Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 14 of 16 1 2 12 13 14 15 16
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: 62maxwgn] #62629
12/16/09 12:26 PM
12/16/09 12:26 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,683
S.E. Michigan
ZIPPY Offline
I Live Here
ZIPPY  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,683
S.E. Michigan
No 440s aren't "special" either.

Good and special aren't the same.
Just because I happen to like it, doesn't mean there's anything all that SPECIAL about it.

Everyone have fun trying to create debate where none exists, this thread is a total waste

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: BigBlockMopar] #62630
12/16/09 12:31 PM
12/16/09 12:31 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,024
Kalispell Mt.
H
HotRodDave Offline
I Live Here
HotRodDave  Offline
I Live Here
H

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,024
Kalispell Mt.
Quote:

Quote:

Mods is there anything positive coming out of this thread anymore? Merry Christmas to all and to all a goodnight...




Oh yes there is... It's providing a certain level of fun for those who don't participate in it (anymore) ...






I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!



Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: HotRodDave] #62631
12/16/09 12:41 PM
12/16/09 12:41 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,024
Kalispell Mt.
H
HotRodDave Offline
I Live Here
HotRodDave  Offline
I Live Here
H

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,024
Kalispell Mt.
Hotrod also did a build like Patrick mentioned but they used BB chevys with small valve heads so shrouding would not be an issue and they did correct the R/S ratios to be equal and they even ran the dyno on a steady state pull (stop RPM from going up then check power) so the different bob weight would not effect it, the result less than 1% differance any where in the curve, pretty much squashed the bore/stroke tq/hp debate.

That is not the only test I have seen either but it should be easy for someone computer savoy to find a link to bth articles.

Can any one find where I said a 440 was "special"?

I only said it can make a tad more hp than an equal 413 and for less $$$ Now that I think about it, I never even said a 413 was stupid or dumb


I am not causing global warming, I am just trying to hold off a impending Ice Age!



Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: HotRodDave] #62632
12/16/09 01:37 PM
12/16/09 01:37 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,109
Upper Marlboro, MD
R
Reggie Offline
top fuel
Reggie  Offline
top fuel
R

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,109
Upper Marlboro, MD
I think this guy knows what he's talking about.

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: Reggie] #62633
12/16/09 03:45 PM
12/16/09 03:45 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,533
Indiana
F
Fury Fan Offline
master
Fury Fan  Offline
master
F

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,533
Indiana
That article is a good example of where everything is well-written and appears to have merit -- if you only take it at face value. However, it does not address opposite compromises/perspectives.

As an example:
He mentions that ring friction is the greatest loss in an engine, which we all accept to be true. He mentions that a shorter stroke has less drag of ring friction -- however he does not quantitatively discuss the 'longer' rings required in a larger bore. Based on a simple circumference calculation, a 440's bore/ring is about 3% longer than a 413 - so there is higher friction with a larger bore.

Larger bores take advantage of larger valves but they weigh more. Running larger valves, and at higher RPM, requires stiffer springs to maintain control with all else equal, there is increased inertia & more friction in the valvetrain.

Larger bores have more area and therefore require more time for the flame front to travel. This theoretically requires more ignition timing, and advanced ignition timing permits more heat to be lost to the cooling system. Ideally, ignition would start at TDC. Larger bores also have more surface area at the cylinder walls that hold cool end gasses that contaminate the next intake charge.

My subject is racing engines, not street motors, so I'm not concerned with torque at 2,000 rpm. In my view, if you are building an engine for maximum output at a specific displacement, such as a Comp engine, then the bores should be as big as possible and the stroke as short as possible.

It is known that an engine is most efficient at its torque peak, so you increase power by creating more torque pulses/unit time, however they become less efficient individually as RPM increases.

Yeah, if you dont care about fuel usage and you want to run an engine at max RPM (and dont care about the higher expenses involved with high-RPM durability), then his statements have more merit.

Its all a compromise. Whomever suggested a scientific test of identical 413-440 builds hit the bullseye.

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: Fury Fan] #62634
12/16/09 03:57 PM
12/16/09 03:57 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Quote:

That article is a good example of where everything is well-written and appears to have merit -- if you only take it at face value. However, it does not address opposite compromises/perspectives.

As an example:
He mentions that ring friction is the greatest loss in an engine, which we all accept to be true. He mentions that a shorter stroke has less drag of ring friction -- however he does not quantitatively discuss the 'longer' rings required in a larger bore. Based on a simple circumference calculation, a 440's bore/ring is about 3% longer than a 413 - so there is higher friction with a larger bore.

Larger bores take advantage of larger valves but they weigh more. Running larger valves, and at higher RPM, requires stiffer springs to maintain control with all else equal, there is increased inertia & more friction in the valvetrain.

