367 vs 410 Engines Masters

-
I keep looking at the graph and thinking " how are these two motors even close?" Obviously judging from the parts used to build these motors they were never intended to be all out drag racing motors. Yet that is the direction this discussion is heading in an effort to minimize the difference between the two motors.
 
We do know this from the graph. Any shift point that drops below 5500 and the 406 has the advantage. And up to 6000 they are the same. only above 6000 is there an advantage for the 367. Go back and look at your charts and see how much time is spent below 5500 vs above 6000. Use the 4.36 gear for both to make it simple.
But they wouldn't be at the same rpm so it would depend what hp each engine was making at whatever rpm each is at. Why I showed what hp and rpm each could be possibly be at for each 5 mph, they were generally close and sometime the 410 was slightly higher others was the 367.

But basically if 2.94 vs 3.23 or 3.23 vs 3.55 or 3.55 vs 3.91 etc.. it would work out similar cause the 367 only has to turn slightly higher to be making similar hp as the 410, why we have gearing.
 
But they wouldn't be at the same rpm so it would depend what hp each engine was making at whatever rpm each is at. Why I showed what hp and rpm each could be possibly be at for each 5 mph, they were generally close and sometime the 410 was slightly higher others was the 367.

But basically if 2.94 vs 3.23 or 3.23 vs 3.55 or 3.55 vs 3.91 etc.. it would work out similar cause the 367 only has to turn slightly higher to be making similar hp as the 410, why we have gearing.
look at your charts. How much time is the 367 spending above 6000 rpm vs below 5500? what rpm is it going through the traps at? Look at 3rd gear.
 
I keep looking at the graph and thinking " how are these two motors even close?"
Cause if you generally use 300 hp parts you get 300 hp same with 350 hp, 400 hp etc..
Obviously judging from the parts used to build these motors they were never intended to be all out drag racing motors. Yet that is the direction this discussion is heading in an effort to minimize the difference between the two motors.
It's not about all out drag engine it about matching the driveline to the engine for whatever task.

Instead of reading the chart vertically, look horizontally see how much more rpm the 367 needs to turn to make similar hp as the 410 which ain't much which means a little more stall and a little bit of deeper gears and shift a little higher and you know what all a sudden the 367 is putting similar hp to the ground cause it's in it's powerband.

It not like this isn't known that two engines of different sizes that make similar power generally do it at different rpms and the smaller one generally be at a higher rpm and generally need deeper gears, higher stall and higher shift points to operate in it's powerband not the bigger engines powerband, why you acting like this ain't a thing ?
 
look at your charts. How much time is the 367 spending above 6000 rpm vs below 5500? what rpm is it going through the traps at? Look at 3rd gear.
Why does that matter ?

Other than peak the 367 makes all the same as the 410 but at different rpms, Do they both make 250 hp ? 300 hp ? 350 ? 400 hp ? 422.5 hp ? of course they do just one does it a few hundred rpm higher, again why we have gearing.
 
Why does that matter ?

Other than peak the 367 makes all the same as the 410 but at different rpms, Do they both make 250 hp ? 300 hp ? 350 ? 400 hp ? 422.5 hp ? of course they do just one does it a few hundred rpm higher, again why we have gearing.
Because they don't make the same power where they are spending the majority of their time.
 
I keep looking at the graph and thinking " how are these two motors even close?" Obviously judging from the parts used to build these motors they were never intended to be all out drag racing motors. Yet that is the direction this discussion is heading in an effort to minimize the difference between the two motors.
It always goes to all out drag.Racing, because that's more chest thumping territory....
Playing the numbers, such a small number of people actually drag race... the majority of people will know their car from the seat of their pants...
The stroker will put a bigger smile on your face on the way to your cars and coffee and hardly dent your wallet much more.Then a factory rebuild when rebuilding..... ( if i'm playing to the true masses here...)
 
Full throttle ?
yes
I did

Why would you run the same gear and converter and shift points for both if looking for best times for each ?

Here's my work, I'm not saying these are optimal stall gearing and shift points you would only know that once installed searched out, why I said we won't know which is better but do think these are reasonable data points and it shows like I thought these engines have similar potential.

