The best stroker 408-416-426-435 combination in stock 68 340 block

-
well...the eddy heads on our 71 Dart were have suppose to been CNC by hughes...and they are open chambers too...I bought those back in 2010 from someone on this forum.
 
How do you like them?
What state of porting?
 
Well...right now I dont...since it was the head that got the **** beat out of it with the broken exhaust valve...but the old engine 360 ran 10.30s in Bakerfield....so I would say they ran pretty good.
And I wonder whose CnC program was used on them...dont know since I bought them second hand...but they were not used. I guy I bought they from was changing from eddy heads to indy heads.
 
While not perfect, the CNC work from Hughes will move enough air to do what the OP wants provided all the parts work together. He doesn't need every last cfm of flow. There's enough cross section for a 500-550hp engine needs with a street/strip type setup. But the numbers Hughes posts are usually not reality anywhere but at Hughes... So unless you're racing there, I would have somewhere else simply flow test them. Not to improve, just to get more than the baseline supplied numbers. Then you can better decide on a camshaft package.
 
moper said:
While not perfect, the CNC work from Hughes will move enough air to do what the OP wants provided all the parts work together. He doesn't need every last cfm of flow. There's enough cross section for a 500-550hp engine needs with a street/strip type setup. But the numbers Hughes posts are usually not reality anywhere but at Hughes... So unless you're racing there, I would have somewhere else simply flow test them. Not to improve, just to get more than the baseline supplied numbers. Then you can better decide on a camshaft package.
Click to expand...
I'd prefer hand ported heads, you can leave more short turn in the port, keeping it fast and providing more TQ. I've used their heads with the cnc option (customer supplied heads) and I felt the engine was down on power down low for a stroker.
I really like the Indy TA head, I get alot more HP per CFM out of that head than any other head in that price range.
 
1st why do you want a stroker ?
For most they think its more powerful than a non stroker which is untrue.

If you build a 340 416 or even 435 with the parts your assembling your gonna come out with similar powered engines.

Note every 20 or so cubes is a step not a leap. Eg. 340 vs 360, a 340 will need about one level deeper gear about 300 more stall and have a slightly hotter idle than a similar 360 same with 318 vs 340.


So what will be the difference between the 3

Well theres two different ways to look at Hp and cid.

1st similar hp but different cid is gonna operate at very different powerbands "rpm"
But use similar parts, eg. cfm of carb intake exhaust and mainly heads.

2nd operate at similar powerbands but make and very different hp and use of parts. Eg. A 273 with a peak hp of 6500 rpm is gonna be a lot easier then a 572 at peak 6500 rpm. And by easier i mean cheaper. A slightly modded 273 head will get it there a slightly modded 440 head ain't. But yes hp is obviously gonna be very different.

So a 340 will need a lot more gear and stall and have worse street manners than a 408-435. So if that dont bother you no need to stroke or go too big. Like said earlier even a 3.58 or 3.79 might be the ticket still good rod and bore to stroke ratios. If you care about such things.

So really the way i see it.

Is 1st how much gear stall and ruff idle you willing to live with. ?

2nd where you want your powerband ?
Cause thats what the cid of your engine will decide. Want it to rev like a truck engine and be done by 5000 rpm or be in the hot street range 5400 - 5800 peak hp rpm or street strip 6400 - 6800 rpm etc..
 
Yea! He is so right. A 440 is so much more powerful than a 400 or 383!

I’m surprised you didn’t mention how stupid it is to stroke a 400/440 to 500/512 or greater.
 
rumblefish360 said:
Yea! He is so right. A 440 is so much more powerful than a 400 or 383!

I’m surprised you didn’t mention how stupid it is to stroke a 400/440 to 500/512 or greater.
Click to expand...

Bore size is the theoretical limit to power.
But reality is practical rpm and or block strength is more likely for most.

Id didnt say its stupid to stroke just know why. And for the street its mainly cause we want to run 3.55 gears or so.


To me id rather have a 550 hp 540 over a 550 hp 408. Idle like stocker, great daily driver.
 
Any compromises at all for a street/ strip setup and a stroker with lots of cubes will be a lot quicker. Just think about the low rpm torque, where you will start from with a streetable rear gear and converter.
 
273 said:
To me id rather have a 550 hp 540 over a 550 hp 408. Idle like stocker, great daily driver.
Click to expand...
Didn’t you just say... Hypocrite LMAO
Bore size is the theoretical limit to power
Click to expand...
And increasing the stroke doesn’t help?
ROTLM-MF-AO!!!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
rumblefish360 said:
Didn’t you just say... Hypocrite LMAO

And increasing the stroke doesn’t help?
ROTLM-MF-AO!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Its seems like 75 % we get each other and the rest we're 180 in opinion.