Larger bores have more area and therefore require more time for the flame front to travel. This theoretically requires more ignition timing, and advanced ignition timing permits more heat to be lost to the cooling system. Ideally, ignition would start at TDC. Larger bores also have more surface area at the cylinder walls that hold cool end gasses that contaminate the next intake charge.

My subject is racing engines, not street motors, so I'm not concerned with torque at 2,000 rpm. In my view, if you are building an engine for maximum output at a specific displacement, such as a Comp engine, then the bores should be as big as possible and the stroke as short as possible.

It is known that an engine is most efficient at its torque peak, so you increase power by creating more torque pulses/unit time, however they become less efficient individually as RPM increases.

Yeah, if you dont care about fuel usage and you want to run an engine at max RPM (and dont care about the higher expenses involved with high-RPM durability), then his statements have more merit.

Its all a compromise. Whomever suggested a scientific test of identical 413-440 builds hit the bullseye.



excellent answer

Reggie was throwing the Reher-Morrison Racing name around becouse that name would seem to have credibility, which it does.. but not on this case.

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? #62635
12/16/09 04:04 PM
12/16/09 04:04 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,533
Indiana
F
Fury Fan Offline
master
Fury Fan  Offline
master
F

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,533
Indiana
Quote:

excellent answer




Thanks! Sometimes my long-winded answers become the last one in a thread for some reason.

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: Fury Fan] #62636
12/16/09 04:31 PM
12/16/09 04:31 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



What the....

Youg guys can't be serious!

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: ZIPPY] #62637
12/16/09 04:51 PM
12/16/09 04:51 PM
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 21,250
Manitoba, Canada
DaytonaTurbo Offline
Too Many Posts
DaytonaTurbo  Offline
Too Many Posts

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 21,250
Manitoba, Canada
Quote:


Everyone have fun trying to create debate where none exists, this thread is a total waste



No, it allows us to vent our winter/cabin fever!

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: DaytonaTurbo] #62638
12/16/09 06:22 PM
12/16/09 06:22 PM

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Quote:

Quote:


Everyone have fun trying to create debate where none exists, this thread is a total waste



No, it allows us to vent our winter/cabin fever!



yup lotsa winter cabin fever here. i'm gonna waste my time effort and $$$ on a 413 build. then lay the hurt
on a couple 440's/Chev 454's around here that think their "fuel" don't stink.

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: Fury Fan] #62639
12/16/09 06:43 PM
12/16/09 06:43 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,109
Upper Marlboro, MD
R
Reggie Offline
top fuel
Reggie  Offline
top fuel
R

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,109
Upper Marlboro, MD
Quote:

That article is a good example of where everything is well-written and appears to have merit -- if you only take it at face value. However, it does not address opposite compromises/perspectives.

As an example:
He mentions that ring friction is the greatest loss in an engine, which we all accept to be true. He mentions that a shorter stroke has less drag of ring friction -- however he does not quantitatively discuss the 'longer' rings required in a larger bore. Based on a simple circumference calculation, a 440's bore/ring is about 3% longer than a 413 - so there is higher friction with a larger bore.


True. However, any power loss due to friction would be more than offset by the power gain due to the increased displacement.

Quote:


Larger bores take advantage of larger valves but they weigh more. Running larger valves, and at higher RPM, requires stiffer springs to maintain control with all else equal, there is increased inertia & more friction in the valvetrain.


Also true. However, that point is moot for this discussion which suggested a heads up comparison of 413 and 440 short blocks with all other variables being equal.

Quote:

Larger bores have more area and therefore require more time for the flame front to travel. This theoretically requires more ignition timing, and advanced ignition timing permits more heat to be lost to the cooling system. Ideally, ignition would start at TDC. Larger bores also have more surface area at the cylinder walls that hold cool end gasses that contaminate the next intake charge.


Again, any power loss due to these factors would be more than be offset by the power gain due to the increased displacement. If this were such an issue, Ma Mopar wouldn't have produced anything with a bigger bore than a RB 383 in the first place.

Quote:

My subject is racing engines, not street motors, so I'm not concerned with torque at 2,000 rpm. In my view, if you are building an engine for maximum output at a specific displacement, such as a Comp engine, then the bores should be as big as possible and the stroke as short as possible.


I read that. To me it means that a bigger bore 440 would have the advantage in a race against a 413.

Quote:

It is known that an engine is most efficient at its torque peak, so you increase power by creating more torque pulses/unit time, however they become less efficient individually as RPM increases.

Yeah, if you dont care about fuel usage and you want to run an engine at max RPM (and dont care about the higher expenses involved with high-RPM durability), then his statements have more merit.


