I have that book/had the one posted by OP. Note "had". Not a bad book but the HP Books version seemed more understandable to me so that's the one kept.
Is this the correct book for small blocks?
- Thread starter Woodsman341
- Start date
-
The Direct Connetion Performance Book (PN 4120792) is excellent and specific for MOPARS. I have read a number of books that have some misconseptions so be careful what information you use. A Stock 340 can easily make 300+ HP, so a 360 will be a sinch. Key points are good ring seal, excellent head with mild porting and best valves you can get (Ferrera is my choice). Bowl and port matching. Mild cam like the 268H or 280/480 which is close to the 340 Mechanical Cam (PN 3412044, 276/284, 0.444/0.453, 112° C/L). Pay particular attention to the distributor, both the advance curve and total advance. Limit distributor mechanical advance to 11° total (22° crank) so you can run around 12° advance timing at the crank. Vacuum advance should be about 50° total at 15" vacuum for best cruse timing and improved fuel economy. (Richard Ehrenburg's recommendation), but I did this in the '70's when FE was critical during the gas shortages.
This should get you into the mid 13's with 3.55 gears and good tires in an A-Body.
This should get you into the mid 13's with 3.55 gears and good tires in an A-Body.
Dale Davies
Well-Known Member
Each book you purchase at a book store or download will have a kernal of wisdom. The FSM will direct on the proper procedures of basic inspection and assembly. What you are looking for is those bits of wisdom to gain some torque, driveability and fuel economy. I expect this and the other above mmentioned book are two to find Mopar specific wisdom. Another Cartech book available directly or through Amazon is How to Port and Flow Test Cylinder Heads. Another is How to Build Power. Both written by David Vizard.My REAL goal is to build my 360 to have at least 300 HP, but remain very easy to use as a regular street driver, without going all power crazy, if that makes sense. It should be doable, right? I see guys posting about making them into 408 strokers hitting over 400 horses, so with a mild cam and a few other goodies (which I'm not sure of yet), it shouldn't be hard to go from the stock 270s to 300, I think. Why 300? Mainly just so I can say it has 300 or 310 or whatever. Why not 400? I don't want to drive around with a big ol' cam and a loping idle. Same reason I want to swap my 3.91 Sure Grip for something like 3.23 Sure Grip. I know z I'm rambling, but it's super bowl Sunday and I don't watch that, so there.
He is currently involved with Uncle Tony's Mission Impossible build of a 318 to make 318 HP with a BBD two barrel carb. They are on a mass reduction program, so Chev LS valves are on the program. He also did a performance prep on the con rods with the intention of removing mass and increasing reliability. The stock 318 valve weighs 118g. A larger diameter LS valve weighs 95g. If your spring installed height is real close to 1.800", you could get behive springs, retainers and keepers from a Pick n Pull. Melling valves were inexpensive through Summit or probably your local parts store as they are stock replacement. These valves have 8mm stems which is where a lot of weight is saved. A little judiscious porting to unshroud the valves, improve swirl and just clean up the ports helps greatly. Port match the heads and intake to the gaskets for a smooth transfer.
David Vizard has a formula for specing camshaft LSA. For SBC - 128, for SBF - 127. These are parrallel valve engines so one of thisecshould work for SBM. For the Mopar Poly engines, Cleveland Fords, 385 Fords and BBC the number is 132. The formula is for SBC, 128 - (displacement for one cylinder ÷ (intake valve diameter × 0.91)). For best performance it is better to be 1° tight on LSA than too wide. I would look to a cam with say 215° to 220° at 0.050 lift. You want 0.500" to 0.530" lift. A 40° exhaust seat will aid low lift flow without incurring reversion. You want quick off the seat and a quick return to the seat without being hard on the seats. A higher rocker ratio with roller tips aids here.
If you need an intake a 4 barrel, I recommend the Edelbrock performer RPM AirGap manifold used with their AVS2 carburetor for good driveability and fuel atomization for economy. The 650CFM 1906 should function well. If you have a Performer 600CFM, you can get the annular primary boosters from The Carburetor Shop to convert yours. Edelbrock tech recommends starting calibration with the AVS2 factory primary jets and rods. 651 770 3505 is their number. $105US with gaskets and a new bowl cover gasket.
I would recommend looking up David Vizard Powertec 10 Youtube videos. Lots are not dedicated to Mopar, but wisdom on one can be applied to all. Peculiarities of each engine design may require slight modification to your application.
I think with this information and what you glean out of the books should get you a torquey 350HP with good driveability, fuel economy and reliability, without breaking the bank. Most of this can be done in your garage. Porting the heads; use a shop vac with a filter on the inside to catch the dust and grit as it comes in. Also use a tight fitting dust mask to keep the crap out of yoyr lungs. DV has a post containing comment on the filter and using a dust mask.