I not trying to talk the OP out of stroking his engine. Just trying to explain stroking is not for more power just the need for less gear, stall, street manners, reliability etc.. but not power.

And yes increasing stroke dont give you anything power wise. Bore is, if you take everything to it limits. A 318/360/340 are relatively in bore size so have similar power potential. A 273 would have a hard time keeping up since valve size will be limiting compared to its bigger brothers. Thats why bore size is the limit cause it limits valve size which limits head flow which limits etc..

A 4.07" bore is gonna have the ability to flow the same amount of air no matter the stroke.

So a 4.07" x 3.31" = 345 4.07" x 4" = 416
A 345 is 83 % of a 416 but a 416 only can spin about 83 % of a 345 of similar rotating assemblies. Which all equals out.

Eg. 345 x 6500 rpm = 650 cfm
416 x 5400 rpm = 650 cfm

Same air flow same power potential.

What about torque you say ?
416 will need about 83% of the gear as the 345 torque or more accurately hp to the tires will be the same and similar mph. Allowing the car to accelerate at similar rate. E.T.
 
Why would you limit the rpm of the stroker? That’s insane and as well as to use for a comparison.

You say one thing and try to reason it out as bad in the next sentence.

Sorry, gotta walk away from this.... so gotta walk away.

(Strokers can rpm high!?!?! RONTFLMFAO GASPING FOR AIR!)

Have a good day everyone.....
 
a point could be made that the short stroke engine will rev more quickly
and if it's torque / hp numbers are matched to the vehicle weight it will
accelerate quicker.A light A body does not always benefit from a long stroke
and big torque,but A heavier B body will.
Never put a size 12 boot on a size 9 foot.
 
ir3333 said:
A light A body does not always benefit from a long stroke
and big torque,but A heavier B body will.
Click to expand...
If that’s the way you see it, then I’d say something is lacking. Not making full use of something to a few things.
Never put a size 12 boot on a size 9 foot.
Click to expand...
In literal terms, absolutely!
LOL
 
Your using the same heads on both, the 416 stroker will be limited about 83 % in rpm compared to a 345 what ever rpm thet maybe. But the point is both engines will move about the same amount of air at there respective speed same power potential.
And if you even you take the engines to there limits in piston speed just before they fly apart there will be about 83 % speed difference between them.
 
273 said:
Your using the same heads on both, the 416 stroker will be limited about 83 % in rpm compared to a 345 what ever rpm thet maybe. But the point is both engines will move about the same amount of air at there respective speed same power potential.
And if you even you take the engines to there limits in piston speed just before they fly apart there will be about 83 % speed difference between them.
Click to expand...
Wait!
So the 340 vs a 416(?) The stroker merry will make 83% less power at the same rpm?

Are you on crack?
 
rumblefish360 said:
Wait!
So the 340 vs a 416(?) The stroker merry will make 83% less power at the same rpm?

Are you on crack?
Click to expand...

I think the problem is your reading me wrong.

At the same rpm the 340 will make about 83 % percent less than a 416.

And Yes a larger engine will make more power per rpm but a smaller engine will rev higher and make up the difference.

When you stroke your engine your trading rpm for torque. Which is a zero net gain.
You break even.
 
Yup! My problem. Read that backwards.

I’m still standing ground on prior statements. Your confusing. First it’s bad then it’s not but it is ok do so if you want to short yourself even though the other is fine but never mind I said it was better the other way and not the first way which is best.
 
There is no best
Just compromises
I was just giving the OP info so he could choose. Heres what id choise under different circumstances.

Personally id probably go with 3.79 cause i still think bore and stroke and rod ratios matter. And in his car shooting for 11 id assume id be running fairly deep gear and stall.

If i was going for more have my cake and eat to. And want a more friendly car id go big block id rather have a 400 over a 408 even a 383 over 408. And 440 over them all especially stroke to 512.

But since hes already heavily invested in the small block id go 408 for a more street friendly car. There is ton of 408 out there proving it can be done.

But if his gear choice is 3.55 or smaller then id say go the 435 one.

Basically each crank is gonna lower your powerband say 300 rpm and need about one less gear. This just a generalized idea.

So say the 3.31 crank has a peak hp of 6800 rpm and needs 4.56 gears. So 3.58 6500 rpm 4.30, 3.79 6200 rpm 4.10, 4 5900 rpm 3.91, 4.125 5600 3.73.

