Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: moparcanuk]
#761055
07/30/10 02:38 AM
07/30/10 02:38 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,161 CT
GTX MATT
master
|
master
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,161
CT
|
The thing that dissapoints me with that test is something that JohnRR pointed out, apparently that dyno was very friendly until recently, I believe it was something like 10 percent. I looked into it and he was right.
Now I need to pin those needles, got to feel that heat Hear my motor screamin while I'm tearin up the street
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: GTX MATT]
#761056
07/30/10 05:04 AM
07/30/10 05:04 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 707 California
BigDaddy440
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 707
California
|
This probably won't help you, but I dyno'd a fairly stock 440 on a chassis dyno years ago.
440, .030" over, KB pistons, Mopar .474 lift cam, stock 906 heads with upgraded valves and springs. Performer RPM intake, 850 carb, and 1 & 7/8" headers.
Made 305 rwhp and nearly 600ft lbs or torque on the dynojet dyno.
Eventually, I went with a bigger cam, and edelbrock heads and made 360rwhp.
-dan
1969 A12 Roadrunner 1970 Plymouth Cuda 1968 Dodge Dart
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: BigDaddy440]
#761057
09/08/10 05:26 PM
09/08/10 05:26 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,161 CT
GTX MATT
master
|
master
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,161
CT
|
Quote:
This probably won't help you, but I dyno'd a fairly stock 440 on a chassis dyno years ago.
440, .030" over, KB pistons, Mopar .474 lift cam, stock 906 heads with upgraded valves and springs. Performer RPM intake, 850 carb, and 1 & 7/8" headers.
Made 305 rwhp and nearly 600ft lbs or torque on the dynojet dyno.
Eventually, I went with a bigger cam, and edelbrock heads and made 360rwhp.
-dan
How much torque?
Now I need to pin those needles, got to feel that heat Hear my motor screamin while I'm tearin up the street
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: GTX MATT]
#761058
09/08/10 08:03 PM
09/08/10 08:03 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,978 U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,978
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
The thing that dissapoints me with that test is something that JohnRR pointed out, apparently that dyno was very friendly until recently, I believe it was something like 10 percent. I looked into it and he was right.
Don't you hate that ??? ... nevermind it was REBUILT , I'd like to see a LO MILEAGE survivor engine on the pump , something with under 5k miles or so ...
I think MM mag has me blocked, the link will not completely load ...
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: BigDaddy440]
#761059
09/08/10 08:05 PM
09/08/10 08:05 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,978 U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,978
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
This probably won't help you, but I dyno'd a fairly stock 440 on a chassis dyno years ago.
440, .030" over, KB pistons, Mopar .474 lift cam, stock 906 heads with upgraded valves and springs. Performer RPM intake, 850 carb, and 1 & 7/8" headers.
Made 305 rwhp and nearly 600ft lbs or torque on the dynojet dyno.
Eventually, I went with a bigger cam, and edelbrock heads and made 360rwhp.
-dan
I think you are right , that won't help , what was stock about it , SOME of the castings ??
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: JohnRR]
#761060
09/08/10 09:44 PM
09/08/10 09:44 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,161 CT
GTX MATT
master
|
master
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,161
CT
|
Quote:
Quote:
The thing that dissapoints me with that test is something that JohnRR pointed out, apparently that dyno was very friendly until recently, I believe it was something like 10 percent. I looked into it and he was right.
Don't you hate that ??? ... nevermind it was REBUILT , I'd like to see a LO MILEAGE survivor engine on the pump , something with under 5k miles or so ...
I think MM mag has me blocked, the link will not completely load ...
I agree 100%, none of the resto cams actually replicate what stock was that I know of, and even if they do we probably dont know since we dont have the actual @.050 figures for the stock cams (although I do understand someone measured an A12 cam) and none of the "stock replacement" pistons deliver stock compression. I guess someone just needs to find a really low mileage original engine to test on a good dyno.
Now I need to pin those needles, got to feel that heat Hear my motor screamin while I'm tearin up the street
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: BSB67]
#761064
09/09/10 12:20 PM
09/09/10 12:20 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Chrysler (Direct Connection) rated the 440 4bbl (no year specified) at an estimated 270 to 330 hp. FWIW
That would have been net horsepower at the flywheel; gross would be higher - although not necessarily as high as advertised horsepower.