All the best on your build. Remember one thing, never install a bolt or nut without properly tightening it. Putting rods and pistons in and somebody arrives with a box of browns, finish tightening to torque that last piston pushed in. Ask how my younger brother found out about that.
Dale Davies
Well-Known Member
I would go with David Vizard recommendation by his formula for LSA. Outside that, I agreeon your post. Too wide and you leave torque which relatescto power, on the table. A little tight and the idle quality is degraded a bit. Who sits in traffic twiddling their thumbs for the fun of it? Most of these cars now are driven to Cars and Coffee gatherings or a few cruise to a town out of the city for a meal.
I'll second (or forth, or fifth) the Larry Shepard books. It's 1980's tech but it's sound theory and some of it is always sound and relevant.
I learned a LOT from the big block book, and that helped my first build be a success.
Looks like your name has to be "Larry" in order to write a book on building performance Mopar engines/
I learned a LOT from the big block book, and that helped my first build be a success.
Looks like your name has to be "Larry" in order to write a book on building performance Mopar engines/
Things that have changed since the '80's are the availability of really good heads. The TrickFlow heads would be something I would consider if I hadn't already with with Edelbrock heads before the TF heads were available. These flow as well or better than W-2 heads with much lower cost and manifold selection.
I agree with the TR head being an excellent choice and better than a as cast W2 vs it’s OOTB state. Not against a ported W2.
David Vizards math for the 360 works out to be a 107. He states 1* ether way is not really noticeable but to choose the one numerically lower. At a 106, the idle is going to be a bit snotty. I have a 108 in my 340 @ and 10.5-1 & 2.02 heads. It’s pretty good!
If you plan on headers for the car, just copy the 340 build specs and with the cam, the same duration specs can be used but I suggest tightening up the LSA for better low and mid range torque.
David Vizards math for the 360 works out to be a 107. He states 1* ether way is not really noticeable but to choose the one numerically lower. At a 106, the idle is going to be a bit snotty. I have a 108 in my 340 @ and 10.5-1 & 2.02 heads. It’s pretty good!
If you plan on headers for the car, just copy the 340 build specs and with the cam, the same duration specs can be used but I suggest tightening up the LSA for better low and mid range torque.
A junkyard 5.9 Magnum in decent condition will give you 300 hp.
harrisonm
Well-Known Member
I have the "How to Rebuild Your Small Block Mopar" book pictured in post 21. It is a great book. It thoroughly covered the entire rebuild process in a clear, concise manner with lots of good pictures. I DO have a 69 FSM, and it is really GREAT for a lot of things, but I like this book better for the engine rebuild.
100% correct! Give the healthy 5.9 a RPM, 750, headers (I suggest 1-3/4 tubes) and a great ignition, 300+ all day long.
No cam change needed.
Dale Davies
Well-Known Member
I would seriously consider an upgrade to higher ratio rockers. This may mandate a spring upgrade as well. Check the installed height. If it is around 1.8", you can use Chev LS beehive springs. You would have to source retainers to fit your keepers. Beehive springs perform better at controling the valve and spring harmonics/resonant frequencies which can enable valve float. There are millions of LS engines in bone yards to source good springs from for little cost. Spend on what is important, good reliable roller rockers. If considering removing the heads to touch up the valve job going to LS valves can be considered. This would require replacing the guides to fit the 8mm stems, 5/16" bronze guides and hone .001" to .002".The LS valves do not wear much so you could possibly use the valves, springs, retainers and keepers from heads removed at a Pick n Pull yard for not much more than peanuts. Let your machine shop cut new seats as required and touch up the valve seats with a 30° back cut on the intakes. Re machining the exhaust valves and seats for a 40° angle can aid low lift flow when max lift is no more than 0.500". With that in mind you need to grab the low hanging fruit where ever you can. Some bowl work and minor porting to remove casting ridges and gasket match the ports. If cutting a little out to improve flow, consentrate on the cylinder wall sides of the port going past the valve. On the cylinder wall side of the guide the roof of the port can be raised a bit. Narrow the guide and aero shape it. On the cylinder center side, just take the roughness off as the guide is shaped. The port floor is a dead area to speak of, so just remove casting imperfections. Inexpensive valves and some carbide burrs and 80 grit for the diegrinder could get you more than you hope for with high ratio rockers. Still very reliable and drive like it came off the showroom floor.
@Dale Davies
Since your quoting me….
