Re: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: Ramrod39]
#1040722
07/26/11 08:48 PM
07/26/11 08:48 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,319
Chicago Burbs
sthemi
master
|
master
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,319
Chicago Burbs
|
nothing wrong with the 77 440. Not going to make a ton of power without pistons and a decent cam.but it will run on any unleaded swill you can pump in. the 68 383 is a great motor, makes good power and likes RPMs, needs Premium fuel only, unless the comp is lowered... I would go on conditon of the donor motor combined with the amount of time and money you want to spend on freshing.. 
|
|
|
Re: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: sthemi]
#1040723
07/26/11 09:57 PM
07/26/11 09:57 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,058
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,058
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
the 68 383 is a great motor, makes good power and likes RPMs, needs Premium fuel only, unless the comp is lowered...
The as delivered compression of the 68 383 HP was barely 9.2 , without knowing what pistons were used in the build along with block and head type/machining one thinking that motor will need premiumn is a stretch.
|
|
|
Re: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: JohnRR]
#1040724
07/27/11 12:15 AM
07/27/11 12:15 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,219
Someplace you aren't
SomeCarGuy
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,219
Someplace you aren't
|
An OEM 383 is a nice package. I'd bet that it has some real crappy pistons in it since it has been punched. In other words, I'm pretty sure it will not be all that great.
The 77 440 will have crappy pistons OEM. If you are going to build, grab that one and do it right.
I want my fair share
|
|
|
Re: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: SomeCarGuy]
#1040725
07/27/11 07:23 AM
07/27/11 07:23 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,392
nielsville, minn.
quickd100
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,392
nielsville, minn.
|
I used a '77 hp short block, 516 heads cut to 65cc's,steel shim head gasket, a 509 cam, 1-3/4" headers, M1 single plane, 850 holley, TA 10" convertor, and 4.56 suregrip in my old truck. It ran 12.20@106 with a 1.60 60ft time. Use the 440. Dave
|
|
|
Re: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: Pale_Roader]
#1040730
08/03/11 01:58 PM
08/03/11 01:58 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
|
Quote:
I have the same car same year and am also just looking to get mine running. I have an available 75 or 76 440 pulled out ov a runner, but i would MUCH rather find and use a 68-69 4-bbl 383 (one with stock pistons though). I like the smaller engines, dont need a 440 to go fast, the 383's are just generally stouter, i like revs over low-end torque and probably the main reason that 440 will continue to sit there, alongside my non-running Challenger until i find a nice low-deck... The lowdecks are just easier to work around. I have never had a big block Mopar that wasn't high-maintenance... and there is just more room in the engine compartment with a 383. Weight savings is a big deal for me too... even if its (on average) only 20lbs. I also like the doing more with less idea.
Thats all fine but;
- "generally stouter" is completely irrelevant at any reasonable street horsepower level.
- the 383 revving issue is largly an urban myth, especially on a street build with hydraulic lifters; both motors are done by 6000rpm. Want to rev? get a solid lifter BBC.
- easier to work around?? why because of the 3/4 inch less deck height? ummm OK....
- the weight difference is zero to 25 lbs; if weight is an issue, there are any number of goodies that will more than make up the difference between a B or RB in weight.....if there is any difference at all.
- High maintenance?? a Mopar wedge?? wow, try something exotic. anyway, no difference between a B or RB as far as maintenance goes.
- doing more with less is fine; it's your money but using a 383 instead of a 440 is giving away free power; I'd never do it unless I was going to build a stroker and it was in an original 383/400 car....but hey, fill your boots.
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: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1040731
08/04/11 09:00 AM
08/04/11 09:00 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,862
the frozen wastes...
Pale_Roader
Swears too much
|
Swears too much
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,862
the frozen wastes...
|
Quote:
Thats all fine but;
- "generally stouter" is completely irrelevant at any reasonable street horsepower level.
So is using aftermarket rods... but thats almost considered mandatory to many here...
Quote:
- the 383 revving issue is largly an urban myth, especially on a street build with hydraulic lifters; both motors are done by 6000rpm. Want to rev? get a solid lifter BBC.
Hey... i like the revs. The lowdeck WILL do it easier... measurably? well, who knows really...
