340 Vs 360

Nobody is saying a 360 is better just because it's cheaper.
They're saying it's better because it's both cheaper *and* has more cubes.

You get more potential power from more cubes and it costs less. It's a win.



Thats right, in stock configuration they never were equal. The 340 had the advantage.

But 50+ years has passed and most people expect to make more than the 275hp the high performance 340 engine made.

Any 50yo 340 or 360 LA engine with original heads/valves is probably going to be snagged out.
And those factory valves, springs etc are almost certainly gonna go straight in the trash and be replaced by something superior. (If not replacing heads with new aftermarket ones entirely)

That's $$$ you need to spend regardless of whether you are building a 340 or 360.

Can't get leaded petrol anymore, even if you found low mileage 340 heads for cheap, it'd still be time for new seats by default.

The 340's cylinder head advantage seriously just isn't there at all in reality.

I'd even say that reconditioning any factory cylinder head isn't worth it if you want performance. unless you can do the machining and port work yourself.



Not necessarily, a junkyard $500 5.9 magnum with stock heads and pistons will make as much power as a freshened up 340, and would absolutely roast a 50yo one with a lot of mileage.

Sure, the 340 comes with a decent 4bbl intake.
But most people would be buying a superior aftermarket piece regardless of whether they have a 340 or 360 though.
Intake manifolds are literally the lowest hanging fruit in the quest for horsepower.



If a 340 and 360 were comparable in price, a 340 block with stroker rotating assembly would be the hot item.

But 340 engines cost 3x-10x what a 360 does, depending on condition.

If you wanna pay an extra $1500+ for a 340 block that might give you the potential for an extra 8 cubic inches in a stroker configuration...I say go for it.
Personally I couldn't justify that.

I'd save $1500 and used it to pay for most of that stroker.



All of these things cost the same whether they're bolted to a 340 LA or 360 LA, (and a 360 magnum too if you redrill to suit LA intakes)

but all of these will gain more horsepower on a 360ci engine than a 340ci with the same heads/cam/valvetrain etc.

Bottom line, the 340 is only the better choice if comparing stock engines.
LOL, I said all of that intending to lighten up the ascerbic tone to which the thread had sunk. There should be a funny button to hit whenever someone tries to be humorous (down under it is humour).
Nonetheless, thanks for reinforcing the fact that the key advantage of a 360 is it‘s cheapness.

By-the-way, when I purchased my 1971 H Code 340 Duster it had a 1974 318 in it. My intent was to replace it with a Gen III 5.7 HEMI. Everyone of my car buddies including the previous owner urged me to put a 340 back in it. Not one of them recommended putting a 360 in the engine bay.
So, I bought one original bore 340 (disassembled) for $800 from a friend and another year correct complete (carb to pan, water pump to rear tranny seal) 340 with its 727 for $1200. I’m happy with everything that I have.

Of course I could have bought a junk 360 for $500 and poured $1500 into it to make it perform but that wasn’t my desire. It still isn’t.