|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: Diego (not Ted)]
#1159471
01/17/12 06:52 PM
01/17/12 06:52 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
|
I don't know a lot about the 67 , they would have had 516 heads and I think it was based off the 300HP 383 , the left manifold was more restrictive on the 67 , they changed the manifold for 68 and used it on 69. I never compared the specs on the 68 , based on the lower HP engine, and by the way the 68-69 330HP 383 used the 2bbl cam.
What I do know is the 69 330HP 383 used in A bodies only is the same engine as the 335HP engine , same cam , same heads , same carb on the 4 speed , auto ??? the A body 383 had a dual point distributor , the 335HP engine didn't. I'll guess the 5HP difference is that left manifold.
This spring/summer I'll finally have the replacement engine for the Dart on the dyno and I intend to swap the exhaust manifolds to see how much HP difference there is .
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: JohnRR]
#1159472
01/17/12 07:09 PM
01/17/12 07:09 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,541
Round Lake Beach, Illinoisy
Rhinodart
Rhinotruck
|
Rhinotruck
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,541
Round Lake Beach, Illinoisy
|
Indeed a smaller cam, 516 heads with small valves, restricted exhaust manifolds that were changed each year, and the killer was a low rise intake manifold and small carbuertor that only let the 383 rate at 280 HP in 67.
The funny thing about science is that if you change one miniscule parameter you change the entire outcome to the way you want it.
JB Rhinehart, Realist
A-Body's RULE!
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: JohnRR]
#1159473
01/17/12 08:35 PM
01/17/12 08:35 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,900
Gabba Gabba Hey! NYC
Diego (not Ted)
OP
Too Many Posts
|
OP
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,900
Gabba Gabba Hey! NYC
|
Quote:
by the way the 68-69 330HP 383 used the 2bbl cam.
You mean the B-body 383?
So the downgrade for the AC RRs and "normal" Satellites was the cam?
Why was the A-body manifold different? Because of a low-clearing hood?
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: Diego (not Ted)]
#1159474
01/17/12 08:42 PM
01/17/12 08:42 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,679
owt west
Thread Ender1
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,679
owt west
|
Quote:
Quote:
by the way the 68-69 330HP 383 used the 2bbl cam.
You mean the B-body 383?
So the downgrade for the AC RRs and "normal" Satellites was the cam?
Why was the A-body manifold different? Because of a low-clearing hood?
Thats the 1st of heard of 68-69 383 330hp four barrel having a 2 bbl cam, i believe the difference in the 383 four barrel 330hp was a deleted windage tray.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: Thread Ender1]
#1159475
01/17/12 10:56 PM
01/17/12 10:56 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
1. There was such a thing as a 383 two-barrel cam in the early 60's. Two barrel cam was 252 duration, about .390 lift. Four barrel cam was 268 duration, .430 lift
2. There is no "two-barrel cam" for late 60's 383's. Not sure about 65 or 66, but 67-70 383's ALL used the same 256/260 duration, .425/.437 lift cam EXCEPT for Road Runners, Super Bees, and 69 A body 383's. The last three used the 440 hi-po cam.
3. 383 A bodies did not use any special low rise intake manifold. ALL 62-67 383 four barrel engines used the same #1859300 intake manifold.
4. 67 A body 383's were identical to 67 B and C body 383's except for the exhaust manifolds.
5. The initial question assumes that 67 A body 383's actually had less horsepower than 67 B body 383's. Given that dyno testing of the 67 B body 383 showed that they only made 280 horsepower, that's a questionable assumption.
6. People need to look at the 67 B body 383 exhaust manifolds and compare them to 67 A body 383 exhaust manifolds. I personally don't see how the log manifolds B body 383's had can flow any better than the 383 A body manifolds, but they darn sure aren't any 45 horsepower better.
7. If you really believe the factory hp ratings, you have to believe that a 1964 383 with two-barrel carb, 252 cam, single exhaust and a factory rating of 305 horsepower is stronger than a 67 Barracuda or Dart with a 383 4-barrel, 256/60 cam and dual exhaust. Makes you wonder why the factory bothered putting a four barrel or dual exhaust on the A body 383's.
