440 thread if you want...!!
what about 440 vs HEMI? $ for $ of course.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017250
07/05/11 05:56 PM
07/05/11 05:56 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
again a 440 any-body will walk a 340 any-body. I said it outloud.
Thats about a def-con 4...
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017251
07/05/11 08:52 PM
07/05/11 08:52 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
Quote:
again a 440 any-body will walk a 340 any-body. I said it outloud.
Thats about a def-con 4... [/quote
lol but so very true. any body want to take me up on it? build one of those 340's for 5k (about what I have in my heap) toss it in a 3900 b-body and lets go. all throttle no bottle.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Mr.Yuck]
#1017252
07/05/11 09:30 PM
07/05/11 09:30 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
I'm sure theres cheap fast goodies at .25c on the dollar for small blocks too. I just got back from the 50,000 shootout in medicine hat Ab... Don't recall any 440s that hung on past the 1/8 mile with me. But I only ran 21 passes. There could have been one lurking...
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017253
07/05/11 10:24 PM
07/05/11 10:24 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
I'm sure theres cheap fast goodies at .25c on the dollar for small blocks too.
I just got back from the 50,000 shootout in medicine hat Ab... Don't recall any 440s that hung on past the 1/8 mile with me. But I only ran 21 passes. There could have been one lurking...
only reason mines at 5k is because I spent $2100 on the six-pack. A big single 4 would run batter and be cheaper but they are near as coooooool. 383's don't even work until the 1/8th...lol
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017256
07/07/11 04:01 AM
07/07/11 04:01 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,765
quick77rt
Parts Problem
|
Parts Problem
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,765
|
Well ive tried not to but since you BB guys cant agree one one thing while your trying to figure out how to make a tiny 3.75 stroke 440 motor work in the 11-s 12-s us 4 inch plus small block stroker guys are in the 9s-10s all day running less bobweight, less head flow and more rpm. So when you get it figured out let us small block guys know...im easily found in Denver if anyone needs schooled, by an F-body none the less. Looks like only the green six pack charger is doing well As far as the weight issues, some f-body cars weigh 3800, some 3200 Just because some like the fat chicks of the mopar world, dont pawn them off on others.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: quick77rt ]
#1017257
07/07/11 04:17 PM
07/07/11 04:17 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
Well ive tried not to but since you BB guys cant agree one one thing while your trying to figure out how to make a tiny 3.75 stroke 440 motor work in the 11-s 12-s us 4 inch plus small block stroker guys are in the 9s-10s all day running less bobweight, less head flow and more rpm.
So when you get it figured out let us small block guys know...im easily found in Denver if anyone needs schooled, by an F-body none the less.
Looks like only the green six pack charger is doing well
As far as the weight issues, some f-body cars weigh 3800, some 3200 Just because some like the fat chicks of the mopar world, dont pawn them off on others.
You're going to have to knock the dust off your old 340 crank to get in on this discussion.. Stroker big blocks can run 9s, 10s too.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: quick77rt ]
#1017259
07/07/11 05:05 PM
07/07/11 05:05 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
Well ive tried not to but since you BB guys cant agree one one thing while your trying to figure out how to make a tiny 3.75 stroke 440 motor work in the 11-s 12-s us 4 inch plus small block stroker guys are in the 9s-10s all day running less bobweight, less head flow and more rpm.
So when you get it figured out let us small block guys know...im easily found in Denver if anyone needs schooled, by an F-body none the less.
Looks like only the green six pack charger is doing well
As far as the weight issues, some f-body cars weigh 3800, some 3200 Just because some like the fat chicks of the mopar world, dont pawn them off on others.
fat chicks are fun.