Again, the issue of stroke is moot with a 413/440 comparison. What he does hit on is bore size and power, which is why I posted the link.

Quote:

Its all a compromise. Whomever suggested a scientific test of identical 413-440 builds hit the bullseye.


I agree, but I doubt that anyone will bother.

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? #62640
12/16/09 06:50 PM
12/16/09 06:50 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,109
Upper Marlboro, MD
R
Reggie Offline
top fuel
Reggie  Offline
top fuel
R

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,109
Upper Marlboro, MD
Quote:

Reggie was throwing the Reher-Morrison Racing name around becouse that name would seem to have credibility, which it does.. but not on this case.




Didn't "throw anything around" for credibility,(although he does it for a living rather than playing with his toys in the garage). I posted the link because he talked about bore size and power. Stroke is moot in this comparison.

Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: Reggie] #62641
12/17/09 03:18 AM
12/17/09 03:18 AM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,213
Los Angeles, CA
Mobarge Offline
pro stock
Mobarge  Offline
pro stock

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,213
Los Angeles, CA
Speaking of 413s, anyone want to decode the pad on mine?

J 413 TH

Casting date 5/5/73

There is no casting number on the block.


'71 SSP - SOLD!
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: DaytonaTurbo] #62642
12/17/09 04:26 AM
12/17/09 04:26 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
H
HYPER8oSoNic Offline
top fuel
HYPER8oSoNic  Offline
top fuel
H

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
Quote:

Quote:

not rocket science to source out good
parts for the 440. The 413 however.. seperates
then men from the boys.




You mean the men who cut their losss and throw that 413 in the trash and the boys who can't accept their mill is a boat anchor? Lol, just kidding.

Really it would be neat to see someone stroke a 413, however with the low price you can get a 440 core block for, and the ease of availability of 440 based stroker kits, I think most guys will come to the conclusion it's easier to just go with the flow and pick up a 440 block. Plus like I said in my previous post, I can find a 440 block any time. Even if I tried, I would be hard-pressed to locate a 413. The one guy I know I could get one from would want much more $ than I can get a core 383/400/440 for. But you are right, doing a 413 properly with a nice set of custom pistons is not for the faint of heart or the average guy.

And yeah this thread is fun, keep it up!






"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids"
"Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: Reggie] #62643
12/17/09 05:03 AM
12/17/09 05:03 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
H
HYPER8oSoNic Offline
top fuel
HYPER8oSoNic  Offline
top fuel
H

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
Quote:

Quote:

That article is a good example of where everything is well-written and appears to have merit -- if you only take it at face value. However, it does not address opposite compromises/perspectives.

As an example:
He mentions that ring friction is the greatest loss in an engine, which we all accept to be true. He mentions that a shorter stroke has less drag of ring friction -- however he does not quantitatively discuss the 'longer' rings required in a larger bore. Based on a simple circumference calculation, a 440's bore/ring is about 3% longer than a 413 - so there is higher friction with a larger bore.


True. However, any power loss due to friction would be more than offset by the power gain due to the increased displacement.

Quote:


Larger bores take advantage of larger valves but they weigh more. Running larger valves, and at higher RPM, requires stiffer springs to maintain control with all else equal, there is increased inertia & more friction in the valvetrain.


Also true. However, that point is moot for this discussion which suggested a heads up comparison of 413 and 440 short blocks with all other variables being equal.

Quote:

Larger bores have more area and therefore require more time for the flame front to travel. This theoretically requires more ignition timing, and advanced ignition timing permits more heat to be lost to the cooling system. Ideally, ignition would start at TDC. Larger bores also have more surface area at the cylinder walls that hold cool end gasses that contaminate the next intake charge.


Again, any power loss due to these factors would be more than be offset by the power gain due to the increased displacement. If this were such an issue, Ma Mopar wouldn't have produced anything with a bigger bore than a RB 383 in the first place.

Quote:

My subject is racing engines, not street motors, so I'm not concerned with torque at 2,000 rpm. In my view, if you are building an engine for maximum output at a specific displacement, such as a Comp engine, then the bores should be as big as possible and the stroke as short as possible.


I read that. To me it means that a bigger bore 440 would have the advantage in a race against a 413.

Quote:

It is known that an engine is most efficient at its torque peak, so you increase power by creating more torque pulses/unit time, however they become less efficient individually as RPM increases.

Yeah, if you dont care about fuel usage and you want to run an engine at max RPM (and dont care about the higher expenses involved with high-RPM durability), then his statements have more merit.


Again, the issue of stroke is moot with a 413/440 comparison. What he does hit on is bore size and power, which is why I posted the link.