8. The 68 A body 383's are identical to the 330 horse B body 383's except for the exhaust manifolds. Both have the same 256/60 cam. Since the A body 383's are rated at 300 horsepower and B's at 330, either the A body exhaust manifolds are 30 horsepower worse or either one engine is overrated or the other is underrated.
9. The 69 A body 383's are identical to the Road Runner/Super Bee 383's except for the exhaust manifolds. Both have the 440 hi-po 268/276 duration, .450/.465 lift cam. Since the 69 A body 383's are rated at 330 horsepower, one would assume that their exhaust manifolds are only five horsepower worse than the Road Runner/Super Bee exhaust manifolds (I can actually believe that).
Problem with that theory is that the 68 and 69 A body 383 exhaust manifolds are the same, so you have to believe the same manifolds are 30 horsepower worse than B body (non hi-po) 383's one year, but only five horsepower worse than the (hi-po) 383's the next. (And of course, 440 A bodies had the same horsepower rating as 440 B bodies, so what's the deal there????)
10. Through the 1970 model year, only Road Runners, Super Bees and the 69 A body 383's (and 440's) used the 440 hi-po cam. In 1971, all 4-barrel 383's used the hi-po cam. Two barrel 71 383's continued using the prior years 2/4 barrel cam. So in 71, but not 67-70, it would be accurate to talk about a "two barrel cam."
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: Thread Ender1]
#1159476
01/17/12 11:38 PM
01/17/12 11:38 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
by the way the 68-69 330HP 383 used the 2bbl cam.
You mean the B-body 383?
So the downgrade for the AC RRs and "normal" Satellites was the cam?
Why was the A-body manifold different? Because of a low-clearing hood?
Thats the 1st of heard of 68-69 383 330hp four barrel having a 2 bbl cam, i believe the difference in the 383 four barrel 330hp was a deleted windage tray.
5hp for a windage tray? , the 330HP 383 uses a different carb than the 335HP engine.
According to my 1969 Dodge service manual that shows the specs for the different engines the 330HP engine uses the same came as the 383 2bbl , also the 350HP 440 uses the exact same cam .
Diego , the 67 383 used an AFB with had a different bolt pattern than the AVS and the intake was a different casting than the 68-69 intake.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
#1159477
01/17/12 11:43 PM
01/17/12 11:43 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
1. There was such a thing as a 383 two-barrel cam in the early 60's. Two barrel cam was 252 duration, about .390 lift. Four barrel cam was 268 duration, .430 lift
2. There is no "two-barrel cam" for late 60's 383's. Not sure about 65 or 66, but 67-70 383's ALL used the same 256/260 duration, .425/.437 lift cam EXCEPT for Road Runners, Super Bees, and 69 A body 383's. The last three used the 440 hi-po cam.
3. 383 A bodies did not use any special low rise intake manifold. ALL 62-67 383 four barrel engines used the same #1859300 intake manifold.
4. 67 A body 383's were identical to 67 B and C body 383's except for the exhaust manifolds.
5. The initial question assumes that 67 A body 383's actually had less horsepower than 67 B body 383's. Given that dyno testing of the 67 B body 383 showed that they only made 280 horsepower, that's a questionable assumption.
6. People need to look at the 67 B body 383 exhaust manifolds and compare them to 67 A body 383 exhaust manifolds. I personally don't see how the log manifolds B body 383's had can flow any better than the 383 A body manifolds, but they darn sure aren't any 45 horsepower better.
7. If you really believe the factory hp ratings, you have to believe that a 1964 383 with two-barrel carb, 252 cam, single exhaust and a factory rating of 305 horsepower is stronger than a 67 Barracuda or Dart with a 383 4-barrel, 256/60 cam and dual exhaust. Makes you wonder why the factory bothered putting a four barrel or dual exhaust on the A body 383's.
8. The 68 A body 383's are identical to the 330 horse B body 383's except for the exhaust manifolds. Both have the same 256/60 cam. Since the A body 383's are rated at 300 horsepower and B's at 330, either the A body exhaust manifolds are 30 horsepower worse or either one engine is overrated or the other is underrated.
