Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: AndyF]
#2038189
03/25/16 12:48 AM
03/25/16 12:48 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 36,041 Lincoln Nebraska
RapidRobert
Circle Track
|
Circle Track
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 36,041
Lincoln Nebraska
|
Gerald post all you want there ain't no limits and that is the purpose of Moparts. Just me I'd get a 400 block a 440 steel crank 440 rods (those would be fairly cheap) and the big expense would be the KB 280 pistons & offset grind the crank. that'd give you a ton of cubes (470) in the same B width pkg you have in there now so the alt/ps would fit back up perfect & if you have HP manifolds/good mandrel bends ex system it would fit right back up also. Post any Q's and how you decide to go
live every 24 hour block of time like it's your last day on earth
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: GY3]
#2038847
03/25/16 11:28 PM
03/25/16 11:28 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,421 Balt. Md
383man
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,421
Balt. Md
|
My 505 has been painted up to look like a stock motor. With the Stealth head it fools a lot of people. I tell them it's an RV 440 with a cam and headers that I gave a nice paintjob. Mine ran easy 11's at the track first time out on pump gas, through the mufflers, 3.55 gears and on street tires. I drive it everywhere. I'd love to do up an early B body 4 door with a low deck block and make it all dirty and crusty looking under the hood. Tell everyone it's a 361. Dirt and rust blowing out behind it as you trip the beams with a high 10... [/quote] GY3 your eng looks great ! Ron
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: dart games]
#2039147
03/26/16 01:48 PM
03/26/16 01:48 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,376
dogdays
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,376
|
Blazin' Bob, you keep talking about using 440 rods and an offset ground crank. You can have one OR the other. Offset grinding a 440 crank to a 3.91 stroke means you will use a big block chev type rod.
Chuck Senatore said it in his book and it is still to my mind the best advice; build the BIGGEST shortblock you can afford. When you get better heads it will move the torque peak up and the horsepower will go with it. But you CAN run a 220cfm head on a 500" block, that is also called a Cadillac 500. They moved those 5000lb boats around pretty well.
It feels like s a neat trick to grab a forged 440 crank out of your stash and drag it to your machine shop where the guy trims down the mains to 2.625, trims down the counterweights to 7.250 and offset grinds the rods to 2.200. BUT, WHERE IS THE MACHINE SHOP THAT'S GOING TO DO THAT FOR YOU AND WHAT WILL IT COST???
GUARANTEED IT'S NOT FREE. And, if you don't have a 440 crank stash you have to buy one of those too and that sets you back $150 or so. So now you have a 40+ year old crank made out of 1053 or something like that, not a super alloy by a long shot, and you have $600+ invested and for what? A 3.9" stroke. Contrast that to a brand new 4340 crank, 4.25" stroke, mains and counterweights where you want them, for maybe $100 more. 4340 is WAY superior to 1053.
One other thing to consider and that is engine driving characteristics. If you're not a class racer then what works to make your car feel stout is torque, and that means cubic inches. I'd much rather have a low rpm torque monster that doesn't need super valvegear, than a high rpm screamer that needs the valvesprings changed every year and the lash set every month.
There is no magic here, none whatsoever. A 511 will run stronger with a stock port window than a 470. Every time, all else being equal. They may both make exactly the same hp, but the 511 gets there first.
Figure out the largest shortblock you can afford, and build it.
R.
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: Gerald l]
#2042756
03/31/16 03:41 PM
03/31/16 03:41 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 57 GA
Gerald l
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 57
GA
|
My deal fell through on the 440 so HP engines out of N.C is going to build me a low deck 470. I seen they competed in the amsoil challenge and did pretty well and their builds come with a warranty also.
Last edited by Gerald l; 03/31/16 03:46 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: AndyF]
#2042772
03/31/16 04:08 PM
03/31/16 04:08 PM
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399 Aurora, Colorado
451Mopar
master
|
master
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399
Aurora, Colorado
|
The 470 is definitely grabbing my attention. Mopar magazine even has a 2 part article on a 470 their building with trick flows. It is now going to become a three part article. I have some intake and carb testing to do for part three. Andy, why the 470 and not the 499 (4.125 stroke) or 512 (4.25" stroke)? I know when you get into the 500+ engine size the stock cylinder port size starts to become a issue.
