I need schooling - old vs. new engines

-
M

Maybe shortfalls was not the right word but would you not say there are improvements made over wedge engines in the 3G design? I mean, port floor, mains, oiling, ....?

Nope. How did they fix the mains and the oiling on the Hemi? They kill lifters. And they aren’t as tough as everyone says.

NA the Hemi is a slug.
 
Nope. How did they fix the mains and the oiling on the Hemi? They kill lifters. And they aren’t as tough as everyone says.

NA the Hemi is a slug.
Okay, you win. LA's are a superior design than a computer aided design. Have a great day.
 
@Rat Bastid So now you agree that the 3G is a better design? Maybe you're just mad you can't get into a pissing match this morning?
 
Okay, you win. LA's are a superior design than a computer aided design. Have a great day.

Thats not what I said. YOU said the Hemi
I had thought how wonderful it would be to add an MSD crank trigger to run COP on an LA. MPFI and a nice LSA. I researched the parts and looked at other shortfalls of the wedge. It just doesn't make sense to do if you look at how easy it is to just get a 3g Hemi. Way not worth it to stick with LA.
Now, I love the LA and I have put mega dollars in building 2 of them and put good money into building a few others. However, for my 'cuda I really want that ability to drive across country and get decent fuel mileage making level power.
The design limitations of the LA and wedge engines makes it where it has to keep it from eating itself the more power you make. With modern engines you can make power at higher levels before the inefficiencies start catching up with it. It's really about efficiency of design. Everything was designed beautifully from the get go. There has to be a lot of re-design with older engines to make them efficient and have big power.


This is your post. You made some gross assumptions like the Hemi is bullet proof and that the wedge is an inferior design. And you would be wrong.

The G3 Hemi is just another production based platform with all the issues that come with that.

In NA form, the Hemi is a power loser to a wedge. And why compare a cylinder head designed in the early 1960’s to something designed in the late 1990’s?

Go look at the wedge heads out there. They KILL the Hemi. You need to compare the Hemi with a W8 or 9 head.
 
@Rat Bastid So now you agree that the 3G is a better design? Maybe you're just mad you can't get into a pissing match this morning?

No, I asked you a simple question and YOU got pissed. Grow up and answer the question.

What are the shortfalls of a wedge compared to a Hemi?

And let’s use the lowly LS head as a comparison.
 
I had thought how wonderful it would be to add an MSD crank trigger to run COP on an LA. MPFI and a nice LSA. I researched the parts and looked at other shortfalls of the wedge. It just doesn't make sense to do if you look at how easy it is to just get a 3g Hemi. Way not worth it to stick with LA.

Completely agree. Just looked at doing a CNP conversion using Holley parts and it was $1700 before shipping or tax. Even if I just use the distributor and MicroSquirt or something similar to control the timing and build my own harnesses, it is still $700 or so. Makes sense if you want to stick with the LA, but you can buy a complete well running Eagle 5.7 for around $1700.

...I really want that ability to drive across country and get decent fuel mileage making level power.

Pretty hard to argue with an easy 450-500 hp and 25+ mpg. And that's without an SC or even an NA 6.4
 
They kill lifters.

Kind of a generalization. And you forgot to throw out that the pre-Eagle 5.7 has a tendency to drop valve seats if overheated.

But just like the "cracked Magnum head" straw man, it doesn't happen to every motor.

And there is evidence to suggest that the lifter issue isn't so much a design problem as low oil pressure at idle and long periods of idling.
 
Kind of a generalization. And you forgot to throw out that the pre-Eagle 5.7 has a tendency to drop valve seats if overheated.

But just like the "cracked Magnum head" straw man, it doesn't happen to every motor.

And there is evidence to suggest that the lifter issue isn't so much a design problem as low oil pressure at idle and long periods of idling.

Well, if you look at how the oil the lifters you can see it’s a design issue.

There are compromises in EVERY production engine out there.

Chrysler spent all their money on the G3 Hemi, which NA is less than impressive. I get that they were looking down the road to supercharging but that doesn’t change all the issues an NA Hemi has.

IMO, the Hemi was brought back for the marketing side of it. I’d rather they would have spent the money developing a better wedge head engine than the Hemi.
 
Go look at the wedge heads out there. They KILL the Hemi. You need to compare the Hemi with a W8 or 9 head.

What's a W8 or 9 head flow? And what do they cost? Do you have to buy a Ritter block to run them?

The W8 or 9 argument just seems like a different application to me. Can't see someone building a W8 motor to drive it on Route 66. Seems like the W8 head is more drag race or circle track application, which doesn't really seam to fit the thread as well.