but....drop a stroked BB in an a-body and they run 8's and 9's. You aren't talking same $ for $ son.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017262
07/08/11 12:21 AM
07/08/11 12:21 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,765
quick77rt
Parts Problem
|
Parts Problem
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,765
|
Yep $ for $ its the BB, Im just a bit. Ive alot in my 2 stage six pack spray motor, and overall alot in all my small strokers, could have a hell of a BB stroker for equal money and dont think its not been tempting. But honestly it would have to be a BB stroker, but on a budget or lookng back on the late 70-s early 80s, you were Bob G. if you could pop 11s or 12s in a bias tired 440 car.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: quick77rt ]
#1017263
07/08/11 01:02 AM
07/08/11 01:02 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,445 N.Wilkesboro,NC
DusterKrazy
master
|
master
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,445
N.Wilkesboro,NC
|
The easiest and cheapest route to 500hp will be the 440 hands down. But as far as a 440 ALWAYS outrunning a 383? No way. 383's can be had cheap which is appealing to poor people like me. To many variables. Vehicle weight,gears, and the most important part to factor in is the overall engine combination. A well thought out 383 is very capable of taking down a 440 that's using a crappy selection of parts. I like both but I have a soft spot for the 383. A 383 with Indy heads can be down right nasty fast. Some disadvantages include lower torque and more expensive pistons. Block strength? 383 or 400 for the win hands down... For a lighter vehicle, I'd have no problem with using a 383 at all. A nicely tinkered 383 in an a body is too much fun but for the amount of headache and expense to swap in, I'd just go with a small block. Sometimes I like to build a smaller engine just to see what I can get out of it Some people are stuck in the past. Newsflash!! Performance parts have come a very long way since the '70's. I am a nostalgia buff and I will gladly admit that. There are great cams,intakes and anything else you can think of being made now. Take the 340 vs. 360 debate for example. Stock for stock, the 340 WAS a better performance engine. Today the 360 will get the job done cheaper and better (again combination and YMMV factored in!) . I hear so many older people talk about how crappy the 360 is. Whatever. Just like the 440, more cubes and more torque equals the old saying "cubic inches or cubic dollars". Yes, it's only 20 extra cubes but it makes a difference in the end. I mean with today's parts you can make a 318 haul booty. Build what you have and never be afraid of learning something new. There is nothing like knowledge to make power
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: HYPER8oSoNic]
#1017264
07/08/11 01:11 AM
07/08/11 01:11 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Well ive tried not to but since you BB guys cant agree one one thing while your trying to figure out how to make a tiny 3.75 stroke 440 motor work in the 11-s 12-s us 4 inch plus small block stroker guys are in the 9s-10s all day running less bobweight, less head flow and more rpm.
Well you've ALREADY and it's starting to bubble!! 3.75 inch, tiny, by YOUR standards I guess. LEGENDARY MOTORS were built utilizing this stroke length, so now that 4 inch strokes are the rage, are we supposed to be in awe, now? I don't think so. Stroker motors are a blessing, since they produce "full race type" power at below 6500 rpm, instead of 7 to 8000 rpms. BIG PLUS, they are EXTREMELY streetable (unless you are running class). Stroker small blocks DO make a great deal of power, just as stroker big blocks do, BUT given an EQUAL, LIGHTWEIGHT chassis, the comparison could be VERY close IF both motors are nearly close in power output, not neccesarily in engine size. One motor could have a large bore, moderate stroke and have a similar output as a moderate bore, longer stroke combo. It would be the rpms of peak torque and hp that would tell the tale of winning on the street vs. winning on the track.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DusterKrazy]
#1017265
07/08/11 01:13 AM
07/08/11 01:13 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
The easiest and cheapest route to 500hp will be the 440 hands down. But as far as a 440 ALWAYS outrunning a 383? No way. 383's can be had cheap which is appealing to poor people like me.
To many variables. Vehicle weight,gears, and the most important part to factor in is the overall engine combination. A well thought out 383 is very capable of taking down a 440 that's using a crappy selection of parts. I like both but I have a soft spot for the 383. A 383 with Indy heads can be down right nasty fast. Some disadvantages include lower torque and more expensive pistons. Block strength? 383 or 400 for the win hands down...
For a lighter vehicle, I'd have no problem with using a 383 at all. A nicely tinkered 383 in an a body is too much fun but for the amount of headache and expense to swap in, I'd just go with a small block. Sometimes I like to build a smaller engine just to see what I can get out of it
Some people are stuck in the past. Newsflash!! Performance parts have come a very long way since the '70's. I am a nostalgia buff and I will gladly admit that. There are great cams,intakes and anything else you can think of being made now. Take the 340 vs. 360 debate for example. Stock for stock, the 340 WAS a better performance engine. Today the 360 will get the job done cheaper and better (again combination and YMMV factored in!) . I hear so many older people talk about how crappy the 360 is. Whatever. Just like the 440, more cubes and more torque equals the old saying "cubic inches or cubic dollars". Yes, it's only 20 extra cubes but it makes a difference in the end.
I mean with today's parts you can make a 318 haul booty. Build what you have and never be afraid of learning something new. There is nothing like knowledge to make power
100% with ya!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DusterKrazy]
#1017267
07/11/11 02:50 PM
07/11/11 02:50 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
The easiest and cheapest route to 500hp will be the 440 hands down. But as far as a 440 ALWAYS outrunning a 383? No way. 383's can be had cheap which is appealing to poor people like me.
