Separate names with a comma.
Probably a good guesstimation.
I wouldn't think more than 485 HP, but I've been wrong before.
Wow. That's less than I guessed. I'm sure your guess is a lot closer too, Jim. So in my eyes, those extra two points would be a waste. lol
Just found this...best porn in the industry..great stuff man...and it vindicates many a builds from yesteryears...should be in the archives for real...
Sticky a possibility?......
From my point of view , having gone from a 14.9 second 96 mph Charger RT back in 1971 to an 8.70 drag car that runs 153 mph, There are certain rules that fall in line for best results. Minimum for a decent life and good power, bore it and hone with torque plates if you can. A loose piston to bore wears out rings in a hurry! If you can, pick pistons and rings that are narrow. If the move is free, so is the extra power. 1/16 would be great. 1- make it seal. As said above, if you don't build cylinder pressure, ya ain't gonna get any power! 2 make it flow, usually starting with exhaust. That helps the whole power range. On any performance build, good exhaust (headers+ good mufflers usually) will be the first big jump in performance given you have a healthy motor to start with. 3 Basic cylinder head improvement; fresh three angle valve job, back cut valves. 4 Proper cam for cylinder pressure, must be picked to keep cranking compression compatible with your final compression, head type, quench and lowest point you need torque. Don't make the mistake of trying to put a cam with more duration (more than say five to ten degrees over a factory HP 440 cam) in combination with a stock converter (low stall, say below 2400) or a stock gear ratio manual. You may get your butt handed to you by a stock Duster 318 with headers. It happened to me in 1971. I went by the guy like a freight train three hundred feet down the road, but he already had his victory! 5 Don't think the factory Thermo quad and steel intake need to go. Work with them. If you think I am wrong, check the stock class NHRA low compression cars' performance. I was into the twelves with the RT before I got rid of mine. If you plan to upgrade, untill you get above 500 hp, stick with a Performer RPM as your biggest choice in manifolds. Single planes are for a 4,000 and up launch, combined with a big cam. The rpm that the single plane passes the dual plane in power is 5,000. If you shift at 5500 ( I went 11.60s at 118 mph in a 440 duster shifting at 5500) you spend about three quarters of your time below 5,000 rpm, maybe more. 6 This is a torque motor- you won't run it above 5200 to 5800 until you get into some pretty serious cams and combos. Do everything you can to enhance torque. Long tube headers, long collectors (18-24 inch). Stay reasonable on tube size, 1 7/8 works well. On the rpm deal, My buddys 70 Chrysler New Yorker (gutted for racing) weighs 3800 race ready, uses a Mopar 590 cam and Eddy heads with 10.0 compression, shifts at 6200 and runs 10.90s all day long.
Oh man, good advice! The tests we did were not to recommend the engine build we did, as it certainly wasn't an optimum build, but just to show what we could do with the parts we had laying around.
Greg, GREAT post man!
And great info(yours) it is. I kinda forgot this was your post till I went back and reread the first one, thanks for accepting my info! Good air inlet, like a bell shaped air cleaner base and a cold air source are worth their weight in gold. If I read it correctly, every eleven degrees air temp increase is a loss of one percent power. If that is true, feeding a motor 180 degree underhood air is not too good. It could cost you as much as ten percent in power.
Need to pick your brain here for a minute concerning the 516 heads..what is their basic cc in stock form, and I see you had 2.14/1.81 valves for your test,how important is the larger valve size say versus the 2.08 and say 1.74 exh in the same test..and on the 906's what would it take for them to acheive the same as the 516's in your test....wait...before you smack me in the head with a pistolgrip I have a buddy that has a 73 440 MH,cast crank 30K engine runs like new and I was gonna recommend this build to him and these are some of the ?? he asked me about,he does not have the 516's but has all the others[906,452,346's]and he has all the other components of your test[and others] and his pistons are .160 in the hole same as test...
Scrap that on questions above...I just traded for the above stated engine in the shortblk form...like I needed it..couldnt say no to the trade[300bucs in parts]got the trk mts and pan [they'll be 4sale] got an idea I will be kicking around on the cheap...here I go again...Oh it was a 78 not 73yr
One more round.... Love this thread...
Yep..just one more round before I tap out...may need a red bull with wings...2 little 440's went to the store,one had a little compression the other had more...e i e i O...still looks like original game plan will still be on
r.b,good to see you post....
think I got a few left...