Not really an apples to apples comparison to talk about W8 or 9 heads since only a select few can afford to run such a beast. Maybe the new TF head would be a better comparison? Oh wait they only beat the pre-Eagle 5.7 head but can't keep up with the Eagle head or the Apache 6.4 head out of the box.

Think 5.9 Magnum block, 4" crank, TF heads and intake and a cam and compression combo you can drive to another state with. Then compare that to an 100K mile '09+ 5.7 with a cam and headers. The 5.7 will probably make close to the same numbers, but be much easier to drive, get far better mileage, not leak oil and start in the morning without drama.
 
Using Head flow instead of cam to make power mainly.
 
There are compromises in EVERY production engine out there.

Absolutely. There is no perfect solution for anything. Completely agree.

Chrysler spent all their money on the G3 Hemi, which NA is less than impressive. I get that they were looking down the road to supercharging but that doesn’t change all the issues an NA Hemi has.

Almost 500 hp from an NA 6.4 and still get 25+ mpg is less than impressive? You must run in circles I can't fathom. Even a small 5.7 with no more than a cam swap is 450 hp or so, and still way more drivable than a similar 408 even though it is down on cubes. Heck, BP's biggest offering for a SB Mopar is down when compared to a stock 6.4, let alone the aftermarket one they are working to bring to market.

Maybe you run in the BB circles? Those certainly have something to bring to the table. Pretty sure a BB wedge head can keep up with a G3 Hemi head. But not everyone wants to put 500+ cid motors in their cars.

The only other circle I can think of that you might find the NA G3 less than impressive is drag racing. Seems like there has been plenty of success there, but I'm not watching so maybe you don't see them work well there?

Can you list for me "all the issues" an NA Hemi has? Not poking at you, just curious what those are.

Things that I can think of that a G3 Hemi added when compared to an LA/Magnum

1. Block doesn't get fragile at 500 hp.
2. OEM cask crank is good to 700+ hp ('09+)
3. OEM Cylinder heads that flow well (330@0.600 '09+ 5.7)
4. Doesn't leak oil
5. COP
6. Tuned equal length runner intake
7. SRV (truck and 6.4)
8. VCT ('09+)

I get that things like #7 and #8 are less than useful for drag racing, and even something like the intake might be less than ideal for that. But in the world of driving a car on public roads they can be very helpful. And (I think) this thread isn't about a drag motor or it would be in the drag racing section.
 
Well, if you look at how the oil the lifters you can see it’s a design issue.

There are compromises in EVERY production engine out there.

Chrysler spent all their money on the G3 Hemi, which NA is less than impressive. I get that they were looking down the road to supercharging but that doesn’t change all the issues an NA Hemi has.

IMO, the Hemi was brought back for the marketing side of it. I’d rather they would have spent the money developing a better wedge head engine than the Hemi.

Wait, is your issue with the G3 less that it is a late model motor and more that you thought they would have been better off if Mopar had done an LS like motor?

I've been reading your comments as if you were old-school and didn't like newer motors. But now I am wondering if I as mis-reading you and the issue is more you didn't like the direction they chose to go.
 
Last edited:
Couple of other things I thought of that the G3 added over the LA/Magnum:

9. Crank driven oil pump (reduced cam flex)
10. Raised cam tunnel to straighten out pushrod angles
 
Wait, is your issue with the G3 less that is is a late model motor and more that you thought they would have been better off if Mopar had done an LS like motor?

I've been reading your comments as if you were old-school and didn't like newer motors. But now I am wondering if I as mis-reading you and the issue is more you didn't like the direction they chose to go.

Im not posting anything else until the guy who said the G3 Hemi fixed the shortcomings of the wedge headed engine.

Thats bullshit. If you have one year porting heads and using a flow bench you would understand that flow is down the list of important ****.

The LS head is FAR better than the G3 Hemi. In fact, most decent wedge heads are.

Comparing engines or heads or whatever from different era‘s is difficult at best, but to make the wild *** claim that any Hemi head fixed the shortcomings of a wedge head is crazy talk. Like put the crack pipe down crazy talk.

As far as a few other things you’ve posted, I dont know why you can’t get something other than a new engine to cold start and idle. That makes no sense.

And, I would put a decently prepped W2 head up against a G3 NA Hemi all day long and whip it’s ***. And that head was developed in the mid 1970’s for 340 inches.

No matter how you slice it, ANY Hemi (NA) will lose to a wedge head for power, mileage, drivability and such things.

The Hemi guys (especially the G3 guys) get butt hurt when you call them on their delusions.