9. The 69 A body 383's are identical to the Road Runner/Super Bee 383's except for the exhaust manifolds. Both have the 440 hi-po 268/276 duration, .450/.465 lift cam. Since the 69 A body 383's are rated at 330 horsepower, one would assume that their exhaust manifolds are only five horsepower worse than the Road Runner/Super Bee exhaust manifolds (I can actually believe that).
Problem with that theory is that the 68 and 69 A body 383 exhaust manifolds are the same, so you have to believe the same manifolds are 30 horsepower worse than B body (non hi-po) 383's one year, but only five horsepower worse than the (hi-po) 383's the next. (And of course, 440 A bodies had the same horsepower rating as 440 B bodies, so what's the deal there????)
10. Through the 1970 model year, only Road Runners, Super Bees and the 69 A body 383's (and 440's) used the 440 hi-po cam. In 1971, all 4-barrel 383's used the hi-po cam. Two barrel 71 383's continued using the prior years 2/4 barrel cam. So in 71, but not 67-70, it would be accurate to talk about a "two barrel cam."
I call it a "2bbl cam" to note the difference between it and the cam used in the 383 335HP engine.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: JohnRR]
#1159478
01/18/12 12:29 AM
01/18/12 12:29 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
I call it a "2bbl cam" to note the difference between it and the cam used in the 383 335HP engine.
Fair enough until someone uses that as the reason the 67 A body 383's had less hp than the 67 B body 383's, then you have to explain, well, they have the same cam.
Now maybe if it were better understood that all 67-68 383's had the "two barrel cam" except for the Road Runner and Super Bee, then there wouldn't be such confusion about just what the differences were between the A and B 383's.
Somewhere on Allpar is a history of the Road Runner telling how much trouble the product planners had convincing the engineers to put the 440 hi-po cam in the Road Runner's 383, and you understand why that cam didn't make it into the Barracuda in either 67 or 68.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
#1159479
01/18/12 01:18 AM
01/18/12 01:18 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,541
Round Lake Beach, Illinoisy
Rhinodart
Rhinotruck
|
Rhinotruck
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,541
Round Lake Beach, Illinoisy
|
413 Coronet, the 67 383 manifold is indeed a low rise compared to the 68-69. I have owned 4-67 383 Darts and I have no idea where you got your information. They were indeed rated at 280 HP and the drivers side exhaust manifold was restricted due to it having to wrap around the steering column. In 1968 the manifold was opened up a little more and again in 1969, hence the different part numbers for each year. Also the AFB in 67 had less CFM than the AVS in 68 and 69. 
Last edited by Rhinodart; 01/18/12 01:21 AM.
The funny thing about science is that if you change one miniscule parameter you change the entire outcome to the way you want it.
JB Rhinehart, Realist
A-Body's RULE!
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: Rhinodart]
#1159480
01/18/12 01:47 AM
01/18/12 01:47 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
413 Coronet, the 67 383 manifold is indeed a low rise compared to the 68-69.
I agree. It is not low rise compared to 67 B body 383 intakes.
Quote:
I have owned 4-67 383 Darts and I have no idea where you got your information. They were indeed rated at 280 HP and the drivers side exhaust manifold was restricted due to it having to wrap around the steering column.
I don't disagree with anything you say here, but IMHO, there is no way the 67 A body manifolds are 45 horsepower worse than the 67 B body 383 logs - especially on a 300-or-so horsepower engine. In fact, I don't think they are any worse, because the 67 B body logs are pretty bad, but I haven't flowed them or dynoed them to know for sure; just my opinion.
Quote:
In 1968 the manifold was opened up a little more and again in 1969, hence the different part numbers for each year.
I recognize that the 68 A body 383's driver's side exhaust manifold is different than the 67's. But the 69 driver's side is the same as the 68 driver's side. And the passenger side is the same all three years. I get this information from Galen's White Book. Is his info wrong?
Quote:
Also the AFB in 67 had less CFM than the AVS in 68 and 69.