Hot Rod magazine dynoed a 67 383 4-barrel back in the day. Advertised horsepower was 325. They got 280.
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
#761065
09/09/10 01:32 PM
09/09/10 01:32 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I had a bone stock '71 440 with measured 9.5:1 compression, stock rods, pistons, heads, valves intake, crank etc.
It did have a 750 vacuum secondary 3310 Holley, 1 7/8 headers and a MP .528 mechanical cam. It put out 318-320 HP at the rear wheels and right at 400 HP at the flywheel.
Keeping that in mind I would say the 350, 375 and 390 HP gross factory ratings were dead on!
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: ragtop]
#761067
09/09/10 08:25 PM
09/09/10 08:25 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,389 nielsville, minn.
quickd100
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,389
nielsville, minn.
|
My current dyno mule is a standard bore 440 with 68/69 stock cast pistons. Unfortunately, the block has ALOT of taper in the cylinders. On most pulls it's all done by 4500rpm, (turns into a mosquito fogger as there is no ring seal by that rpm.) Mods to the motor are a mechanical cam, .495I, .519E, 239/246@.050 110 centerline. 1-3/4" headers, 452 heads with good valve job and home pocket porting. Compression is 11.26-1. Fuel is E-85. The first pulls were with a '77 cast iron intake and my 850 E-85 thermoquad. Timing was set at 37 degrees and it made 344.9hp@4319rpm. (as I said it had a tremendous amount of taper resulting in so much crankcase pressure it pushed the breastplate gasket up to the bottom of the intake manifold.) I switched to the MP M1 intake, and installed a another vent to the crankcase and plugged the PCV so I didn't have all that oil smoke recycling through the cylinders. I got the motor to run up to 4425rpm and it made 396.3hp. I played with the secondary air door and got that dialed in. On one pull I was able to get it to pull to 4800rpm, it made 437.3hp@4791rpm and 488.2 ft/lbs.@4577rpm. I know this isn't a stock motor but I believe the factory numbers would be pretty close to those that were published. Dave
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
#761068
09/09/10 09:05 PM
09/09/10 09:05 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,311 Prospect, PA
BSB67
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,311
Prospect, PA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Chrysler (Direct Connection) rated the 440 4bbl (no year specified) at an estimated 270 to 330 hp. FWIW
That would have been net horsepower at the flywheel; gross would be higher - although not necessarily as high as advertised horsepower.
Hot Rod magazine dynoed a 67 383 4-barrel back in the day. Advertised horsepower was 325. They got 280.
Yes, I think you're correct, net, not gross.
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: BSB67]
#761069
09/09/10 09:11 PM
09/09/10 09:11 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,680 South San Francisco, Ca
70sixpkrt
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,680
South San Francisco, Ca
|
Quote:
Quote: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chrysler (Direct Connection) rated the 440 4bbl (no year specified) at an estimated 270 to 330 hp. FWIW
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That would have been net horsepower at the flywheel; gross would be higher - although not necessarily as high as advertised horsepower.
Hot Rod magazine dynoed a 67 383 4-barrel back in the day. Advertised horsepower was 325. They got 280.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I think you're correct, net, not gross.
To me, wouldn't gross be at the flywheel and net would be at the rear tires?
|
|
|
Re: Anyone dyno a completely stock 69 440?
[Re: BSB67]
#761071
09/10/10 12:33 PM
09/10/10 12:33 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,319 Puyallup, WA
StealthWedge67
master
|
master
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,319
Puyallup, WA
|
Not a 440, but I saw an article in I believe Engine Masters Mag about a year ago where they assembled a RR spec 383, and came up with exactly 335 hp!
Horsepower ratings are sooooo subjective though. Seems that Ma Mopar underrated back in the day, or rated at low RPM's for some reason. I.E.: Sure, a 67 solid cam dual quad hemi made 425 hp at 4200 RPM's (published)... BUT, what was it making at 6200 RPM??? (Likely in the 475 range). Chebbie ratings were always impressive, but the cars didn't go any faster than mopars with substantially less advertised HP. Everyone raves about the LS-6 450 horse 454, but where is it at the drag strip?, likely struggling to keep up with a 375-horse 440. Buick GS 455's were rated at 360 horse, but they would flat blister at the track! The only thing that really matters is: WHAT DOES THE TIME SLIP SAY?
LemonWedge - Street heavy / Strip ready - 11.07 @ 120
|
|
|
|
|