All things being equal would the 340 keep up or b faster than the 360,we know the 360 has a longer stroke but also has the smaller bore

Just guessing

Both engines legal in the same weight car......360

We have run both blocks with the same heads cam, intake and exhaust in the same truck, The 360 is stronger

I would prefer a 360 for the street or mild builds. No substitute for cubic inches, a wise man once said. I think by the time you get to an all out engine, W9 heads, roller cam, etc., the difference diminishes as the intake, carb and cam start limiting the power. You would just spin the 340 a little more RPM than the 360. Does anyone still build a stock displacement engine anymore?

It is alot closer than you would think.

I ran 340s for many years before switching to a crate 360 short block a few years ago, My 340s ran good in the 10s and over 500 hp but the 360 made more torque and pulls better in high gear with the same cam, comp.ratio and W2 head setup.

340...............

Quote:

---

Does anyone still build a stock displacement engine anymore?

---

.............I'm a late bloomer.

340 all the way. My '72 Cuda with a roller cam 340 and ootb Edelbrock heads went 6.71 in the 1/8th shifting at 6000. Tuff engine.

The only reason to use a shorter stroke motor is, you already have one, or you need the most HP per CI. Other than that, build with plenty of stroke and your valve train will thank you.

My 360 is stock stroke and has gone 11.79..but i do miss my stroker...

There are a lot of variables within 340's as well as 360's in Stock and SS, so it boils down to "it depends".

'71 high compression 340's with a TQ tend fit and run in slightly faster classes than the other 340's and 360's. The '74 360 is right behind it, but they are used in heavier cars. Then it appears that the AVS 340's and later 360's run is several of the slower classes after that. Car weights vary quite a bit. In Stock, this tends to be spread out from D/Stock up through K/Stock or around there. Basically mid-10's through high 11's.

Moparts member Elephuntman had the C/SA record with a 340 Six Pack Challenger T/A in the 10.30 range at one time!!!

There is no substitute for cubic inches, so, all else being equal, a 360 will be faster. It would be intersting to do some research and see what the average '71 340 would run against the average '74 360 at the same weight.
I'm sure somebody more familiar with the class weights and ET's would know already

From experience a 340 compression engine makes the most power, TQ & AVS, by a good margin. A low compression 340 is not that far off of a 74 360. The 360 has more power down low but it does not have the rpm ability so on the track they are not that far apart. In Super Stock things get closer all the way around.

Herb McCandless told me that he found the 360 to be better in his son's S/S Lebaron. He said they took the cam, heads, intake, etc. and installed them on a 360 short block and that the car ran better. Maybe Herb Jr. can chime in on this...