Paragraphs are an excellent idea. ;)
To bring in one more item, the total lift of what ever the value may be, at what point does the head stop or stall at flowing air?
Any cam change should have fresh new springs to match what’s the valve is lifted at.
Has anyone tested Magnum rockers?
How much power is the rocker worth even at the same ratio?
How much power is the added ratio?
Isn’t it easier to get a cam ground at the desired lift rather than exploit it via a rocker ratio?
A Cam intensity is increased with a change in rocker ratio. Is there not a lobe available to match or exceed a rocker change?
At what point is the valve opening speed to much or of no more benefit?
A quite from his second post FWIW
Zero need for anything above.
Thanks
Since your quoting me….
Paragraphs are an excellent idea. ;)
Why? Making use of an LA cam in a Magnum is an upgrade in .1 already which should have you seriously reconsidering the exact cam specs being used. Going to a 1.7 rocker further exaggerates the issue.
To bring in one more item, the total lift of what ever the value may be, at what point does the head stop or stall at flowing air?
This is not exactly true depending on the valve lift.
Any cam change should have fresh new springs to match what’s the valve is lifted at.
Absolutely, LS not being absolute. OAL valve length should be considered carefully.
Dumb move using used valve springs. New ones are cheap and fresh OOTB
And your mentioning used valve springs, retainers, locks and valves from a junkyard?
A worthy investment for their accurate ratio over LA rockers.
Has anyone tested Magnum rockers?
How much power is the rocker worth even at the same ratio?
How much power is the added ratio?
Isn’t it easier to get a cam ground at the desired lift rather than exploit it via a rocker ratio?
A Cam intensity is increased with a change in rocker ratio. Is there not a lobe available to match or exceed a rocker change?
At what point is the valve opening speed to much or of no more benefit?
What size are Magnum valves stems?
Why do LS valves wear less and again you’re buying cheap used parts over fresh springs retainers and locks? Saving money at what other expense?
Reshaping the port floor is a bad idea? No laying it back?
A quite from his second post FWIW
As I stated above, the post suggestions will do the trick.
Zero need for anything above.
Thanks
Dale Davies
Well-Known Member
Yes, I did think that would get someone excited.
1: Upgrade rockers. The idea with this is to gain a bit of lift without having to replace the cam.
2: may... spring upgrade. The reason I stated MAY require a spring upgrade is that the stock springs may be adequate, but should be verified.
3: LS valve springs. The idea is to compare the stock spring installed height and lift before coil bind and compare to the LS beehive springs.
4: used springs. A low mileage Chev will most likely have good springs in it. As any time you are doing repair or modification on your vehicle, the parts must be inspected. Used springs from a low mileage salvage vehicle will be fine provided they pass inspection.
5: used springs, retainers and keepers. Again inspection of the parts. If no damage or wear they should be perfectly acceptable to use. A bunch of this is low buck performance. Most of us have our budgets pinched more so these days than previously.
6: roller rockers with higher ratio. Semi inexpensive with only the valve covers requiring removal. Now valve to piston clearance at 10° BTDC for the exhaust and 10° ATDC for the intake must be checked. Depends on which ratio is chosen and how much the calculated increase in lift they will provide. About 10° BTDC and ATDC is close to the point of closest approach of the piston and valves.
7: Magnum valve stems. I do not know for certain what the Magnum valve stem diameter is. The guys involved with UTG Mission Impossible were talking about the LA valves being heavy with 3/8" valve stems. SBC and SBF are 11/32" except the 221 and 260 SBF which had 5/16" stems, but much smaller valve head diameters. DV measured a used 318 LA intake valve at 118g. My used 289 intake valve that had been ground once is 113g. A new Melling 1.9 LS intake valve is 96g.
8: LS valve wear. This is according to DV who has a lot of experience with cylinder heads. He shows a used valve they plan to use in Mission Impossible, bigger head diameter and lower weight.
9: port floor generally a dead area. Yes some contouring can help in the right place. Short side radius is the big one on that topic. Outside that the port floor will give minimal gain and can actually lose flow. Generally a bit of filling on the port floor reduces cross sectional area and moves airflow up into the active area. This increases flow speed and port energy. That is getting a bit past quick cleanup and bowl work for inexpensive and quick performance boost.
There are things that can be done inexpensively on a budget for a street cruizer and then there is the step up a notch or two to more bracket or race modifications.
To replace the cam will generally require the removal of the radiator and possibly evac and recharge the air conditioning to remove the condenser. All I relate can be done without that.
