so i'm rebuilding my original 1970 340

-

Nat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2019
Messages
974
Reaction score
620
Location
Canada
i want to have the lightest rotating assembly possible , forged crank h beam or I beam rods and forged pistons , don't want a speed demon more for highway driving ,maybe a road course once in a while \guess i'm going to go roller cam on this build going to use the hughes rockers and morel lifters . not sure which heads and cam to get
Who makes the lightest crank rods and pistons these days also want the best gas mileage possible , i got around 22 mpg with my last 340 but that was stolen
Open to any and all suggestions
 
If you’re sticking with the stock stroke...... I’m not sure how many options there are for cranks.

If you got pretty light pistons and rods, and had the bobweight worked out, you could have the crank sent to a place like Shaftech for some lightening and a “no holes” balance job.
But that stuff isn’t usually too cheap.
 
Scat f-43 gun drilled crank...."super light"
 
According to their website, the F43 is only available for Chevies.

In my 10 year old catalog, the lightweight forged SB Mopar cranks for 340 blocks are only available in 3.58 or 4.00 stroke.

I couldn’t seem to get to any part number listings on the website.
 
You need the 273 forged crank and the early 273 connecting rods. They are both plenty strong and a lot lighter than their 340 counterparts.

That's if you want to stay with factory parts....which there ain't a thing wrong with.
 
RRR is correct, you will also need modern day pistons much lighter than the original slugs! 65'
 
According to their website, the F43 is only available for Chevies.

In my 10 year old catalog, the lightweight forged SB Mopar cranks for 340 blocks are only available in 3.58 or 4.00 stroke.

I couldn’t seem to get to any part number listings on the website.
Sure there is part # SKU-SCA-4-340-4000-6123-3
 
Kinda purdy

61feZcoEzBL._AC_SX355_.jpg
 
i want to have the lightest rotating assembly possible , forged crank h beam or I beam rods and forged pistons , don't want a speed demon more for highway driving ,maybe a road course once in a while \guess i'm going to go roller cam on this build going to use the hughes rockers and morel lifters . not sure which heads and cam to get
Who makes the lightest crank rods and pistons these days also want the best gas mileage possible , i got around 22 mpg with my last 340 but that was stolen
Open to any and all suggestions

If you want gas mileage, 2.94 rear gears are your friend. Stock '69 318 with an added 4 bbl in a B body did 20 mpg. And not totally babying it either.

Enjoy . . .
 
i want to have the lightest rotating assembly possible , forged crank h beam or I beam rods and forged pistons , don't want a speed demon more for highway driving ,maybe a road course once in a while \guess i'm going to go roller cam on this build going to use the hughes rockers and morel lifters . not sure which heads and cam to get
Who makes the lightest crank rods and pistons these days also want the best gas mileage possible , i got around 22 mpg with my last 340 but that was stolen
Open to any and all suggestions
Hang on Nat;
IMO, you need to take a step back and read what you wrote; you have two and a half thought streams going on here, and only one can win, and you are embarking down a very spendy road with very mixed results.
Chose two of;
1) top-end power, or
2) midrange torque, or
3) fuel economy
you can have 1plus 2,
OR 2 plus3,
but you cannot have 3plus1
If you chose 2plus3, then you can throw out all those pricey ideas. You can sneak a lil rpm into street application with just some minor mods.
The rest of your combo is gonna dictate a lot of your build.
You said;
don't want a speed demon
more for highway driving
also want the best gas mileage possible ,
i got around 22 mpg with my last 340

This here is very doable with all factory parts. Consider your current combo, as to transmission and rear gears, and consider whether you need to, or are willing to, or can afford to; change any of it, cuz if they ain't already right for your goals, SOMETHING is gonna have to change.
 
Oh yeah..its only $1,500.00 USD...
THANKS BUT SCAT and eagle are a no go AS for pistons Mahle are the lightest i could find so far as for gears 3.55 with my gear vendor O/D is where it will stay got 22mpg with the 340 engine that was stolen . Having a hard time trying to find a super light crank that does not have China in it's DNA .
And RRR does not need to be factory parts as long as nothing is made in China , Rather pay more for parts made in the USA
 
i want to have the lightest rotating assembly possible , forged crank h beam or I beam rods and forged pistons , don't want a speed demon more for highway driving ,maybe a road course once in a while \guess i'm going to go roller cam on this build going to use the hughes rockers and morel lifters . not sure which heads and cam to get
Who makes the lightest crank rods and pistons these days also want the best gas mileage possible , i got around 22 mpg with my last 340 but that was stolen
Open to any and all suggestions
So you are going to go with a roller cam and expensive lifters and rockers, and you plan to hit road courses (which require plenty of power) AND you want 22 MPG/ Good luck with that!!!!!!!
 