Each gear is written, mph = rpm = hp (as best I could see) at the end of each gear hp ave

410 with 4.10 5500 @ 110 2nd 3540 3rd 4140 Stall 3500 = 29,

1st, 30 = 3615 = 325, 35 = 4218 = 380, 40 = 4820 = 410, 45 = 5423 430, 50 = 6025 = 415 = 392hp ave

2nd, 50 = 3565 = 320, 55 = 3922 = 360, 60 = 4278 = 385, 65 = 4635 = 405, 70 = 4991 = 420, 75 = 5348 = 430, 80 = 5703 = 425, 85 = 6061 = 410 = 394hp ave

3rd, 85 = 4182 = 380, 90 = 4428 = 395, 95 = 4674 = 410, 100 = 4920 = 420, 105 = 5166 = 425, 110 = 5412 = 430 = 410hp ave

367 with 4.36 5800 @ 110 2nd 3717 3rd 4347 Stall 3700 = 29

1st, 30 = 3846 = 320, 35 = 4487 = 375, 40 = 5128 = 410, 45 = 5769 = 422, 50 = 6410 = 415 = 388.4hp ave

2nd, 50 = 3795 = 320, 55 = 4175 = 350, 60 = 4554 = 380, 65 = 4934 = 400, 70 = 5313 = 415, 75 = 5693 = 420, 80 = 6072 = 420, 85 = 6452 = 415 = 390hp ave

3rd, 85 = 4446 = 370, 90 = 4707 = 390, 95 = 4969 = 400, 100 = 5230 = 415, 105 = 5492 = 420, 110 = 5753 = 420 = 403hp ave
Look at your chart.
 
It always goes to all out drag.Racing, because that's more chest thumping territory....
Playing the numbers, such a small number of people actually drag race... the majority of people will know their car from the seat of their pants...
The stroker will put a bigger smile on your face on the way to your cars and coffee and hardly dent your wallet much more.Then a factory rebuild when rebuilding..... ( if i'm playing to the true masses here...)
It's not about all out drag racing, for me it's about comparing potential performance of these two engines (main reason you would build one of the engines), fairly. For most of us performance gonna be one or a combination of these stop light to stop, 0-60, 1/8, 1/4, even you never race you car, 1/4 mile performance does translate to the others.

My point to fairly compare there capability you got to do it in context of each engine powerband, 92b seem to only want to compare both in context of the 410 powerband.
 
Last edited:
yes

Look at your chart.
And if you look at each mph what do you see ? each engine making similar hp sometimes the 410 doing a little better and sometimes times the 367 but on average the 410 did what 5 hp better so basically the same.
 
Well, I knew this was going to go off the rails and I got about a page and a half into it, and it was well off the rails lol...

Anyways, I think I see what you're saying, maybe a lot of money and or something to get eight and a half extra horsepower or torque or whatever...
I watched this video a couple weeks ago on YouTube. So I vaguely remember him saying at the beginning. That it was a no-brainer, because a 4 inch crank from Scott, is like 350 bucks, and if you're rebuilding your engine, you're going to have to resize your factory rides and why not get Bring new rods for a $100 more that are yeah, lightweight, then stronger. And since you're rebuilding the engine, you're going to have to bore it and buy any pistons, anyhow and the pressure, those are about the same... and that kind of resonated with me as the reason I did it... thinking here was I had a great foundation for anything. I wanted to do like switching heads and cams, like I have in the past, and since I have more cubic inches, I can get the bigger ones and still run correctly...
Are you saying everything wouldn't be preventious with larger cubes?..
Also one guy did ask about rpms, as it seemed to be your point. The the three sixty seven could r p m more which I don't think that's proven and if it is it would be in the highest extremes( unusable ranges for both) I would imagine....
I agree the 410 makes a lot of sense especially in a street car.

I just don't agree on how most compare these engines potential.
 

My point to fairly compare there capability you got to do it in context of each engine powerband, 92b seem to only want to compare both in context of the 410 powerband.
It only looks that way because the 410 power band is better or the same everywhere until above 6000
Instead of reading the chart vertically, look horizontally see how much more rpm the 367 needs to turn to make similar hp as the 410 which ain't much which means a little more stall and a little bit of deeper gears and shift a little higher and you know what all a sudden the 367 is putting similar hp to the ground cause it's in it's powerband.
You can take any power curve subtract 20 hp from itself at each rpm then plot the two curves on the same graph. If you keep sliding the lower hp curve to the left they will eventually lay over the top of each other.
It not like this isn't known that two engines of different sizes that make similar power generally do it at different rpms and the smaller one generally be at a higher rpm and generally need deeper gears, higher stall and higher shift points to operate in it's powerband not the bigger engines powerband, why you acting like this ain't a thing ?
Because in the case of these 2 motors it really isn't a thing. They peak close to the same rpm. You need a set of hp curves that cross over more in the middle. Not at the very end of the curve. To do that with this curve you would have to draw a tiny box around the upper right end of the curve and disregard everything else that is outside that box. That's why this becomes a drag racing conversation. Where else does that little box in the upper right corner become the main priority.
 
@273

Honestly man, I'm pretty sure you know the math/theory here and you also know there's an abundance of dyno data out there to back up what you already know.