Quote:

Its all a compromise. Whomever suggested a scientific test of identical 413-440 builds hit the bullseye.


I agree, but I doubt that anyone will bother.




90% of all the information placed by you, Reggie,
is TRUE. But Ma MOPAR increased th bore size from
413 to 440, basically to increase displacement
without altering engine dimensions. To be able
to use the largest Chrysler mill in just about
ANY Chrysler rear-wheel drive chassis. Why? To
save from building different K-Members, and to
keep up with the "Joneses" in the horsepower
game. GM rushed to get a head start with the GTO
and 2 years later Mopar countered with the big
block Coronet option 67' 440 GTX, which formed
the basis of Famous Road Runner. Big bore motors
were the rage back in the late sixties, early seventies. Till longer stroke motors took the
spotlight away. More power, less rpm/engine wear,
more torque/better economy. The 440 sadly left us
in 78', due to more efficient mills of economy and
environmental designs.
AS for the Quotes on the 440, I've been saying it
for a while now, if you are class racing or All
out racing then the 440 IS for you. Street, street
strip racing, in my book 413's get the nod for me.
Ther may be "NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT, but
at the "LIGHT or TREE, Torque RULES and a 413 has
an AMPLE SUPPLY right where it's needed LOW-MID
RANGE WHERE IT COUNTS. 440 RUNS BEST in a light weight chassis, where the 413 can run as well
with slightly more weight.


"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids"
"Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: 62maxwgn] #62644
12/17/09 05:13 AM
12/17/09 05:13 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
H
HYPER8oSoNic Offline
top fuel
HYPER8oSoNic  Offline
top fuel
H

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
Yes 62' the SIX PACK MILL was special. There were
a lot of durability/hi-po parts in the engine as a whole, than your "garden variety" C-body 440 or
440 Magnum mills. The difference was way beyond the induction system and carbs. Excellent street
strip mill. It does the
competition.

Last edited by HYPER8oSoNic; 12/17/09 05:20 AM.

"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids"
"Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: Reggie] #62645
12/17/09 05:19 AM
12/17/09 05:19 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
H
HYPER8oSoNic Offline
top fuel
HYPER8oSoNic  Offline
top fuel
H

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
Quote:

Quote:

Reggie was throwing the Reher-Morrison Racing name around becouse that name would seem to have credibility, which it does.. but not on this case.




Didn't "throw anything around" for credibility,(although he does it for a living rather than playing with his toys in the garage). I posted the link because he talked about bore size and power. Stroke is moot in this comparison.




Well then Reggie, I guess you didn't read you own
press then. He basically was refering more to a
"racing type" mill as opposed to a dual purpose
mill, which 70% of the members do run/own. Get
YOUR facts straight buddy.


"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids"
"Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: HYPER8oSoNic] #62646
12/17/09 05:20 AM
12/17/09 05:20 AM
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 17,646
Trumussia
J
jcc Offline
No politics
jcc  Offline
No politics
J

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 17,646
Trumussia
Quote:

440 RUNS BEST in a light weight chassis, where the 413 can run as well
with slightly more weight.





On vacation until 2-15-19 Figuratively
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: mr_belvedere] #62647
12/17/09 05:25 AM
12/17/09 05:25 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
H
HYPER8oSoNic Offline
top fuel
HYPER8oSoNic  Offline
top fuel
H

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,275
Desert Tracker
Line up at the tree and find out.


"Stupidity is Ignorance on Steroids"
"Yeah, it's hopped to over 160" (quote by Kowalski in the movie Vanishing Point 1970 - Cupid Productions)
Re: Are 413 Engines really all that special? [Re: HYPER8oSoNic] #62648
12/17/09 05:31 AM
12/17/09 05:31 AM
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 17,646
Trumussia
J
jcc Offline
No politics
jcc  Offline
No politics
J

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 17,646
Trumussia
Quote:

Line up at the tree and find out.





If that is all it would take to bury this inane thread, I would gladly chip in gas money to find a local to you sorted out lightweight 440 to line up against a similiar dressed porky 413.

Any takers?


On vacation until 2-15-19 Figuratively
Page 14 of 16 1 2 12 13 14 15 16

Advertisement
Forum Statistics
Forums32
Topics194,382
Posts2,269,920
Members25,836
Most Online1,424
Jun 20th, 2018
Moparts Newest Topics
2007 Ram 1500 Transmission shift control module
by Frankenduster. 04/19/19 12:04 AM
71 Challenger taillights
by evenflow. 04/18/19 10:42 PM
New Reproduction Exhaust Bracketso
by Tom Swope. 04/18/19 10:20 PM
Manual Steering box
by mopar68. 04/18/19 10:03 PM

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1