I agree here, too. Did I say anything different? Some of the comments posted above yours have suggested there were differences between A and B body 383's other than the exhaust in any given year; I don't believe that my comments ever implied that there were no differences between A body 383's from one year to the next. The most differences were between 67 and 68 (carb, heads, intake manifold, driver's side exhaust manifold, and probably pistons); the only differences I'm aware of between 68 and 69 A body 383's are the cam and also the 69's were upgraded to 2-1/2" exhaust pipes.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
#1159481
01/18/12 01:48 AM
01/18/12 01:48 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
I call it a "2bbl cam" to note the difference between it and the cam used in the 383 335HP engine.
Fair enough until someone uses that as the reason the 67 A body 383's had less hp than the 67 B body 383's, then you have to explain, well, they have the same cam.
Curtis , here is what I said above ....
Quote:
I don't know a lot about the 67 , they would have had 516 heads and I think it was based off the 300HP 383 , the left manifold was more restrictive on the 67 , they changed the manifold for 68 and used it on 69. I never compared the specs on the 68 , based on the lower HP engine, and by the way the 68-69 330HP 383 used the 2bbl cam.
I never claimed the 67 used the "2bbl cam " only 68 ... I don't remember clearly but I had a 330HP 383 in a 68 b body , pretty sure it had the 2bbl cam when I looked up it's specs ... but definitely in 69 the 330HP engine had the smaller cam.
If you look at NHRA specs , not that I agree that they are definitive , it shows the 330HP engine with the smaller cam . Now I have to look at it to see what cams it calls for in 67 and 68 .
Jim , best I can tell 68 and 69 used the same exhaust manifolds , but you would no better than myself .
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: JohnRR]
#1159482
01/18/12 01:57 AM
01/18/12 01:57 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
#1159483
01/18/12 02:01 AM
01/18/12 02:01 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
John, see post #2 above.
I see it now , I don't think 69 had upgrade pipes at least not the tailpipes , my original tips are the small inlet type , same as a 340 car, headpipes I'm pretty sure are 2.25.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: JohnRR]
#1159484
01/18/12 02:02 AM
01/18/12 02:02 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As for the NHRA specs for the 69 330 horsepower 383, is that the B body 330 horse engine or the A body 330 horse engine? I don't think they are the same, and the B gets that rating with the smaller cam, while the A gets it with the bigger cam. At least that's what I've always understood. It's not inconceivable that I've always been wrong.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: JohnRR]
#1159485
01/18/12 02:05 AM
01/18/12 02:05 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
John, see post #2 above.
I see it now , I don't think 69 had upgrade pipes at least not the tailpipes , my original tips are the small inlet type , same as a 340 car, headpipes I'm pretty sure are 2.25.
My 69 Cuda 383 has 2.5" headpipes, and I think some of the literature references that, as does the Accurate LTD website. I think some early 69's may only have had 2.25.
I agree that the 69 A body 383 tailpipes are the same as 69 A body 340 tailpipes.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
[Re: JohnRR]
#1159486
01/18/12 02:18 AM
01/18/12 02:18 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As to which cam the 69 383 A body had, for what its worth, my 1969 shop manual shows two cams for the 383 engine: the standard 256/260 cam and for the "Barracuda" and "Road Runner" the hi-po 268/284 cam.
My 67 shop manual shows only the 256/260 cam for 383's and I don't have a 68 shop manual.
|
|
|
Re: Question on 1967-69 A-body 383
#1159487
01/18/12 02:19 AM
01/18/12 02:19 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,004
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
As for the NHRA specs for the 69 330 horsepower 383, is that the B body 330 horse engine or the A body 330 horse engine? I don't think they are the same, and the B gets that rating with the smaller cam, while the A gets it with the bigger cam. At least that's what I've always understood. It's not inconceivable that I've always been wrong.
it does reference A body engine different than b body for 68 , have to check 69 .
My dart is a late build car, end of May 69, I don't think it had the original exhaust so I don't know about the headpipes, just that it had the tips and they were the tiny ones. I now have a mandrel bent 2.5" manifolds to tips using the accurate SS 2.5" tips .
|
|
|
|
|