Really not sure the objective of the thread here (not that there needs to be one).

What are the performance criteria? All things being relatively equal except displacement, the bigger motor is gonna make more torque across the whole curve, up until the point where the heads are choking the combo.

Both combos are gonna make about the same power and et/mph similar, assuming bith combos are reasonably optimized and sorted out. Because that's a function of power, which is a function of fuel burn rate which is a function of airflow.

The bigger motor is gonna run better on the street and generally be more fun.
 
It only looks that way because the 410 power band is better or the same everywhere until above 6000
What you seem to not realize is the 367 also has a powerband that starts and finishes at a higher rpm than the 410.
You can take any power curve subtract 20 hp from itself at each rpm then plot the two curves on the same graph. If you keep sliding the lower hp curve to the left they will eventually lay over the top of each other.
That not the same thing, yes if you took that graph and move it left (deeper gears) you might get some of the lower rpms to line up (why deeper gears will pull harder), but all the meat of the hp curve is gone (top parts) gonna be down 20 hp and you will run out rpm sooner cause peak rpm is still the same but now you have deeper gears and get there sooner.

Gears are to get you into the powerband but there's got to be a powerband to get to, you can over gear it so you get to the power sooner but an engine doesn't have the power and rpm your just gonna run out sooner, is why you can't just keep adding gear to the 410 for more performance cause sooner or later you'll be revving way above it's power curve, why can you add a little more to 367 cause it operates at a higher rpm. It's got a similar hp curve as the 410 but moved up (to the Right) a few hundred rpm.
Because in the case of these 2 motors it really isn't a thing. They peak close to the same rpm.
I've never said the 367 is 1000's of rpms higher, it's only a few hundred but higher is higher still needs a slightly different setup than the 410.
You need a set of hp curves that cross over more in the middle. Not at the very end of the curve.
Not true, based on what ?
To do that with this curve you would have to draw a tiny box around the upper right end of the curve and disregard everything else that is outside that box. That's why this becomes a drag racing conversation.
How else do you compare the performance potential, even you never drag race, if doing full throttle runs anywhere this convo generally holds.
Where else does that little box in the upper right corner become the main priority.
It not about the little part of the curve where 367 does better, never said it was, how many times have I said "Stall to Shift Points" which are mainly under that part of the curve.
 
Last edited:
@273

Honestly man, I'm pretty sure you know the math/theory here and you also know there's an abundance of dyno data out there to back up what you already know.

Really not sure the objective of the thread here (not that there needs to be one).
I thought people be interested in the video, but mentioned how I don't like how they compared these engine, then of course debate followed :)
What are the performance criteria? All things being relatively equal except displacement, the bigger motor is gonna make more torque across the whole curve,
True
up until the point where the heads are choking the combo.
This debate I didn't even see coming, I basically get what people mean the 410 needs better heads, but really don't makes sense to me the 367 ran out of air too and only a few hundred rpms higher and pretty much made same power so got the same out of them, but both could use better heads, but if your looking to make 425 hp this is basically what's need even the 425 hp 318 I posted wasn't too different.

Seem like everyone missed the post where they did put better heads on the 410 and gained 92 hp and 900 rpm's. I'll repost below.
Both combos are gonna make about the same power and et/mph similar, assuming bith combos are reasonably optimized and sorted out. Because that's a function of power, which is a function of fuel burn rate which is a function of airflow.

The bigger motor is gonna run better on the street and generally be more fun.
This what I've been trying tell 92b.
 

ENGINE MASTERS, DIY Cylinder Head Porting Gains 92 Horsepower!​


On this 410


Nice! BUT...moved pushrods? not the same as before. what would it have done with porting with standard NOT W-2 rockers and keep using the dual plane. guess if funds are unlimited, these are options. seems like making the first build, THEN massage the pieces you already have. just my opinion.
 
Nice! BUT...moved pushrods? not the same as before. what would it have done with porting with standard NOT W-2 rockers and keep using the dual plane. guess if funds are unlimited, these are options. seems like making the first build, THEN massage the pieces you already have. just my opinion.
It seem to peak pretty high for the hp most seem to get there by 6,000 rpms wonder if it's mainly do to the bigger port opening ?

You don't need to move the pushrods to make 530 hp.
 
All I know is my 408 is a full second quicker than my similarly built 340. Only gained 4 mph but the torque is crazy. My car is 3550 though.
 
All I know is my 408 is a full second quicker than my similarly built 340. Only gained 4 mph but the torque is crazy. My car is 3550 though.
There wasn't a huge difference between these two engine 443 lbs-ft vs 480 lbs-ft and the 367 torque curve was flatter.
 
-
Back
Top Bottom