440 source engine packages

[Jeremiah (jd)]

Is 500ci, cnc'd Stealth heads, HFT 251*/257* @ 0.050" & 0.564" lift, Performer RPM intake, and 950 4150 carb really good for 650 hp??

Apparently the ported heads are good for 100hp? I doubt that 650hp number. The 550hp package sounds more realistic. Ported heads might make 600hp with that cam? Probably more like 580ish in my experience.


The 680hp package uses a hydraulic roller and ported stealth heads so 625ish?

A Performer RPM seems kind of small over the 550hp range does it not?

My skepticism is growing with respect to the hp numbers above the 550hp kit. Keeping the same cam, intake and carb from 550 to 680hp seems like a stretch. Just one guy's opinion..

Fwiw my (unported) stealth head equipped 11:1 cr 511" low deck made 625hp and 620tq with a QF 1050 (4150), Holley SD and 1-7/8 -> 2" step headers. Custom bullet solid roller ground for n20 and crane steel rockers.

In the car it will run 2->2-1/8" step headers and a Mopar M1 and I expect chassis dyno numbers to correlate to 650 flywheel hp n/a.

On the economic end of things you won't find too many short cuts to make in these packages. A used 66-69 hemi oil pan is not a common part for instance and that is what fits in a BBD. Used valve covers and intake might save a few bucks however shipping prices are obscene making new stuff from summit much more attractive.

Take the 680hp package and go solid roller - that would be my choice for a stock ish ( thank you George Santos) appearing stroker. The following parts woulb be required:

-Custom custom solid roller $500
-Comp Steel Rockers $850
-BAM/Isky/Comp roller tappets $650-1100

I don't know what you would subtract for the substituted parts to the dollar but it is about 60% more expensive to upgrade to a solid roller.

You can spend 15k on parts for a stroker without ever turning a wrench. 20k for a dyno fresh 511" with a solid roller isn't out of line IMO.

The days of screwing a $10k engine together at that level are over.

 

[Dan the man]

About what? HP ratings are pretty close to what could be expected using the sum of parts.
We're not talking small block here we're talking big strokers.

Big strokers, 500 horsepower isn't hard to get from a built 440. That's like 1.13 horsepower per cubic inch. That should be easily done with a 440

 

[Jeremiah (jd)]

Big strokers, 500 horsepower isn't hard to get from a built 440. That's like 1.13 horsepower per cubic inch. That should be easily done with a 440

Hpw many have you personally built and/or dyno'd? What people like to say on the internet and reality are often not in the same space. I say that from direct experience on the subject at hand.

 

[RustyRatRod]

You can make a slant 6 show 700HP with the right dyno operator. lol

 

[PROSTOCKTOM]

Only $200 difference to go from the 680 HP version to the 700 HP version and with that you get TFS 240 heads over ported 440 Source heads. That's a no brainer upgrade.

Tom

 

[Dan the man]

Hpw many have you personally built and/or dyno'd? What people like to say on the internet and reality are often not in the same space. I say that from direct experience on the subject at hand.

You can make a slant 6 show 700HP with the right dyno operator. lol

I hear that. Engine Masters dyno'd a 410" sbf.9.75:1 cr, afr 195 heads, cam I think was 238*duration at 0.050" I forgot what the lift was. 750 Holley, edelbrock performer rpm airgap. Power was 506 at 5900 rpm's. That's pretty good and they did it without spinning it over 6,000

 

[Jeremiah (jd)]

You can make a slant 6 show 700HP with the right dyno operator. lol

That one gets a 175 lb flywheel in the software lol

 

[Jeremiah (jd)]

I hear that. Engine Masters dyno'd a 410" sbf.9.75:1 cr, afr 195 heads, cam I think was 238*duration at 0.050" I forgot what the lift was. 750 Holley, edelbrock performer rpm airgap. Power was 506 at 5900 rpm's. That's pretty good and they did it without spinning it over 6,000

Did the 410 ford have a hydraulic roller? Was it a Windsor or Cleveland? Lots of variables to compare.

A different engine platform, in this case, is irrelevant.

 

[Jeremiah (jd)]

Only $200 difference to go from the 680 HP version to the 700 HP version and with that you get TFS 240 heads over ported 440 Source heads. That's a no brainer upgrade.

Tom

The question is...are you man enough to run the PxQ rockers?

The TF 240's are $1093 and ported Steaths are $999/head. We replaced the valves, guides and one seat on the Stealths in my 511". I have more confidence in the TF heads based on AndyF's feedback that I do with my own experience with the stealth heads.

Maybe I have bad luck...idk. The current cam is .650ish lift and only runs 220lb seat and 570 over the nose with a 6100rpm peak hp.

 

[Dan the man]

Did the 410 ford have a hydraulic roller? Was it a Windsor or Cleveland? Lots of variables to compare.

A different engine platform, in this case, is irrelevant.

It was a Windsor, I believe it was a solid roller. Either way I was impressed by it

 

[Dan the man]

What puzzles me is, they have these high dollar stroker motors putting out like 1.32 horsepower per cubic inch. I wish I had the dyno sheet on a 0.030 over 289 with edelbrock e heads, performer 289 intake, 650 Holley, comp 268h cam, 8.62:1 cr. It made 303 horsepower at 5900 rpm's. So my question is, how can a little 289 make almost as much power per cubic inch as some of those high dollar stroker builds?

 

[dodgedifferent2]

Torque/hp at low (3500) rpm vs hp at 6 grand

 

[Jeremiah (jd)]

What puzzles me is, they have these high dollar stroker motors putting out like 1.32 horsepower per cubic inch. I wish I had the dyno sheet on a 0.030 over 289 with edelbrock e heads, performer 289 intake, 650 Holley, comp 268h cam, 8.62:1 cr. It made 303 horsepower at 5900 rpm's. So my question is, how can a little 289 make almost as much power per cubic inch as some of those high dollar stroker builds?

Look at the dyno sheet and study power under the curve for each combo. Peak hp numbers can mean very little on a 500" engine built to redline around 5500.

If you changed the cam, rockers and added roller lifters things would turn around. Then you would need a bigger carb and intake. Now you need a hole in the hood, etc etc etc. Eventually you need and aftermarket block.

My 511" with unported Stealths makes 1.22hp/cube n/a - 625hp@6100rpm. Not impressive sounding is it? It makes over 600ft lbs of tq from 3500 to 5400. It's going to be a mean mf in my 68 Dart @3500lbs at the line.

Identical 511" shortblock with MW CNC ported Edelbrock Victors, Indy 4150 intake/1000 cfm QF AN1050, .730 net lift solid roller made 1.47hp/ cube - 750hp@7100rpm.

Take the data above as proof that the more powerful engine ( in terms of hp/cube) has ports requiring more RPM and a bigger cam to make power. More lift, more spring pressure..equals drastically more expensicve parts or a much shorter duty cycle. Same with RPM.

The beauty of the big block stroker for 99% of cruisers out there is lots of low end torque in a pcakage that will last a lifetime if properly maintained.