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: Gerald l]
#2042850
03/31/16 05:59 PM
03/31/16 05:59 PM
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399 Aurora, Colorado
451Mopar
master
|
master
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399
Aurora, Colorado
|
No oil support ring in the 512, just the 499, and it is not a big deal. Also, short compression height has little to do with overall piston skirt length. Skirt length is really limited by how close the piston comes to the crank at the bottom of the stroke. The compression height can change what ring pack you use and how far away from the top of the piston you can locate the top ring (usually nitrous applications.) The shorter compression height pistons usually don't need long skirts because the rod pin is pushing/pulling towards the top of the piston, not the bottom. Only the intake stroke where the crank is pulling the piston would make it rock a bit more. On the up strokes (compression and exhaust) and power stroke down, the piston will rock less with the shorter compression height (given the same skirt length.)
I can see where offset grinding a 440 crank and using GM 2.20" rod journal rods would be cost effective for a more budget type build.
As mentioned, 20+ years ago the 451 400 block combination was great because of the low cost, but it basically was a large bore 440 with shorter and lighter pistons in a slightly stronger block.
Now the low cost of stroker cranks, rods and stroker pistons has made these combination quite affordable.
My friend has an older 470" 400 stroker using the Mopar rods journal sizes, but he had to custom order pistons for his application, and that was around $1,200/set?
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: 451Mopar]
#2042878
03/31/16 06:40 PM
03/31/16 06:40 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,203 Oregon
AndyF
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,203
Oregon
|
The 470 is definitely grabbing my attention. Mopar magazine even has a 2 part article on a 470 their building with trick flows. It is now going to become a three part article. I have some intake and carb testing to do for part three. Andy, why the 470 and not the 499 (4.125 stroke) or 512 (4.25" stroke)? I know when you get into the 500+ engine size the stock cylinder port size starts to become a issue. There are a bunch of reasons why I prefer the 470 in a B block to the larger engines. Piston height, rod length, windage tray fitment, torque peak RPM and hp peak RPM, etc. It just seems to me that the 3.91 stroke "fits" in a B block since all of the supporting parts such as rods and pistons etc. also "fit". When you run the numbers the 470 inches "fits" with a standard port cross section to put the torque peak at a "good" point. A normal car with normal gearing can use the torque peak and hp peak to run well. So like I said, a bunch of reasons like that.
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: davenc]
#2043283
04/01/16 02:30 AM
04/01/16 02:30 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,806 Wichita
GY3
master
|
master
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,806
Wichita
|
You may want to consider more carb than a 750, even for a street only vehicle. Have you considered exhaust yet? I agree. I have the rest of the package pretty close to identical save for it's in an RB block. It's a torque MONSTER and very docile on the street. It's like you supersized a 440 with no downside! 3" Dynomax Ultra flows with turndowns in front of the rear axle.
|
|
|
Re: 400/451 or 440/493?
[Re: GY3]
#2044079
04/02/16 12:43 AM
04/02/16 12:43 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,928 Akron, Ohio
ProSport
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,928
Akron, Ohio
|
Personally, I like the 400 block as it leaves more room in the engine compartment and for all the world a 500" low-deck looks like a 383; guess that's the old secretive downplayer gene in me. My last 2 BBMs were 440 blocks in early B bodies, and they were a pain to work on on the right side.
Another thing I like about the 400 block is the bigger cylinders help unshroud the valves/flow a bit.
Your situation may well differ, and it's just my opinion. Next BB I want to build would look like a stock 383 Road Runner but lays down 11s through mufflers... My 505 has been painted up to look like a stock motor. With the Stealth head it fools a lot of people. I tell them it's an RV 440 with a cam and headers that I gave a nice paintjob. Mine ran easy 11's at the track first time out on pump gas, through the mufflers, 3.55 gears and on street tires. I drive it everywhere. I'd love to do up an early B body 4 door with a low deck block and make it all dirty and crusty looking under the hood. Tell everyone it's a 361. Dirt and rust blowing out behind it as you trip the beams with a high 10... I like the way you think! Engine looks great too. I try not to bring it up too often since I've talked about it so many times but I really liked the 451 I had in my DartSport, it ran 9's with Eddy heads and a 590 purpleshaft cam at 3050 pounds. Low maintenance and a ton of fun! I've also owned a couple 500" low decks and they've been fun too but that 451 was pretty darn impressive for what it was. ThumperDart's 470 has always been a strong runner, and I'd also like to try a 470 next due to the reasons AndyF has already mentioned.
1970 Challenger, all aluminum 528 Hemi, HDK suspension, Tremec 5 speed manual
|
|
|
|
|