Come on AJ YOU CAN DO BETER THAN THAT . Iwas expecting a thesis paper from you on how it Could be done Don't care about top end power for this build mid range torque and fuel economy is what i'm after with this build
 
THANKS BUT SCAT and eagle are a no go AS for pistons Mahle are the lightest i could find so far as for gears 3.55 with my gear vendor O/D is where it will stay got 22mpg with the 340 engine that was stolen . Having a hard time trying to find a super light crank that does not have China in it's DNA .
And RRR does not need to be factory parts as long as nothing is made in China , Rather pay more for parts made in the USA
IF you have the budget you can get a lightweight crank from Bryant or Winberg... can get as light as 36lbs. or so. My 3.79 crank is 63lbs.

But you had better have a big wallet.... usually around $3400.00 and up... but they are a thing of beauty!!!


Homepage


Winberg Crankshafts | World Class Racing Cranks
 
hughes rockers and you have not picked heads --gimme a break
chevy crank pins and long rods = lighter
even so I'd go 4" or longer
jones cam if you want to rev
light valvetrain, valves, retainers, springs
set up for 1.8 or 2"
ask krooser about lifters, springs he just looked at everything
 
If fuel mileage is important enough to you to mention it, then perhaps you should consider your build as a big-bore 318, sorta like the 383 is a big-bore 340.
But since you are starting from the block up, you can chose a modest cam that will have some top-end potential, without killing mileage.
What that means to me; is a fast-ramp,solid-lifter, tight-lash cam that slams the door on intake charge before it has a chance to mess up the plenum..... because to get the big mileage numbers, you are gonna have to bring the rpm down.
And that means modest rear gears.
To get the low-speed performance back with an automatic, will require a higher-stall TC... but that works counter to the cam, so it will need to be a loc-up model. And that means you need a lock-up trans..... you see where this is headed?
But now, with 2.94s in the back,60mph is gonna be ~5900 in first gear.So as you said; not a speed demon.
Since this is gonna be a one-gear to 60 mph car, you might as well optimize it that way, and just install an A999 with a 2.74 low gear in it, and run 2.76s for 60=6200@10% slip... at the top of first gear. It doesn't have to be fast up there, it just has to go there before you shift.... just to make it fun.
Ok then, with 2.76s, 65= 2230 with 27" tires, in loc-up, so that is gonna have to be satisfied by the cam. Are you still with me?
If you don't already have 2.76s and an A999, and don't like my plan, then one of us is in trouble,lol.
But here's the deal;a tired 318 can make 22mpg with this combo, running 135 psi cylinder pressure, in a 3600 pound barn door Swinger.
Surely,your 340 can best that, because yur not gonna build a 135psi slug.
To satisfy a decent cruise vacuum at 65=2230 ( I have that), you cannot run a 276/286/110 cam ( I have that). But you can run a 223@.050 Solid lifter cam, which will make tremendous torque in the rpms your engine will spend most of it's life. Since this is a one gear to 60 combo, you also don't have to stick with a 112, or a 110 or even a 108LSA. But to take a 223*/5000rpm cam to 6200 is gonna take some decent heads and a tricky cam. (I took mine to 7000/7200 all the time, so 6200 is nothing,lol.)
So now you just go find that cam, pick your small closed-chamber alloy heads, and set your cylinder pressure to the highest your local gas will support without detonation, at your elevation.. Badaboom
And then you carefully assemble it, and don't forget the oiling mods,
And then pick your bolt-ons,
And then your support works,
And then tune the chit out of it.