Quote:
- easier to work around?? why because of the 3/4 inch less deck height? ummm OK....
Uh, actually yes. It is murder to change plugs in my 72 Charger with headers. In some spots 1/8" ov an inch will literally save the day. The lowdeck is what? an inch narrower... For that alone i will forsake the 440 on my next car. Maybe if Mopar big blocks could go 2000 miles without needing new plugs this might not be an issue...
Quote:
- the weight difference is zero to 25 lbs; if weight is an issue, there are any number of goodies that will more than make up the difference between a B or RB in weight.....if there is any difference at all.
I'm talking averages. We've seen the articles where a 383 block can weigh more than a 440 block, but the average is less, and i think most would agree around 20lbs less. The chances are you'll save weight with the lowdeck. Now, add those weight-savers to the already lighter engine.
Quote:
- High maintenance?? a Mopar wedge?? wow, try something exotic. anyway, no difference between a B or RB as far as maintenance goes.
Agreed, but doing plugs or even getting down the side on a lowdeck will still be easier.
And maybe i've just had nothing but bad luck with these engines (that i love by the way), but yes... high maintenance. Sure, you can BUILD a 440 to be relatively trouble free... but a drop-in is always a headache. I've had many GM big blocks (though not an actual Chevy) and not one ever required the hood to be opened. Maybe i just got lucky... but thats a long string ov luck (or bad luck with Mopars). They were designed well, but built horribly.
Quote:
- doing more with less is fine; it's your money but using a 383 instead of a 440 is giving away free power; I'd never do it unless I was going to build a stroker and it was in an original 383/400 car....but hey, fill your boots.
Dave
Yeah i know... all this obsession with efficiency is gonna make me a smallbock guy one ov these days... But i go to the track and read here and just see such exaggerated diminishing returns with cubic inches. Personally, i think a 426-440 sized stroker lowdeck is about as perfect as a big block Mopar is gonna get. Thats what i'd build if i had the coin.
|
|
|
Re: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: Pale_Roader]
#1040732
08/04/11 01:30 PM
08/04/11 01:30 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
|
I won't disagree with the bulk of that except to say that the "68 - '70 body engine compartment must be bigger, 'cause I haven't had any space issues. And yes, you must have really bad luck because Mopar wedges certainly aren't known for being high maintenance engines. A 451 low deck stroker (or similar) is a great engine; a buddy has one in his '68 Charger with a 6 pack setup on it and it runs great. The only downside is equivalent performance to a 440 with increased build cost but if I had an original 383 car, that's the way I would go too.  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: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1040733
08/05/11 08:26 AM
08/05/11 08:26 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,862
the frozen wastes...
Pale_Roader
Swears too much
|
Swears too much
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,862
the frozen wastes...
|
Quote:
I won't disagree with the bulk of that except to say that the "68 - '70 body engine compartment must be bigger, 'cause I haven't had any space issues. And yes, you must have really bad luck because Mopar wedges certainly aren't known for being high maintenance engines.
I've never owned a 68-70, only this 72 and many E-bodies. It is tight in there. Maybe there are better fitting headers than Hooker Comps though. Spark plugs are a night mare, compression test? forget it. Maybe i just need to buy really expensive tools.
I dont know what it is man, but with the dozen or so big block Mopars i've had all but one vibrated, and all but one burned enough oil to matter. Keeping plugs clean was impossible. This latest 440 (75 drop-in) i have has been the exception, but it still likes oil and plugs. Buick 455's and Caddy 472/500's were my thing before Mopar (plug many driver BOP 350's) and never... never did one vibrate or burn oil. That cant be luck.
Quote:
A 451 low deck stroker (or similar) is a great engine; a buddy has one in his '68 Charger with a 6 pack setup on it and it runs great. The only downside is equivalent performance to a 440 with increased build cost but if I had an original 383 car, that's the way I would go too.
Dave
Even the cost aint much different anymore... depending on how you do it. Its crazy how cheap things have got for the big block Mopar.
