This morning I was thinking about V8 engines, and....

-
Kern Dog

Kern Dog

Build your car to handle.
FABO Gold Member
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
13,782
Reaction score
40,473
Location
Granite Bay CA
Of all the major manufacturers, I wondered why our LA series was only built in 4 displacements. 273, 318, 340 and 360.
Chevrolet ran the table here with the 262, 265, 267, 283, 302, 305, 307, 327, 350 and 400 small blocks.
Ford ? 221, 260. 289, 302, 351 and 400.
Even AMC had what...the 290, 304, 360 and 401, right? Why did Ma Mopar stop at 360? Once the big block went away, GM still had the 400, Ford did too. Pontiac had the 400 for a couple years after the Mopar big block went away, Oldsmobile had the 403.
Ever notice that no "small block" engines were built between a 360 and 400? Why is that?
 
IMHO.....

Back in the day.......when Chrysler was having it's financial issues, the reason why so few different engine displacements may be because with fewer different sizes, requirements for tooling and machining costs could be kept to a minimum.
 
Kern Dog said:
Of all the major manufacturers, I wondered why our LA series was only built in 4 displacements. 273, 318, 340 and 360.
Chevrolet ran the table here with the 262, 265, 267, 283, 302, 305, 307, 327, 350 and 400 small blocks.
Ford ? 221, 260. 289, 302, 351 and 400.
Even AMC had what...the 290, 304, 360 and 401, right? Why did Ma Mopar stop at 360? Once the big block went away, GM still had the 400, Ford did too. Pontiac had the 400 for a couple years after the Mopar big block went away, Oldsmobile had the 403.
Ever notice that no "small block" engines were built between a 360 and 400? Why is that?
Click to expand...
I guess Chrysler felt like that was all they needed.

Don't forget with Ford there were THREE 351 small block engines. The 351W, the 351C and 351M. It's always been my thought that ford created the 351M just because "they could" and no other reason. They had been making the 351W since 1969, so they already had that displacement. The 400 came out in 1970. Then in 1975 they destroked the 400 with a 3.5" crank and made the 351M. There was really zero reason to come up with the 351M other to just do it, since they had the 351W already. Just crazy.
 
Well, I wouldn't really call the Ford 400 a "small block", it was an M series engine not the Windsor (or Cleveland) series of smallblocks.
AMC, just like B/O/P/C had no smallblock/big block distinction- they were all the same series. You could just as easily say they had no small blocks- just some very small big blocks.
As for why Chrysler never developed a larger LA, well, they already had the 383/400 "B" engines, and they were already downsizing the existing LA (lop 2 cylinders off the 318 to make a 3.9 V6) and introcucing the Trenton 2.2/2.5 4 cylinders, so upsizing the LA was not even a consideration; especially with no planned RWD platform in their near future
After they adapted the LA into the Magnum platform for their trucks, they also had a better handle on engine fuel/spark management and could achieve adequate power and economy levels without altering the displacement. If you needed something bigger, they'd be happy to sell you a Cummins.. You could even say they built a bigger small block when they added 2 cylinders to the Magnum and gave us the 8.0L V10.
 
Last edited:
RustyRatRod said:
I guess Chrysler felt like that was all they needed.

Don't forget with Ford there were THREE 351 small block engines. The 351W, the 351C and 351M. It's always been my thought that ford created the 351M just because "they could" and no other reason. They had been making the 351W since 1969, so they already had that displacement. The 400 came out in 1970. Then in 1975 they destroked the 400 with a 3.5" crank and made the 351M. There was really zero reason to come up with the 351M other to just do it, since they had the 351W already. Just crazy.
Click to expand...
And with three different 351s already in the stable, why did they feel the need for a 352 (FE)? But they did it anyway...
 
my buddy had a early comet with a 260 that had a solid cam with a little 4bbl and three on the tree. fun little car that handled like a coal cart. he also had a sunbeam tiger with a 260 that was built to some shelby spec. that thing was a ripper.
 
junkyardhero said:
my buddy had a early comet with a 260 that had a solid cam with a little 4bbl and three on the tree. fun little car that handled like a coal cart. he also had a sunbeam tiger with a 260 that was built to some shelby spec. that thing was a ripper.
Click to expand...
The 289 Tiger was every bit as fast as a small block Cobra, came with a Dana 44 rear end, and the 260 was no slouch either.
 
missing linc said:
The 289 Tiger was every bit as fast as a small block Cobra, came with a Dana 44 rear end, and the 260 was no slouch either.
Click to expand...
the comet was just a mellow fun little car, and behaved a lot like a early cuda with a 273 commando minus the brakes and handling. sounded cool and seemed to rev to the moon. the tiger was an entirely different beast. it was green and he called it "the alligator" because if you didn't pay attention it'd whip around and bite ya.

the 260 had a isky solid with whatever ford's version was of the eddy LD4B topped with a small holley that had mechanical 2ndaries and some slick heads that were worked up by DLI. he had some old timer out if BFE build out these wild stainless headers-- apparently the dude worked for lockheed back in the day. anyway, the whole thing was painfully period correct down to hurst/airhearts with a balance bar and real deal mags. we ran it on the dyno a few times and it put down near 300hp which was *more* than enough in that thing to be a handful.

now his friend was the wild man. he also had a tiger and this dude was straight up nuts. unhappy with a johnny hot **** 289 and deep seated ford hater he had me build a stroked 340 to drop in and "make it how it should've been". in a nutshell, "how it should've been" was downright terrifying.

TT5.9mag said:
Want.
That’s a bucket list car for me.
Click to expand...
same here man. that's a "maybe one day" kind of dream.
 

Rick@Laysons said:
Chrysler was having it's financial issues
Click to expand...
Yeah, in 1974 It was almost over for Chrysler. For awhile at the dealership we thought maybe tomorrow we will be out of a job. Factory quality was pretty bad.
I swear all I did that year was warranty work. Some cars barely ran coming off the transport trucks.
gzig5 said:
New federal emission regulations had something do with it?
Click to expand...
This is really possible Chrysler cars were choked with slap on parts to please the federal government.
There is a You Tube video of Ronald Regan talking about manufactures needing time to engineer better products to meet emissions.
Congress said no get it done now... It was a interesting video.

Lastly it has been said that the 360 had(s) a really good torque curve. Maybe Chrysler said "Good Enough"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Similar threads

Kern Dog
What is your fastest time to pull an engine, install another and drive it away?
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
2K
Kern Dog
Kern Dog
A
The mighty 318! Help with compression, and head/piston combos…or even a stroker!
2 3 4
Replies
86
Views
7K
Illahe
I
Kern Dog
The 360 build that has more turns than Willow Springs
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
273
Views
19K
volaredon
V
Brooks James
V8 Engine sizes....
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
halifaxhops
halifaxhops
RLF Cuda
'68 Barracuda Formula S Fastback Restoration Background
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
Duster346
Duster346
Back
Top Bottom