• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

NOS 413 Engine

Info I found says 2205697 block is 59-65 413, and 64 426 (street wedge obviously, not hemi or maxwedge).
Head casting 2406516, my info shows 64-67 361/383.
What are the casting dates on the heads and block?
Casting date on the block was 1-6-64
 
That's rather odd. But I guess not impossible. Usually it will contain a build date and or info about bearings if they are undersized or oversized etc etc...

Your block was casted on 1-6-1964 But assembly date would be on the pad. That block could have been assembled anytime.
It sounds like it should bolt in my 64 imperial no problem then. The engines look identical to each other. The stamp pad is blank though. I’ll look at the heads again and see if I can find a cast date. The dyno should yield a lot of info too. I’ll come back on this and share the results.
 
A little more research.....
Apparently there were "ordinary" 300 chryslers in 64, that weren't considered "letter" cars. There were also 64 300K cars that ARE letter cars, available with a 413, SOLID LIFTER, crossram engine. (Rated 390 hp?!?)

Maybe???

Also, maybe the pad is blank cause it's a warrantee engine?
 
Is there anything stamped into the pad in the front of the engine right behind the water pump housing? There is a flat spot behind it. This picture shows where that information is stamped. I'm pretty sure even though it was a crate engine there should be some kind of build info on that pad.
View attachment 1203155

BeepBeepRR is that your block in the pic ?
 
A little more research.....
Apparently there were "ordinary" 300 chryslers in 64, that weren't considered "letter" cars. There were also 64 300K cars that ARE letter cars, available with a 413, SOLID LIFTER, crossram engine.

Maybe???
That would be wonderful, but the 300K had 1.75 ports. This has 1.6”. I’ll measure the spring I.D.s too. The springs in there now are very beefy. I know I have something, but what? It’s a new 413 bore with 3-3/4 stroke without hydraulic lifters. Puzzling. It was worth the 2k I paid for it.
BeepBeepRR is that your block in the pic ?
BeepBeepRR is that your block in the pic ?
BeepBeepRR is that your block in the pic ?
That’s my block in the pic.
 
That would be wonderful, but the 300K had 1.75 ports. This has 1.6”. I’ll measure the spring I.D.s too. The springs in there now are very beefy. I know I have something, but what? It’s a new 413 bore with 3-3/4 stroke without hydraulic lifters. Puzzling. It was worth the 2k I paid for it.



That’s my block in the pic.
Sorry, no. We meant the block in post #13. It's a 413 max block.
 
I think this is a question for @69Coronetrt !

I'll be the first to say that I am no expert on this stuff, but I find it odd that the pad is not stamped. As already stated, that was stamped when the block was built, and includes information like assembly date, shift, undersized journals, etc. I see no reason why that wouldn't be stamped for ANY block built, warranty or otherwise.

Could you show us a picture of the pad (in front of the intake manifold, as shown in an earlier post)? Could that have been machined later?
 
I think this is a question for @69Coronetrt !

I'll be the first to say that I am no expert on this stuff, but I find it odd that the pad is not stamped. As already stated, that was stamped when the block was built, and includes information like assembly date, shift, undersized journals, etc. I see no reason why that wouldn't be stamped for ANY block built, warranty or otherwise.

Could you show us a picture of the pad (in front of the intake manifold, as shown in an earlier post)? Could that have been machined later?
I will show you a pic when I go back to the shop. There is an “m” only on the block. They would have had to blend in the entire valley pan area around the entire intake, or leave a step where just the pad area is. I’ll check it out.
 
Last edited:
Does the HP make it a max?
Not really, no. Maxes used a different casting, supposedly with more nickle in it.
We just recognized the numbers and font on the pad, and you can see the reliefs in the top of the bores for the 1.88 maxwedge exhaust valves.
 
Sounds like a marine block. The solid lifter street 413s had the 1.74 exhaust valves (300K). The marine engine has solid lifters but still 516 heads. You should measure up the cam, I’d be interested in its specs. The 300J/K cams were almost identical the the HP hydraulic with a tiny amount more lift (268-268, 450-450). Instead of 430-430.
 
The motor in MAX is a factory replacement. It is not stamped.
Thanks for the info maxwedgechar. Now I’m guessing that someone complained about the hydraulic lifters, and of course back in those days, when customer service mattered, they handed that one with solid lifters to them with no hassles. And it was never installed.
 
I think that the mechanic was supposed to stamp the block with the original engine's numbers.
 
Are the rocker arms adjustable? Have you checked the crank flange? Are the holes in the flange threaded or through bolt? The cast iron TorqueFlite torque converters had studs that slipped through the flange and were held on with nuts. Painted red I am wondering if it might be an engine for an older car even with a '64 casting date. The 361 in my '59 Plymouth was painted red.
 
Auto Transport Service
Back
Top