When I did this; my 3650 pound 1968 Barracuda(367 cubes) went 106 in the quarter, smoked the tires to past 60 mpg with a 4speed and 3.55s, broke the tires loose at 40/45/50 in second gear (still 3.55s) , and on one point to point trip, made 32 mpgUSg; OOPs in overdrive.,lol, geared for 75mph =1830rpm
That's how I covered the bases.
You can't hit them all, quite the way I did with my manual trans, but you can sure have a lot of fun trying.
BTW.
I ran the A999 and 2.76s with my stock 1973 Smoggerteen winter engine, in this Barracuda, and it was dynomite big fun. The only bolt-ons were a 4bbl, headers, and a higher stall.
Oh Yeah
There are other roads to where you want to go; this is just the road I took... with no regrets.
I'm not trying to push you into this combo.
I'm just trying to give you an overvue of what is possible.
for instance;
If you already have a built 727 with a 2600stall and 3.23s,
and you got a lotta coin wrapped up in them,
then the combo I detailed is already all wrong, because 65=2610 @zeroslip, perhaps 100 to 150 more, depending on the load presented to the engine. It's gonna be hard to make fuel mileage with that rpm. Furthermore, 60mph is now ~3840 in Second gear, so there is no need for a 223* cam anymore, you can run a stock 318 cam and won't be much if any slower. And you don't need the hi-rpm Alloy heads either. You see the domino effect?
Happy HotRodding
 
Last edited:
Ok so the GVod and 3.55s puts your rpm right where mine is; 65=2240@ zero-slip. I can't get any decent fuel economy out of my combo at that rpm, with my 230@.050 cam, even with 10.95-Scr and 180psi cylinder pressure; the intake is just too dirty.
So that takes you back to the 223* SFT cam. And in steady-state running, and that 223 cam peaks at around 5000rpm, you don't need lightweight components.
If you want a lil more bottom end torque, you can even go down one cam size, it kindof depends where your final compression ratio come in at, with the least amount of machining.
Also, now, with what you said in post 14, not caring about hi-rpm power, then there is no need to spend your money on hi-rpm lightweight components.
But
I think RRR read you right from the beginning; you can slam a 273 crank and rods in there with some lightweight, tall, flat tops;
and put a 318 top end on it, OOps Rusty didn't say that part, lol. But you could, cuz they're good to 4000 or so,lol.( I already did that back in the 70s). But any old cast iron head will meet your needs, as long as you take care to not build a detonation-prone pos engine. Of course, a closed chamber, tight-Q, head will very likely get better mileage, partly cuz you can run a lil more pressure. But realistically, you already have the big-port heads so.......
 
You get 22 mpg now, how much more can you possible get and what really $$$$ savings would that get you, what do you spend on gas a year now $500, $1000, $2000? even if you could save 10% on $2000 is only $200 a year. If you do a lot of Highway install an OD tranny but I wouldn't neuter the performance too much for a couple more mpg's.
 
THANKS BUT SCAT and eagle are a no go AS for pistons Mahle are the lightest i could find so far as for gears 3.55 with my gear vendor O/D is where it will stay got 22mpg with the 340 engine that was stolen . Having a hard time trying to find a super light crank that does not have China in it's DNA .
And RRR does not need to be factory parts as long as nothing is made in China , Rather pay more for parts made in the USA

Mopar Performance actually sold sets of the 273 rods completely reworked with good rod bolts right in the MP book years ago. When worked and good rod bolts installed, they are both strong and light. Needless to say, we don't have to argue about how strong the factory steel cranks were.
 
Sure there is part # SKU-SCA-4-340-4000-6123-3

This is not an “F43” crank........ it’s in their “superlight” series, which does not have the gun drilled mains.
And, as I said.......they’re only available in 3.58 and 4.00 stroke.

That part number is for a 4” stroke crank.
 
68, 69 and 70 318s had the lighter full floater rods as compared to the later heavier 645 press fit rods of 74 and later.
 
Oh my....Build and tune a stock 340 with 3.23 gears and stock 14 inch tires and save a ton of the money
...but you didn't want to hear that.
 
is this a one owner vehicle?
been apart before?
let's do a compression check for a baseline
if rebuilt someone could have put rebuilder pistons it to cut down on the detonation- pinging
you know about octane creep?
carbon build up
If it is an oem early 340 let's figure 9.2-9.7:1 depending on gaskets
too bad KB does not make a quench dome piston for these stock strok stroke 340's
but worth pistons getting custom made
but hard to make one work in a non race motor with stock heads
stroker kit gives you best choices in pistons
 
Oh my....Build and tune a stock 340 with 3.23 gears and stock 14 inch tires and save a ton of the money
...but you didn't want to hear that.
Except a stock 340 with 14" tires and 3.55s will not get 22mpg. It's going to take small gears (like 2.94 or less) plus an overdrive transmission to get 22mpg from a 340.
 
-
Back
Top