|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
[Re: Streetwize]
#1794631
04/02/15 02:24 PM
04/02/15 02:24 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,506 Az
Crizila
master
|
master
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,506
Az
|
Quote:
If you have an uncut 340 and the bores clean-up at .020 you wind up with a standard 4.06" bore which has lots and lots more piston and ring pack choices readily available. Plus you get to save the block for additional incremental bores later...If I can I go 4.06 I will and I'll save for a possible need for 4.07 down the road.
Valve shrouding is IMO more of a concern on Big block Mopar Wedges than on small blocks due the SB superior valve angle, on-center valve/bore placement, the limiting factor on SBM's is generally port cross section and pushrod pinch shrouding.
all else being equal a 340 stroker will have a bit less frictional losses at the mains due to its' smaller bearing diameter....a 360 will also be a bit heavier due to those thicker crank mains (steel is heavier than cast iron)
360s are a lot more plentiful though ![](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbs.gif)
As for why mopar went to a 360 instead of just a 4" bore 318 block, I suspect cost cutting with the longer 3.58 stroke allowed for cheaper but still strong cast crank production and external balancing saving millions ofver the mass production multi-year run of the engine. As evidence of that, (to my knowledge) there was never a steel or internally balanced 360 made. The 360 was also intended as a gap bridger for trucks and the big C bodys between the 318 and the (was 383, now 400).
also thought there was a SCCA / NASCAR cubic inch rule change involved there . The 340 was always touted as the "performance engine", mostly because of when it came on board (1970)and of course the performance options available. When the 360 showed up ( 1971 - with a 2-barrel only ) the performance party was on the way out. On the market, that 340 is probably worth 2-3 times what the 360 is worth. ![](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wave.gif)
Fastest 300
|
|
|
Entire Thread
|
360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
wkroncke17
|
04/02/15 04:52 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
MR_P_BODY
|
04/02/15 04:58 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
wkroncke17
|
04/02/15 03:07 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
MR_P_BODY
|
04/02/15 03:26 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Crizila
|
04/02/15 04:59 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
MR_P_BODY
|
04/02/15 05:02 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
wkroncke17
|
04/02/15 05:19 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
MR_P_BODY
|
04/02/15 05:26 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Oyvind Mopar
|
04/02/15 10:26 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
justinp61
|
04/02/15 03:47 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Crizila
|
04/02/15 04:26 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Streetwize
|
04/02/15 04:59 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
HotRodDave
|
04/02/15 05:18 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Crizila
|
04/02/15 06:24 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Moparnut426
|
04/02/15 06:34 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
cheapstreetdustr
|
04/02/15 07:31 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Streetwize
|
04/02/15 08:35 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
justinp61
|
04/02/15 08:37 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Crizila
|
04/02/15 09:51 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
wkroncke17
|
04/03/15 03:20 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
340_Dart
|
04/03/15 04:09 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
wkroncke17
|
04/03/15 04:05 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
Streetwize
|
04/03/15 04:16 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
340_Dart
|
04/03/15 04:25 PM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
VIPERDUST
|
04/09/15 04:43 AM
|
Re: 360 to 408, or 340 to 410?
|
mrsmallblock
|
04/10/15 02:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|