I still like the less is more idea. Street racing with my buddy's 289 Maverick kinda drove that home. That thing was unstoppable... and what a bashed welfare piece ov [Edited by Moparts - Family Friendly Site - Keep it clean] it was. Still, that sucker revved to the moon, on its 87 octane gas, and everyone thought it was a 351 or at least a 347... People started coming out from the city to race the 'nitroused Maverick'... and we just laughed. Same basic idea with a 383/400.
|
|
|
Re: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: Pale_Roader]
#1040734
08/05/11 04:30 PM
08/05/11 04:30 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:
I won't disagree with the bulk of that except to say that the "68 - '70 body engine compartment must be bigger, 'cause I haven't had any space issues. And yes, you must have really bad luck because Mopar wedges certainly aren't known for being high maintenance engines.
I've never owned a 68-70, only this 72 and many E-bodies. It is tight in there. Maybe there are better fitting headers than Hooker Comps though. Spark plugs are a night mare, compression test? forget it. Maybe i just need to buy really expensive tools.
I dont know what it is man, but with the dozen or so big block Mopars i've had all but one vibrated, and all but one burned enough oil to matter. Keeping plugs clean was impossible. This latest 440 (75 drop-in) i have has been the exception, but it still likes oil and plugs. Buick 455's and Caddy 472/500's were my thing before Mopar (plug many driver BOP 350's) and never... never did one vibrate or burn oil. That cant be luck.
Quote:
A 451 low deck stroker (or similar) is a great engine; a buddy has one in his '68 Charger with a 6 pack setup on it and it runs great. The only downside is equivalent performance to a 440 with increased build cost but if I had an original 383 car, that's the way I would go too.
Dave
Even the cost aint much different anymore... depending on how you do it. Its crazy how cheap things have got for the big block Mopar.
I still like the less is more idea. Street racing with my buddy's 289 Maverick kinda drove that home. That thing was unstoppable... and what a bashed welfare piece ov [Edited by Moparts - Family Friendly Site - Keep it clean] it was. Still, that sucker revved to the moon, on its 87 octane gas, and everyone thought it was a 351 or at least a 347... People started coming out from the city to race the 'nitroused Maverick'... and we just laughed. Same basic idea with a 383/400.
- not sure about the difference between B and E body engine compartments, but the space comment makes more sense with headers; I suppose every 1/2" counts then......I am a manifold guy.
- I've been a GM guy most of my life but my mopars have never had those issues nor have I ever heard of mopar B or RB engines (which would be similar due to the fact the design is almost identical) having more issues with oil consumption, plug fouling or vibration.....  I would guess that you have the worst luck ever or are doing something bizarre!! .....mixing and matching the various 440 cranks, balancers and torque converters maybe?
- agree that stroker kits are pretty cheap....not as cheap as a 440 core, but pretty cheap.
- yes, there is a certain allure to building a motor that runs better than people expect.....was thinking of stroking the 318 in the 'Cuda for the same reason and I think a low deck stroker would be perfect for a Superbee or RR 383 car.
anyhow,
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: 68 383 hp or 77 440
[Re: DPelletier]
#1040735
08/05/11 08:15 PM
08/05/11 08:15 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,221
Branson, Mo.
joedust451
super gas
|
super gas
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,221
Branson, Mo.
|
Id say pic the engine that has the best platform & overall condition for the price, There is no sence installing thin gaskets on the 440 because all those BBs came factory with the steel shim gaskets, You can mill the heads, but with a piston .180" in the hole won't do you much just cutting off .030", even .050" BTDT, If the 383 was rebuilt useing factory style pistons then definitly go for it, you never know, Don't ever think a 383 won't kick a 440s ass, because i've seen it done many times, & as for the 383s derability sheezz, they are by far the strongest BB mopar ever built, They are rugged & tough & will run like hell, A friend of mine had a 74 duster with a .060" 383, 12.5.1 compression, .590 cam, Victor intake, 850dp, 4.56 gears & 5200 stall, He ran that car in brackets "every" weekend for 10 yrs. & only re-ring it twice & fresh bearings, won tons of cash, kicked ass on many 440s, At 3700ft Alt, car ran 10.9s, in dallas it ran 10.4s, In bay town it ran 10.teens & it twisted the driveshaft right out of the car, he shifted right at 7000 on stock rods with good bolts, yes stock rods. I'd take an HP 383 anyday over a smogged out 440.
|
|
|
|
|
