367 vs 410 Engines Masters

[MMissile]

SBM cylinder heads are the cork on bigger cube small blocks. Mine stalled on the dyno, around 6800. It does have torque and fair bit of power, and I should never blow it up.

 

[Killer6]

Yes I don't know the history of the bbm and the 2.08 valve but it seems they didn't think they needed larger than 2.08 for there performance 413/426 Max Wedge and 440 and 440 six pack but they were all so worried about 383 performance breathing abilities that it only became standard equipment for the 383 when it became standard equipment for rest.

Don't see how that really helps Illahe's case.

#1) The ONLY B engines to use a 1.99" intake valve was the one year only '58 4.062" bore 350ci (see Christine the movie), and the 1st-year std. '58 Dodge/Desoto 4.125" bore 361ci. All High Output '58 361's & every B/RB engine built from '59-'til production ceased used 2.08" intake valves.
#2) You are confusing the switch from 1.60" exhaust valves to 1.74" in '67 440 only, and all B/RB's '58 & up, with the Max Wedges getting a creepily large 1.88" exhaust.
#3) You need to give those mice a couple hits on a blunt........

 

[273]

#1) The ONLY B engines to use a 1.99" intake valve was the one year only '58 4.062" bore 350ci (see Christine the movie), and the 1st-year std. '58 Dodge/Desoto 4.125" bore 361ci. All High Output '58 361's & every B/RB engine built from '59-'til production ceased used 2.08" intake valves.
#2) You are confusing the switch from 1.60" exhaust valves to 1.74" in '67 440 only, and all B/RB's '58 & up, with the Max Wedges getting a creepily large 1.88" exhaust.
#3) You need to give those mice a couple hits on a blunt........

That a little different the iinfo I found, they said 62 2.08 became standard equipment, but really don't matter. Obviously they didn't overly care about cid and valve size if all performance 361/383/413/426/440 came with 2.08 and basically most standard performance engines.

And really not proof for buddy was my point.

 

[Killer6]

That a little different the iinfo I found, they said 62 2.08 became standard equipment, but really don't matter. Obviously they didn't overly care about cid and valve size if all performance 361/383/413/426/440 came with 2.08 and basically most standard performance engines.

And really not proof for buddy was my point.

Factory BBM heads are shitty stock, chamber shrouding etc., bigger engine bigger cam.....easy peasy for them & no multiple valve part#'s to mfr....., Mopar knew what it was doing......saving $$$$ & providing an ample size intake valve for the bores being used.
Now go back to keeping the mice all circling in the same direction.

 

[273]

Factory BBM heads are shitty stock, chamber shrouding etc., bigger engine bigger cam.....easy peasy for them & no multiple valve part#'s to mfr....., Mopar knew what it was doing......saving $$$$ & providing an ample size intake valve for the bores being used.

That what I said, but said 440 instead 413/426 whatever was the biggest at the time they standardize.

Now go back to keeping the mice all circling in the same direction.

I'm only replying to the mice, they keep spinning all by themselves

 

[RustyRatRod]

SBM cylinder heads are the cork on bigger cube small blocks. Mine stalled on the dyno, around 6800. It does have torque and fair bit of power, and I should never blow it up.

Yeah, but how often and WHERE will you spin it up to 6800 in high gear?

 

[Killer6]

That what I said, but said 440 instead 413/426 whatever was the biggest at the time they standardize.

I'm only replying to the mice, they keep spinning all by themselves

No, they standardized the valve size to the smallest bore that would be utilized, 4.125"(this doesn't include the industrial long-stroke 361ci). That bore & chamber design set that parameter.
Replying to the mice in Your head....isn't that the same as talking to Yourself? You should let them out for a breather, and some fresh water, they've gotta be tired....

 

[273]

No, they standardized the valve size to the smallest bore that would be utilized, 4.125"(this doesn't include the industrial long-stroke 361ci). That bore & chamber design set that parameter.

Whatever lol

Replying to the mice in Your head....isn't that the same as talking to Yourself? You should let them out for a breather, and some fresh water, they've gotta be tired....

Aren't you guys the mice ?

 

[92b]

Yes, if I had that 367 and was talked into stroking it, that example has nothing to do with my actual car.