To many variables. Vehicle weight,gears, and the most important part to factor in is the overall engine combination. A well thought out 383 is very capable of taking down a 440 that's using a crappy selection of parts. I like both but I have a soft spot for the 383. A 383 with Indy heads can be down right nasty fast. Some disadvantages include lower torque and more expensive pistons. Block strength? 383 or 400 for the win hands down...
For a lighter vehicle, I'd have no problem with using a 383 at all. A nicely tinkered 383 in an a body is too much fun but for the amount of headache and expense to swap in, I'd just go with a small block. Sometimes I like to build a smaller engine just to see what I can get out of it
Some people are stuck in the past. Newsflash!! Performance parts have come a very long way since the '70's. I am a nostalgia buff and I will gladly admit that. There are great cams,intakes and anything else you can think of being made now. Take the 340 vs. 360 debate for example. Stock for stock, the 340 WAS a better performance engine. Today the 360 will get the job done cheaper and better (again combination and YMMV factored in!) . I hear so many older people talk about how crappy the 360 is. Whatever. Just like the 440, more cubes and more torque equals the old saying "cubic inches or cubic dollars". Yes, it's only 20 extra cubes but it makes a difference in the end.
I mean with today's parts you can make a 318 haul booty. Build what you have and never be afraid of learning something new. There is nothing like knowledge to make power
Exactly!!
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: RemCharger]
#1017269
07/11/11 08:45 PM
07/11/11 08:45 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,186 Wherever I am.
Junky
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,186
Wherever I am.
|
Quote:
Just took out another 440 on saturday in the final. 11.78 at 114~ 115. Getting there quick is fun, but flat-out-powering a guy at the stripe is funner.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: Junky]
#1017270
07/11/11 09:02 PM
07/11/11 09:02 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 843 Suffolk,VA
ireland383
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 843
Suffolk,VA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Just took out another 440 on saturday in the final. 11.78 at 114~ 115. Getting there quick is fun, but flat-out-powering a guy at the stripe is funner.
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: dodgeboy11]
#1017275
07/13/11 12:27 AM
07/13/11 12:27 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,323 NY NY
340duster340
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,323
NY NY
|
hypothetical example...two core motors 1) 383 and 2) a 440 both have steel crank.
to do a budget rebuild (reuse block, crank, rods, heads)...assume new rings, brearings, came, intake.....I imagine the cost would be the same/similar as labor is a constant
to do a hi-po rebuild, new crank, rods, pistons, etc...again, i imagine the cost would have to be the same or similar.
that being said, why wouldnt you want to start with bigger motor to begin with?
regardless...just make sure you build a hemi 440...thats always the best way to go
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017276
07/13/11 03:43 AM
07/13/11 03:43 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825 Sk. Canada
RemCharger
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,825
Sk. Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
Just took out another 440 on saturday in the final. 11.78 at 114~ 115. Getting there quick is fun, but flat-out-powering a guy at the stripe is funner.
Good for you! I saw a VW beetle outrun a 383 Charger a couple of weekends back at the strip in Ashcroft.....not sure what that proves about the superiority of VW beetles, though.
Dave
That they can easily beat 440 cudas?
and six pak super beez...
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: 340duster340]
#1017278
07/13/11 12:59 PM
07/13/11 12:59 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
hypothetical example...two core motors 1) 383 and 2) a 440 both have steel crank.
to do a budget rebuild (reuse block, crank, rods, heads)...assume new rings, brearings, came, intake.....I imagine the cost would be the same/similar as labor is a constant
to do a hi-po rebuild, new crank, rods, pistons, etc...again, i imagine the cost would have to be the same or similar.
that being said, why wouldnt you want to start with bigger motor to begin with?
You're wasting your breath spouting logic to the illogical.
Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: 383 VS 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1017279
07/16/11 12:59 PM
07/16/11 12:59 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275 Desert Tracker
HYPER8oSoNic
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
|
Quote:
Quote:
hypothetical example...two core motors 1) 383 and 2) a 440 both have steel crank.
to do a budget rebuild (reuse block, crank, rods, heads)...assume new rings, brearings, came, intake.....I imagine the cost would be the same/similar as labor is a constant
to do a hi-po rebuild, new crank, rods, pistons, etc...again, i imagine the cost would have to be the same or similar.
that being said, why wouldnt you want to start with bigger motor to begin with?
You're wasting your breath spouting logic to the illogical.
Dave
Sometimes, GREAT and INNOVATIVE concepts come from the ILLOGICAL!! Being cheap HAS it's limitations.
Last edited by HYPER8oSoNic; 07/16/11 11:23 PM.
"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids" "Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
|
|
|
|
|