Dale Davies
Well-Known Member
Another thought, can an LA cam be used in a Magnum. The LA blocks were all machined with the same lifter bore angles used in the A Polysphere blocks. The A lifter bores were spread to accomodate the pushrod angle for the Polysphere rockers. When Mopar engineered the LA with wedge heads, they did not correct the lifter angle. This requires the cam be ground with the lobes for the left and right banks be ground at a different angle than the B engines or the SBC and SBF.
It is my understanding that when they engineered the Magnum, Chrysler corrected that "error" in lifter bore angles. Swapping a cam between a LA and Magnum would create a situation with the valves on one side opening and closing early while the other side would open and close late.
Excited? Naaaa But a good conversation is at hand I think and always good for the forum.
Of course!
Thumbs up
A wise course of action
Now here’s the caveat, who has a spring tester handy to test?
I’m personally do. Most do not. Expensive for a one time purchase.
Dived this reply in half and the first one is a repeat of above and the second half is Amen! Crap is expensive!
This can be a pricey experiment.
Valves seals I just purchased are 7.92
LA head, yes.
Yes, heavy bastards the MoPars are.
The wear is in the metal used against the metal it’s sliding in combined with valve lift. Rpm and length of service are the next two items. Highly variable.
Thank you!
The A/C system should (key word) remain intake and require no disassembly that would kill the use of it once reassembled. This may very well depend on the flexibility and length of the A/C hoses.
In short, a Poly cam, an LA cam & a Magnum cam cam all be swapped and lift and rotate the lifters, no problem. Let’s move away from the poly for obvious reasons of the valve layout of EIEIEIEIE
You can swap a LA cam into a Magnum and a Magnum into a LA. Lifter issues need to be addressed for the roller into a non roller abled block. I am currently using left over LA parts in which this is a Hyd cam into a 5.9. Use appropriate lifters and pushrod length and style. (Hollow)
No
No
Lifter bore angles are corrected on 48* race blocks.
The way I see it, a nice spring upgrade can be had @ Hughesengines which includes new retainers and locks for the stock valves. The heads are capable as we know through the MP create engine program to produce 400+ HP with a 230@050 Hyd roller cam. The 300/360 was a box stock engine that was given a 750, MP dual plane, 1-3/4 headers and MP’s electronic ignition system. This engine was known to produce just over 300hp.
So the OP needs to do nothing more than that above.
The purchase of new springs is a minor inexpensive amount and personally I’d never bother with all the LS swap for a driver/cruiser.
Should the owner want more power, new valve springs, retainers if needed and locks will replace the OEM material to suite the new cam. Even a small increase in duration will improve power very well. Let’s just use the MP purple cam, the “757” w/211@050 intake duration is at least a 10* jump in duration that will not have any side effects of a larger cam like the need of an improved torque converter, more gear or compression needed.
This cam will improve the RPM ability another 500 rpm without batting an eye and I’ll guess improve Tq. & HP by at least 10, maybe 15 hp.
He did state earlier that a big lumpy cam is not wanted nor is 400 hp. Just a driver and a cruiser. With Hwy gears he should be able to see 20 mpg. A great help in mileage and off the line performance would be a OD trans.
If you have been in or driven a stripped down 2000 Durango, they’re pretty good for a heavy truck. (That’s vs a cars weight.)
This is what I have pirated from my Daughter (and added the above parts, a RPM instead of an MP intake) after she wreck it. I use this engine in my ‘79 Magnum with a (currently) 727 & 3.55 gears rolling on Cooper Cobra, 245/60/15’s. An O.D. transmission will come later.
So the OP needs to do nothing more than that above.
The purchase of new springs is a minor inexpensive amount and personally I’d never bother with all the LS swap for a driver/cruiser.
Should the owner want more power, new valve springs, retainers if needed and locks will replace the OEM material to suite the new cam. Even a small increase in duration will improve power very well. Let’s just use the MP purple cam, the “757” w/211@050 intake duration is at least a 10* jump in duration that will not have any side effects of a larger cam like the need of an improved torque converter, more gear or compression needed.
This cam will improve the RPM ability another 500 rpm without batting an eye and I’ll guess improve Tq. & HP by at least 10, maybe 15 hp.
He did state earlier that a big lumpy cam is not wanted nor is 400 hp. Just a driver and a cruiser. With Hwy gears he should be able to see 20 mpg. A great help in mileage and off the line performance would be a OD trans.
If you have been in or driven a stripped down 2000 Durango, they’re pretty good for a heavy truck. (That’s vs a cars weight.)
This is what I have pirated from my Daughter (and added the above parts, a RPM instead of an MP intake) after she wreck it. I use this engine in my ‘79 Magnum with a (currently) 727 & 3.55 gears rolling on Cooper Cobra, 245/60/15’s. An O.D. transmission will come later.
-
Similar threads
