nice to know a common family/old lady car ... a bone stock 4,100 lbs 3.6 V6 charger sxt will be all that Muscle car power of GTX's, Super Bees and R/T's. Do I dare mention a Honda Accord with a V6 that grandma gets groceries in once a week ??
340 A body versus 383 B body
- Thread starter justinp61
- Start date
-
justinp61
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,056
- Reaction score
- 4,039
Advancing technology, just about everything improves over time, televisions are a good example. Most of us accept the downfalls and challenges of our outdated cars. Enjoy your Honda.nice to know a common family/old lady car ... a bone stock 4,100 lbs 3.6 V6 charger sxt will be all that Muscle car power of GTX's, Super Bees and R/T's. Do I dare mention a Honda Accord with a V6 that grandma gets groceries in once a week ??
thesiren74
Well-Known Member
Yep my 2005 toyota avalon would make these look stupid lolnice to know a common family/old lady car ... a bone stock 4,100 lbs 3.6 V6 charger sxt will be all that Muscle car power of GTX's, Super Bees and R/T's. Do I dare mention a Honda Accord with a V6 that grandma gets groceries in once a week ??
roccodart440
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Messages
- 6,798
- Reaction score
- 3,566
The MPH tells all.
This will rile some egos and feathers, but the 383 B-bodies in stock trim were pigs. Heavy, severely underpowered (335hp@5,000 at best), undercubed, under RPM'd, under everything.
If you had or have a quick 383, it isn't stock, and it has some gear behind it.
A tuned only 340, especially a 6 pack, or a tuned and warmed over 340 A-body will mop a stock 383 B-body.
Neither of those cars need more than a 10.50 tire to hook and will easily fit under either car, just little more work under the A-body, requiring offset shackles and proper offset.
truth is, I was being sarcastic because one ride in a GTX and you'd know the 3.6 charger wouldn't keep up. I'm just going back to my original post 8 in stating that these numbers seem slow to me from my experience......
The MPH tells all.
This will rile some egos and feathers, but the 383 B-bodies in stock trim were pigs. Heavy, severely underpowered (335hp@5,000 at best), undercubed, under RPM'd, under everything.
If you had or have a quick 383, it isn't stock, and it has some gear behind it.
A tuned only 340, especially a 6 pack, or a tuned and warmed over 340 A-body will mop a stock 383 B-body.
Neither of those cars need more than a 10.50 tire to hook and will easily fit under either car, just little more work under the A-body, requiring offset shackles and proper offset.
- 383 vs 340, here is a thought.
- My factory stock '68 Plymouth Fury III had a 383, auto, 3.23 and ran 15.2's. I didn't think that was so bad for a car that weighed 4350 at the start line. I don't think I could have pulled the 383 for a factory stock 340 swap and ran faster. I think the 340 would have struggled with the weight, 3.23's and a factory tight converter.
- Thoughts ??
33IMP
Well-Known Member
I remember a couple tests in adds for RR/GTX, (wanna say 1969) that tested a hemi car with Ro McGonagall and Ronnie Sox driving a four speed. (and I think they did the same with a Sixpack, later.) Sox was about 1.5-2 tenths faster than a talented amateur. Ro ran 13.07/13.11 in the A12, Sox went 12.91. (you can bet they were tuned within an inch of their lives!)
Last edited:
furrystump
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2004
- Messages
- 2,100
- Reaction score
- 1,697
My bone stock 340-s fastback auto, 3:23 open diff ran 14.97 at 97 mph. I had to walk it out pretty good to get it to stick. I was a kid, there was probably 14.6 in it. Weight hurt the 383 then and still does.
So do you think if we swapped your (we'll give it the 14.6) 14.6 340 into my Fury at 4350 lbs at the start line it would have ran a 15.2 ?? You'd be adding at least 800 lbs .... maybe a 1000 lbs ?? My thought is it would not. Also, there'd be a little more wind resistance in the Fury.
33IMP
Well-Known Member
I think you're right.
33IMP
Well-Known Member
If I remember right, the Huntington tests showed the 325 horse 396 to be about 30 hp down, compared to a 335hp 383. Seen several tests of 325/396 chevelles where they were mid 15s cars.
furrystump
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2004
- Messages
- 2,100
- Reaction score
- 1,697
Even at moderate to serious level effort in FAST, the “340” 420 CI A body (10.48) NOT 3600 lbs is quicker than the “383” 499 CI B body(11.0)at 3600 lbs It is just HARD to overcome the weight. The B body will close that up a bit, but the A isn’t sitting still. Take the 499 CI “383” and put it in my 3150 lb (with the b block) fastback……..and the b bodies are a distant memory, but I would still probably be battling a small block A body.
On the street it was a 340 by a mile. At the track stock 383's ran about 15.50 and stock 340's ran about 14.60. I had an all stock 69 Swinger 340 auto and just put a 4.10 in it on E70's went 13.70. Also stock GTO's went 15.50's with a good driver and the 351 Mustangs were about the same. I use to always baseline my cars before any changes.
furrystump
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2004
- Messages
- 2,100
- Reaction score
- 1,697
I think you are correct, I don’t think the 340 would like the weight. Bone stock my car weighed 3700, but it had a/c then also.
roccodart440
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Messages
- 6,798
- Reaction score
- 3,566
A 2015 3.6L Charger bone stock runs 14.0-seconds flat at 103 miles-per-hour. I agree that a stock, well tuned 440GTX would take it, but keeping with the discussion of B-body 383 cars. Better look out..
Mind you that Charger weighs 3,900-4,500 lbs.
In answer to post #1, weight difference and the heavier RR likes more gear.
We all know the 340 is a great engine in the light A body.
The high reving B motor is a great engine in the B body especially with a gear.
What is not to like??
We all know the 340 is a great engine in the light A body.
The high reving B motor is a great engine in the B body especially with a gear.
What is not to like??
roccodart440
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Messages
- 6,798
- Reaction score
- 3,566
The 340 isn't meant to be in a heavy car, nor behind a tight vert.
340: 4.04 x 3.31
All the chargers/challengers brand new I see run turn 14.6's. In fact, I guy i know right here in town bought a brand new V6 Challenger and ran a 14.6. I haven't seen a charger go faster, and I've seen enough of them run. Our track is at 600 ft elevation.
interesting.
I know the bore and stroke of a 340. My point is everyone that stays behind the 340 in a A-body while the 383 is pulling more weight and cutting more wind. As far as the BB in a A-body, I think the exhaust got some choked..... But put them both in a 3000 lbs car with the same 3.55's and open headers, I think the 383 takes the win on a 340. And I love 340's
383 magnum w/hp manifold in an A-body will mop the floor with a 340 A- body, 350 Nova /Camaro, 351/390 Mustangs, period.
I did in 1979.
I got 15.9's out of a 318 2bbl in a B-body with auto & 2.94 gears .... means we like the 15's today.
sorry, 318 is not part of the conversation. my bad.
sorry, 318 is not part of the conversation. my bad.
thesiren74
Well-Known Member
The 383 makes torque lower in the rpm range than a 340 and big blocks usually have a pretty flat torque curve.
Sorry, NOT. Owned them all raced them all. You ever run a LT1 or a 327/365. I've had them also these little small block chevys kicked ***. Sorry the stock 383's magnums were just plain heavy dogs as were the 390 fords. Now I know they can be made to run my freind with his RR all steel 383 went 11.20's in the early 70's.383 magnum w/hp manifold in an A-body will mop the floor with a 340 A- body, 350 Nova /Camaro, 351/390 Mustangs, period.
I did in 1979.
-