Of course, if you want to discuss power adders (with the exception of Nitrous) then the Hemi is a far better engine to start with. The wedge has serious issues with fuel volume and flame speed.
 
Couple of other things I thought of that the G3 added over the LA/Magnum:

9. Crank driven oil pump (reduced cam flex)
10. Raised cam tunnel to straighten out pushrod angles

Ok, the crank driven oil pump was done for COST SAVINGS and packaging. That’s it. It’s BAD policy from a performance standpoint.

Correcting the lifter bank angles is nice, but under 8k RPM it doesn’t really matter.
 
I guess I'm on the other side of this issue. I want smooth power when I put my foot down — I couldn't care less about a lumpy idle, in fact I hate the shaking. To each his own.
Then run the appropriate camshaft and be done with it. Tons of cars came with lots of power and ran very smoothly. It's no secret how to do it.
 
If you have one year porting heads and using a flow bench you would understand that flow is down the list of important ****.

Ok, so you are saying peak flow number comparisons aren't going to be the best way to compare cylinder heads. Fair enough.

The LS head is FAR better than the G3 Hemi. In fact, most decent wedge heads are.

Can you explain that a little more? Better in what way? Packaging? Smaller valve cover?

I dont know why you can’t get something other than a new engine to cold start and idle. That makes no sense.

I'm not trying to say you can't get a LA/Magnum to cold start and idle. I'm just saying that a carb'ed 408 isn't going to do either as well as a 5.7 or 6.4. And the more ragged edge the 408 is built, the less likely it will do it without constant tweaking.

And, I would put a decently prepped W2 head up against a G3 NA Hemi all day long and whip it’s ***. And that head was developed in the mid 1970’s for 340 inches.

I guess I am looking at it from an "other than theoretical" position. I love the ide a of a W2 headed smallblock. But the idea of finding all the parts and making them work together makes me say a 5.7 is the better way. Would a W2 outrun a 5.7 if they were equally built? Maybe, don't really care. Could you build a W2 headed motor that has equal drivability as a small cammed 5.7 and still outrun it? I have doubts.

I would love to see that done though. Don't get me wrong. And it might already have been done. I know @racerjoe has a trick SBM with EFI and CNP. Maybe he would be a good one to give input on building a nice driving SBM that get's good fuel economy and makes great power. Another one is @goldduster318. He has a fully EFI'ed SBM and even a T56.

I guess they way I see it, I can buy a BP 465 hp crate motor for $9K and get probably 16 mpg. Or I can do a complete 5.7 swap, including a 6.4 cam and intake, and make about the same power but with 25+ mpg and better drivability. Maybe as you assert the G3 Hemi head isn't as good as the Edelbrocks on the BP motor, but the results kind of say otherwise.
 
Ok, the crank driven oil pump was done for COST SAVINGS and packaging. That’s it. It’s BAD policy from a performance standpoint.

Can you expand on why it is bad policy? Seems like a win-win to me so I must be missing something.

Correcting the lifter bank angles is nice, but under 8k RPM it doesn’t really matter.

Agreed, probably doesn't make much difference. But I also wouldn't be surprised if correct pushrod angles adds some efficiency. One that you can't get in an LA without tracking down a 48 degree block and all the associated parts.

BTW, I'm not trying to goad you or start a fight. Just dialoging. I learned a long time ago that I don't know what I don't know so if someone has an opinion about something, better to listen rather than ignore what might be useful info.
 
Here's an interesting comparison (to me anyway :D ).

The 380 HP crate motor cam specs I found are 288/292 duration with 0.501/0.513 lift.

The 6.4 cam specs I found are 286/288 duration and 0.577/0.537 lift.

I know there is more to a cam than just those numbers, but as a rule a 28_+ cam is fairly rowdy and I know the 380hp crate motor was a beast but not the best driving motor.

But the 6.4 cam with similar duration numbers makes gobs of power everywhere and is a peach to drive.

Not saying the 380hp crate motor should have been better, it has it's compromises for sure. Just saying that if one compares the cams it would seem that they should drive the same and yet they are worlds apart for drivability. Maybe the narrow LSA of the 380hp crate motor has a lot to do with that? Pretty sure the 6.4 cam is in the 112-114 LSA range.

Interesting to note too that the Eagle 5.7 makes similar power to the crate motor and is again head and shoulders above it in drivability.
 
Can I say or dare I say... new school engines in anything pre 80 is disgusting and a slap in the face. no matter how good they perform and the power that can be made. LS is hands down the top dog hands down. Put those in all the fords and GM folks want. Leave the mopars to old school raw torque and oil stains. Old school power for old school iron. How God intended them to be.
 
