My old 383 was a beast from 3500- 6800, the 4500 stall convertor and 4.57 gear was a factor keeping it in range.
367 vs 410 Engines Masters
- Thread starter 273
- Start date
-
mopowers
Well-Known Member
Some people argue over the stupidest ****. How bout we get out and actually turn a wrench instead of playing internet engine masters?
It's not
not really, basically line them up at there peak hp's (323 vs 367 vs 410) and see the powerbands are fairly similar to one another. The 367 only operates about 300 rpm higher through out the entire rpm's that's like one gear ratio deeper, eg.. 3.55 vs 3.91 and your both basically putting similar hp to the ground.
even if you widen them to 2,500 rpms below peak = all 3 are at around 250-260 hp
There only substantial if your gear them same. Cause again they make the same power just at higher rpms.
Icetech
Well-Known Member
cause we are bored at work? or waiting on parts.. or both...
Plus I don't think it's stupid, if people don't understand powerbands gearing etc.. and torque doesn't do X and Hp does Y how are they gonna be able to make informed decision. It's the same reason every 318 thread goes to ****.
Of course only the best
plus doesn't it add torque lolThis discussion and the many like it, every time displacement is brought up is why one of my signature says
"If your willing to gear it build it if not build a larger displacement, Or take solace in your compromises."
"If your willing to gear it build it if not build a larger displacement, Or take solace in your compromises."
Last edited:
I remember talking to Mancini years back and him telling me 5.0's were cleaning up on the streets. lol
And our little guy (318) is a decent step up from that, but some how 302 can kick *** and make 350-400 hp easily and run decent size cams and heads but 318 is a delicate little flower that torque gonna fall off with the slightest mods
Icetech
Well-Known Member
and they were back in the 90s.... it was crazy around, 5.0s kicked ***
Icetech
Well-Known Member
And our little guy (318) is a decent step up from that, but some how 302 can kick *** and make 350-400 hp easily and run decent size cams and heads but 318 is a delicate little flower that torque gonna fall off with the slightest mods
The main difference is the 302 had a 4" bore... and everyone know less than that will barely even run..
At 3.9999" physics ceases as we know it.
DionR
Well-Known Member
I am going to speculate that the 410 is faster on the drag strip even if the 367 is geared differently. I say speculate because all I have is a half ***'ed attempt at the curves and an old copy of Drag2000 to plug them into.
Here is the 367 power curve I entered:
And here is the 410 power curve:
My results using a '72 Duster and running iterations for stall, launch, shift and rear gear are as follows:
367 - 11.106@118.0
410 - 11.042@118.5
Not much faster, but still faster.
Here are the results for the 367:
And the results for the 410:
And the settings for the iterations:
It's far from conclusive, but more stall, higher shift points and more rear gear still weren't quite enough to catch up with the bigger motor.
Doesn't mean the premise isn't valid, but I would say for this theoretical discussion, the 410 is the faster motor. In my opinion.
Oh, and I went back and plugged in actual rear axle ratios rather than the speculative ones:
367/4.11 -> 11.106@118.0
410/3.71 -> 11.043@118.6
So the "odd" ratios didn't throw it off.
Here is the 367 power curve I entered:
And here is the 410 power curve:
My results using a '72 Duster and running iterations for stall, launch, shift and rear gear are as follows:
367 - 11.106@118.0
410 - 11.042@118.5
Not much faster, but still faster.
Here are the results for the 367:
And the results for the 410:
And the settings for the iterations:
It's far from conclusive, but more stall, higher shift points and more rear gear still weren't quite enough to catch up with the bigger motor.
Doesn't mean the premise isn't valid, but I would say for this theoretical discussion, the 410 is the faster motor. In my opinion.
Oh, and I went back and plugged in actual rear axle ratios rather than the speculative ones:
367/4.11 -> 11.106@118.0
410/3.71 -> 11.043@118.6
So the "odd" ratios didn't throw it off.
I never said 367 it's faster or even better, All I've said is the powerbands are similar, even the 323 was, so they all have similar potential, especially a lot closer then the way they read the graph in the video and how a lot of others will read it. And to me your results show similar performance, If people were racing these engines in a highly competitive heads up race class then we would know forsure which is best, but that's unlikely gonna happen
I imagine there's a ton of these 410 crates running around with all sorts of gears and stalls and probably a few similar 323 and 367 out there, doing the same thing, It's a bit of a crap shoot, if your gonna run one of the smaller engines you should run more gear than the average guy or "Or take solace in your compromises." or build bigger.
I'm not anti displacement just pro fair comparison.
Too close to speculate. lol My money is on the 367 getting the hook and squeaking out the win.
DionR
Well-Known Member
But you kind of did...
For what it's worth, I kind of agree with your premise that setup can make up for a smaller or lower HP motor. And I'm not ready to die on the hill that the 410 would be faster. It was just a way to get an idea of how they both might work if gearing, etc. was adjusted.
DionR
Well-Known Member
One thing I didn't look at was tire slip. I put slicks on both, but I didn't look to see if either was spinning, which would throw off the iterations.
DionR
Well-Known Member
Out of curiosity, I slid the HP curve over 1000 RPM and ran the iterations again with higher peaks and more rear gear.
Looked like tire slip was an issue since launch is only 2500 rpm. Weird thing is, I manually set the launch to 6500 and it didn't change the result at all.
Looked like tire slip was an issue since launch is only 2500 rpm. Weird thing is, I manually set the launch to 6500 and it didn't change the result at all.
I figure the 323 and 367 have way more usable rpm above peak hp so you probably could gear it even deeper, be in the top of the powerband longer.
Last edited:
oh hush up! you keep bringing up five-ohs and the minivan man will be here in no time telling us how billy bad *** he was back in the day with his LX hatch, mullet and oakley E-frames.
fIve hUndReD hOrSes just a underdrive pulley!
Icetech
Well-Known Member
That 500 horses thing has been around since i was a kid.. every guy that put on air shocks and a thrush muffler... "Around 500hp"
-
Similar threads
- Locked