Personally I feel everyone looking for power
Should be running a 440 especially one stroke to 512 and maybe more if looking for insane power numbers.
 
The biggest thing I see with these strokers (the first Chrysler I did in 1999) was that they are way out of head. The lower R/S ratio makes it worse. Even at a 3.58 stroke it's hard to get enough port area. Anything over that and a W-2 is almost a must if you want to make power.


It may just be that I'm dumber than most (my wife would agree) but I've actually made power at 8000 and up and it's freaking hard to do. And I was doing it on 345 inches with W-2 and W-5 heads. To add 60 plus inches and reduce the R/S ratio changes everything when the port area is too small.

That first stroker I did made 565 HP and some stupid amount of torque (which I really didn't care about) but it did it all by 5200. Even if it still made 565 HP but did it at a paultry 6200, which isn't much any more the thing would have been much quicker.

There is such a thing as too much of a good thing. Certainly stroke is one of those. It fashionable to say you have a 4 inch stroke but that's a lot like ***** length. Unless you are doing ****, it's just bragging.
 
273 said:
Its seems like 75 % we get each other and the rest we're 180 in opinion.

I not trying to talk the OP out of stroking his engine. Just trying to explain stroking is not for more power just the need for less gear, stall, street manners, reliability etc.. but not power.

And yes increasing stroke dont give you anything power wise. Bore is, if you take everything to it limits. A 318/360/340 are relatively in bore size so have similar power potential. A 273 would have a hard time keeping up since valve size will be limiting compared to its bigger brothers. Thats why bore size is the limit cause it limits valve size which limits head flow which limits etc..

A 4.07" bore is gonna have the ability to flow the same amount of air no matter the stroke.

So a 4.07" x 3.31" = 345 4.07" x 4" = 416
A 345 is 83 % of a 416 but a 416 only can spin about 83 % of a 345 of similar rotating assemblies. Which all equals out.

Eg. 345 x 6500 rpm = 650 cfm
416 x 5400 rpm = 650 cfm

Same air flow same power potential.

What about torque you say ?
416 will need about 83% of the gear as the 345 torque or more accurately hp to the tires will be the same and similar mph. Allowing the car to accelerate at similar rate. E.T.
Click to expand...
All those motors i increased in size by stroking, and went faster, how did that happen? Simple. More hp, but about as important, more hp at a lower rpm with the same shift rpm. If you haven't seen a hp increase with stroking, something in the combo isn't right, probably starting with the cam. For instance you can't feed more cubes effectively with the same overlap duration.
 
I understand what 273 is saying.
But hi reving motors are expensive to setup and most people are buiding street strip cars . Who wants to run down the hiway with 4.88 gears?
 
gregsdart said:
All those motors i increased in size by stroking, and went faster, how did that happen? Simple. More hp, but about as important, more hp at a lower rpm with the same shift rpm. If you haven't seen a hp increase with stroking, something in the combo isn't right, probably starting with the cam. For instance you can't feed more cubes effectively with the same overlap duration.
Click to expand...



It couldn't be possible you didn't have the correct set up? Not enough gear? I see that all the time. Not enough converter? See that just as much. Junk shocks? Yep. Lower RPM and less gear makes it easier on shocks and suspension settings.

When the power glide craze hit, most guys went faster. Was the power glide better? Not likely. It's a physical impossibility that more gears are slower IF the engine is built for it and the chassis is tuned for it.

Remember when Pro Stock were running 4 speeds? I do. All the fence leaners and comic book reader said a 5 speed would be slower. They were wrong. I personally watched Bob Glidden testing a 5 speed. I can promise you 6 gears would be faster yet.

Just because you put more arm in an engine doesn't garantee better ETs.
 
mbaird said:
I understand what 273 is saying.
But hi reving motors are expensive to setup and most people are buiding street strip cars . Who wants to run down the hiway with 4.88 gears?
Click to expand...


I use 4.56's and have since 1980. I made a ton of money off of fools who had no gear and couldn't leave. Hell, I taught a friend to drive his 70 Challenger. It was a 440 4 speed with a 4.10 Dana. He was a slow learner with shifting but he got to where he was good enough.

I came home on leave from the Army and we all ended up drinking at a park we used to hang at. A few beers and he got to running his mouth. Wanted me to go get my car. I said not until you beat the car I came down here in...a 1970 Firebird with a 326 and a 2 bbl. The bet was a trunk full of beer to the winner.


Needless to say, that no HP Pontiac would hook in a car wash. I got out on him and he panicked. After he gathered it up it was too late.

We came back to the park with a trunk full of beer on ice.

The point is it ain't about horsepower all the time. It's about getting the system together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top