Can I say or dare I say... new school engines in anything pre 80 is disgusting and a slap in the face. no matter how good they perform and the power that can be made. LS is hands down the top dog hands down. Put those in all the fords and GM folks want. Leave the mopars to old school raw torque and oil stains. Old school power for old school iron. How God intended them to be.

I got no problem with that opinion. To each his own.

I love the look of a BB A-Body. Would still love to do one someday. I've got a buddy with a 400/4 speed 67 Dart and I think it is just cool.

But when the function of the car is to do more than run down to the Piggly Wiggly to get ice-cream or sit on the grass, the newer motors have a real strong draw for me.

Add that while I could buy a new Challenger, why have 2 cars when one could do it for me. Plus, that avoids the debt I would have to carry. And I can say I built it, not bought it.

My scenario isn't the same as everyone else's though. So I say do what works for you.
 
Im not saying it's stupid. I understand the want and desire of modern performance. I fully understand that, I just dont agree with it lol personal opinion. Now i definitely dont discredit the work done to make it look sanitary and done nicely. When I see a classic car, I wanna see a classic powerplant. Stock sucks in anything I agree with that but I think you know what im getting at lol
 
Whether it's here on the forum, or in person locally, I've not seen one single aftermarket EFI conversion that works 100% correctly and or has not been a total and complete pain in the BUTT for whoever was doing it. In fact, I've seen many of them snatch it all back off for a carburetor.
 
Rat Bastid, I am probably one of the few on this forum that agrees with a lot of what you have to say. But this thing with the G3 and G4 Hemis after owning 3 of them since 2006 ( 2 trucks and a 2012 Challenger R/T) is a crock of crap. The valve seat problem was a problem,but only if they were over heated, the cam lifter problem is in the MDS system and less than 5% of production engines according to the real facts and not a flawed block design. The LS engines with whatever they call there MDS are eating cam and lifters also at a rate fast enough that the aftermarket came to there rescue with a fix. Oh let us all not forget the worst cam and lifter fiasco of all, all those small block Chevys that ate cams from 1972 to the end of production of flat tappet cams in what 1987, nobody condemned the SB Chevys and LS for that, like they do the Hemi. These Hemi engines will run with any LS out there, and do not forget in Factory Stock class the Hemi Challengers were sanctioned against 3 times in one season for beating up on the Copo Camaros same as the G2 426 Hemi was sanctioned out of competition in most racing sanctions. I have owned 3 Challengers in my life a 340 4spd , a 440 6 pack automatic, both of them had 3.55 rear gears and the one I still have, a 2012 R/T Classic 5.7 6spd tremec and 3.90 rear gear. I changed the cam out to a 214/224 @ .050 .590/.585 lift cut on a 112* installed at 106* VVT is still active, 1 7/8 headers, stock factory SRT 2 3/4" exhaust, 6.4 srv intake manifold set to switch to short runner at 4800 rpms, the car itself weighs over 4300 pounds. Now the 340 car had 484 mopar cam,headers, LD340 intake, and 800 Holley. The 440 6 pack had a 509 mopar cam, headers and a 2800 converter, both had a lot healthier cams then the new R/T and both weighted a lot less, 3400 to 3500 for the 340, 3700 to 3800 for the 440-6. Seat of the paints the way I remember them running at the time in the 70's the 340 never could have caught the new 5.7 the 440-6 would of given it a run for its money but in my heart I think the 5.7 would come out on top. I have run two older muscle cars on the street with the new Challenger, first was a 67 Camaro SS with a warmed over 350 automatic no competition at all, the second was a supposed 496 big block in an early 70's Chevelle he pulled me in first and second gear at the top of third I stared reeling him in fourth gear I pulled alongside of him, now if we had got off the throttles at the 1/4 mile he probably had me by a fender, but we kept going till I pulled a little over a car length on him and I heard him dump the throttle probably out of gear. Now my 2012 runs high 12' in the quarter with 2.0 60 fts. but from a first gear roll like I ran the Chevelle it's definitely quicker than that. So I think and a lot of people are listening to a lot of internet crap about this new Hemis and do not realize how good they really run, especially with all the weight they are pushing.
 
DionR the 6.4 cam is cut on a 121 LSA and has 215/221 @.050 107 ICL with 20+ degrees of retard in the VVT. The 380 Crate engines cam if I remember right was
288/292 232/236 @.050 (or it could have been 230/234@.050 i'm not sure) cut on a 108 lsa with a 106 ICL, pretty healthy street cam. The 6.4 cam is very mild in comparison.
 
-
Back
Top