Yes, and I was explaining how My cars actual powerband works with those gears and stall.

The point was my non race cars powerband is basically 4000 to 6000 rpms and peaks at 5400 rpm. An engine's powerband is not 2,500 to 6,000 plus rpms cause that's what they dyno'd,
It's relative to it's peak hp rpm. You very well know that as you pointed out in a race (full throttle run) the useful part is that little box (powerband) to the right on a dyno sheet.
But you don't want to talk about that cause it don't help your case, so you rather take pieces out of context strawman me to try and gotcha me. Been 18 pages still waiting for to make a valid argument .

Way back you said this wasn't about all out drag racing. So at this point it's becoming a circular discussion. You keep making drag racing choices so apparently this discussion is about drag racing. I made the mistake of thinking this discussion was about the video you posted in the first post. The difference in the power curves between two motors built for the street.

 

[273]

Way back you said this wasn't about all out drag racing.

You don't comprehend very well, as I said I'm not talking drag racing per se especially professional racing. But to compare the performance potential (aka the reason you built it) two or more engine is gonna have to be some kind of performance situation in a car whether it's 0-60 mph or street light to light etc.. 1/4 mile is a good representative of that potential and something we all basically understand as a potential 12's 13's 14's etc.. if we race or not.

So at this point it's becoming a circular discussion.

It's Not, your making It circular, I've made it quite clear if you compare these two even three engines (323,367,410) by there powerband (in relation to peak hp) all 3 engines have similar powerbands therefor similar potential, you want to make it about ever other thing under the sun.

You keep making drag racing choices so apparently this discussion is about drag racing. I made the mistake of thinking this discussion was about the video you posted in the first post. The difference in the power curves between two motors built for the street.

All a drag track is, a stretch of road.

 

[92b]

You don't comprehend very well, as I said I'm not talking drag racing per se especially professional racing. But to compare the performance potential (aka the reason you built it) two or more engine is gonna have to be some kind of performance situation in a car whether it's 0-60 mph or street light to light etc.. 1/4 mile is a good representative of that potential and something we all basically understand as a potential 12's 13's 14's etc.. if we race or not.

It's Not, your making It circular, I've made it quite clear if you compare these two even three engines (323,367,410) by there powerband (in relation to peak hp) all 3 engines have similar powerbands therefor similar potential, you want to make it about ever other thing under the sun.

All a drag track is, a stretch of road.

You are ignoring all other aspects of performance in a car that is driven on the street and boiling it down to that tiny box at the right side of the curve. Gear changes (lower) in a street car do have an effect on the performance of the car and it’s not all positive. The comparison between the two engines in the video was about which engine would perform better for the application it was intended for. None of your arguments have swayed me. I still agree with the conclusion that the people who did the test came to. No contest.

 

[273]

You are ignoring all other aspects of performance in a car that is driven on the street and boiling it down to that tiny box at the right side of the curve. Gear changes (lower) in a street car do have an effect on the performance of the car and it’s not all positive. The comparison between the two engines in the video was about which engine would perform better for the application it was intended for. None of your arguments have swayed me. I still agree with the conclusion that the people who did the test came to. No contest.

All I got from you is you have terrible reading comprehension and have zero idea what a powerband is.

 

[92b]

All I got from you is you have terrible reading comprehension and have zero idea what a powerband is.

Maybe, but at least I'm in good company.

 

[273]

 

[EL5DEMON340]

put both these engines in a A body, and the stroker may be 3/4 tenths quicker. go next deeper gear and 500/1000 more stall and the 367 runs the same. Someone like me who likes to run hard BUT look relatively stock using a 6 pack intake and ported J heads may still build a stroker even though it's not ideal with it being chocked up..

 

[273]

put both these engines in a A body, and the stroker may be 3/4 tenths quicker. go next deeper gear and 500/1000 more stall and the 367 runs the same. Someone like me who likes to run hard BUT look relatively stock using a 6 pack intake and ported J heads may still build a stroker even though it's not ideal with it being chocked up..

All depends what you want ( where you want the powerband to live) I could see a stroker with ported j heads, to me displacement is more of an rpm & gearing thing (less & higher for similar performance) than a performance mod.