I was looking at the year by year specs on mymopar.com (yes I know they have a few errors), and it seems that the baseline of the dyno test is pretty dang close to what the spec is from the factory. I wonder how my '69 10:1 motor would do with the same mods... ...and I also noticed the specs say 10.1:1 for the non HP 440 versus 10:1 for the HP. Wonder what the deal was with that? Again- thanks for doing this wonderful "scientific method" dyno test for us.
Taken out of Mopar Performance BB 'B-RB' Engines: part#P4876825....1998 edition. Mechanical Camshaft Testing "To illustrate potential performance improvements, three mechanical camshaft designs were installed in our 400 cubic inch 'B' engine Duster bracket test car. The test car's engine featured an 8.5:1 compression ratio (stock pistons), Mopar performance parts headers, stage IV heads, 850cfm 4Bbl. Mopar performance parts carburetor and a mopar performance parts chrome box ignition (P4120534). Other equipment included an A-727 torqueflite transmission, a 4.30 8-1/4" rear-end, and 10-1/2" slicks. The car weighed in at 3,200 lbs. (less driver). The results are shown on the following chart (a popular hydraulic camshaft was used as the baseline). Each camshaft was installed at a camshaft centerline 2degree less than the centerline listed on the chart; for example, the .590" lift camshaft ground on 106degree centers was installed at a 104degree centerline. The valve springs (P2806077) remained the same in all tests..." camshaft part # Duration lift Centerline E.T. MPH P4120237 Hyd 292degrees .509" 108degrees 11.77 114.89 (baseline) P4120659 Mech 284degrees .528" 112degrees 11.69 115.90 P4120661 Mech 296degrees .557" 110degrees 11.55 117.05 P4120663 Mech 312degrees .590" 106degrees 11.45 118.00 This is a 400 cast crank stock 8.5 comp piston engine,old school cams[not that there's anything wrong with these] just substitute a 440 smogger,with todays modern grind camshaft of your chosing, more intake choices,better convertors of today,better electronics etc,you get the picture? and a real good set of heads...low comp and on the cheap....and pump gas.....so I would say ole Rustyratrod was right ..'flow trumps compression' and here's the proof...so my perception of this is head flow and mods is where the power is derived..take it for what it's worth in HP ratings which I'm sure somebody will figure and post...just thought I'd pass it on,good stuff and 'aint nothing new' for some but new to many....so break out those smoggers fellas....you may not be 1st but you can be next...oohrah
What effect if any does c/r have on engine vacuum. I'm planning on running a .509 cam in a 426w with 10:1. Just curious if vacuum would be different at 8:1 or 12:1 for example. Thanks
:happy1::coffee2::happy1::coffee2::toimonst::coffee2::happy1:............anyone gonna comment on the vacuum ???...........and no comments on MA MOPARS low comp tests?? How about the stage lV heads in comparison to factory castings ported etc.?
..........more comp = more vac all else being equal, stage 4 flows a fair bit more............kim.........
Higher compression always increases vacuum and smooths the idle with a bigger cam. It also increases your gas mileage at the same time as power (it is mathematically related to the "fuel conversion efficiency" of the engine). Heat from combustion also is higher meaning you have to beef up the cooling system and run a cooler thermostat. Most importantly for the car companies in the '70s higher compression puts out more NOx emissions especially if the combustion chamber isn't very "fast-burning."
Wrong answer on the cooler thermostat making an engine run cooler. The thermostat has nothing to do with the maximum temperature an engine runs.
I know, it regulates what temperature your engine does run at, and when you have high compression you need your engine to run cooler to reduce detonation and make more power... A '69 Polara with a factory-original 10:1 383 4-bbl I worked on last summer had an old sticker on the radiator support that clearly said "USE ONLY 180* THERMOSTAT" it ran hot when I first got it running and changing out the t-stat for a 180* cured it.
Sorry to resurrect an old thread but this one has a lot of interesting info, any updates on the build IQ52?? My cousin has a '72 440 out of a Polara with only 45,000 miles on it and we will probably be taking a similar route "heating it up" a bit before we drop it in his '71 Satellite.
Dropped it into a '72 Satellite and sold it to a feller in NJ. Coming up new, three big blocks, 505, 496, 440 and a 426 small block. All pump gas.