410 plus 36.4 tq & 8.5 hp over the 367, They never factor gearing when they make these comparisons, not saying the 367 is better but if geared and stalled right and with optimal shift points for best quarter mile I don't think there would be much difference and could even see the 367 squeak out the win.
367 vs 410 Engines Masters
- Thread starter 273
- Start date
-
abdywgn
dismantler
I didn't listen to what internals were used ( I always skipped ahead to the "specs" when they used to be printed in magazines) but it would seem the 367 would be less expensive to build. but just my opinion.
They built the 367 to same specs as the 410 Blueprint create. Had a 241/247 .545 110 cam 10.1:1 cr airgap and edelbrock heads.
Especially for a 8.5 hp difference.
The thing that bothers me is they never factor in shift points, stall and gearing. The 367 makes similar hp throughout the power curve but at 2 to 3 hundred rpms higher than the 410, you only need one or two step ups in gearing to be at a similar hp at the wheel at any given speed.
we all know if it was a high pressure 367 it would be a totally different story! total and utter embarrassment of that stroker is how it would go down.
The result doesn't surprise me a bit, same size bore being fed the same amount of ingredients.
Just start eating at a different rpm.
Just start eating at a different rpm.
I'd like to see the dyno results with a similarly built 400 big block.
I bet the bigger bore and valves win.
They did a 383 Chev vs Mopar and tried to keep them equal as possible, down low the mopar won, above 4,000 rpm they basically had same curve.
Start turning them above 6000-7000 rpm the that's gonna be a different story.
I get why people do a 408 but never made too much sense to me, since we got 383/400/413/426 all great 400 ish cid engines even a 361 (4.125") with a 3.75 stroke gets there. And you don't have to worry about underheading the engine.
because a 408 hooks up to your current transmission can use your current mounts and exhaust, etx etx etx
yeah, cubes will [almost] always win out but when you have to go back to square one and lay out a bunch of cashish all of a sudden staying in the same engine family makes a lot of sense.
and you can just press the easy button, melt a credit card and have a 408 dropped on your doorstep.
The extra torque would be felt in a street car. Less gearing and converter needed.
That being said I would be ashamed if my 410 only made 8 more hp than a 367.
Sounds like the cylinder heads weren't up to the task.
That being said I would be ashamed if my 410 only made 8 more hp than a 367.
Sounds like the cylinder heads weren't up to the task.
33IMP
Well-Known Member
Agree! Sounds like the 410 was crippled by having to use 360 parts (for the comparison.) The 410 is 12% bigger, needs 12% better heads, and 12% bigger cam.
Put enough cam and cylinder head on the 410, it'll smoke that 367 easily.
(Put 273 heads and cam on a 367, I bet it won't be real impressive.)
And why do some think gearing can help the 367 against the 410, when you can do the same to the 410.?
I have yet to see anyone prove that a (non-fullout race motor) 360 can rev higher than a 410.
Last edited:
If geared optimally both should be putting similar torque to the ground.
To me the main purpose of a stroker.
There's no reason a 367 can't take advantage of better heads also.
340sFastback
Well-Known Member
Didn't both engines have unported Edelbrock heads? 4 inch crank engine really needs those heads fully ported out to perform.
They built the 360 to match the 410 create.
How's that a fair comparison? of course more head cam etc.. generally equals more power.
So 410 with 500 hp parts vs a 367 with 400 hp parts is a fairer comparison ?
There a limit to how deep of gear you can go optimally for each engine. Generally since the 367 has more rpm to trade it should be able to run a little bit deeper.
So does a 367, If building to 500 or 600 or even 900+ hp there gonna need similar stuff, just there gonna do it at different rpms.
33IMP
Well-Known Member
WHY do you think the 367 "has more rpm to trade" ?
And I think 500 hp parts on a 410, and 500hp parts on a 360 IS a fair comparison. Much more so than 360 parts on a 360, and 360 parts on a 410.
Last edited:
Did you look at the dyno graph ? Granted wasn't a huge rpm difference because this 367 was running pretty efficient compared to the 410. It peak hp was 300 rpms higher and looked like it wasn't gonna fall off after peak as quickly (more usable rpm for higher shift points).
I'm not saying this 367 is gonna be faster, just saying if both setup right probably very similar, what matters is torque and hp to the ground not crank.
33IMP
Well-Known Member
What matters is power to the ground.
I can certainly agree with that!
That's why I have seen guys with claimed "huge power" get humiliated by another guy with (supposedly) less power, but a sorted-out dedicated car.
I can certainly agree with that!
That's why I have seen guys with claimed "huge power" get humiliated by another guy with (supposedly) less power, but a sorted-out dedicated car.
The 8.5 hp difference is at one moment in time. I'm guessing at peak. The average horsepower difference over the usable rpm range would be a better indication of the difference between the two engines. A graph of the two layed over each other is a good visual for comparing two engines. I think its human nature to look at peak numbers because they are the biggest. I also think that is why we switch to torque numbers when we look at the lower rpm range. Because the numbers are bigger. You never hear someone quoting horsepower numbers at the rpm where peak torque is. I'm guilty of it too.
Please explain usable rpm range
I'm not looking at peaks but the averages, When I compare engines that have different rpm power bands on the dyno graph, I compare hp horizontally to what rpm each engine makes that hp, eg, at what rpms do each engine make 250hp, 300hp, 350hp, 400hp, 422.hp etc..
Why generally when gearing the smaller engine it should have deeper gears therefor more rpm per mph, say the 410 revs in 1st 1000 rpms per 10 mph and the 367 revs 1070 rpm per 10 mph. So the 410 = 3000 rpm @ 30 mph, 4000 rpm @ 40 mph, 5000 rpm @ 50 mph etc.. the 367 gonna run 3210 rpm, 4380 rpm, 5450 rpm etc.. at those speeds if each engine is making similar power at each of those rpms gonna be putting similar power to the ground.
Torque is relatively flat (frown curve) especially compared to hp which has more of a hockey stick shape. So we know a high lbs-ft per cid that that's fairly flat over a broad range of rpm numbers = a good under the curve hp eg. it makes over 500 lbs-ft from 3000-5500 rpms, to say that in hp power you would have to rattle off a bunch of hp and rpm numbers and still be fuzzy, eg. 250 hp @ 3000 rpm, 300 hp @ 4000 rpm, 350 hp @ 5000 rpm etc..
It's not only the cylinder heads, but more so the intake manifold. I don't recall what those heads flow out of the box, but that intake only flows 220-230 out of the box and those cylinder heads definitely flow more than that.
But it's the same circumstance for the 367, 410/367 are just the static displacements, CFM is the actual displacement (dynamic displacement, cid x rpm), both are making similar power so there displacing similar amount of air/fuel over time (CFM). Heads intake etc.. doing a similar job for both.
The rpm range the engine will be used at. As an example. Let's say it's a circle track motor and it's going to live between 4300 and 6500 rpm. Drag race motor 5000 to 7000rpm. Street strip motor 3000 to 7000 rpm. Pick up truck towing a trailer etc.
-
Similar threads
- Locked
