383 vs. 440 street build

[fatecaptured]

Ok Guys, the idea is I have a 71 440 hp and a 383 .030 hp.

The 383 came out in 2000 and was running now in pieces. The 440 is still between my charger fenders and needs pulled and rebuilt.

My objective is to have good power relatively good fuel economy and enough balls to put to waste some of these aggressor's (fast and furious wannabe's). The car (72 charger) has a 727 trans and a 3.55 sure grip. Now keep in mind I already have my 70 coronet with 440 .060 and .509 cam. So I'm not looking to launch to the moon with this car. I just want to enjoy it and possibly be a daily driver on dry days during the summer months.

 

[terzmo]

no replacement for displacement

 

[Sweet5ltr]

440 without a doubt..

 

[mjb765]

do the 440..If I had that choice that's what I would do....

 

[RustyRatRod]

440. 3.55 gears are for pussies.

 

[fatecaptured]

440. 3.55 gears are for pussies.

Hey don't be a sandy vagina... lol

 

[court9155]

I voted 440. For what its worth I was in the same boat, 35K mile 69 383hp motor or 440 with 48K miles.........I went the with longer arm.

Dan

 

[arsinist01]

If you're going to have to rebuild both of them I would choose the 440. Neither one is going to be all that great on gas anyways lol.

 

[44070dart]

forforty

440 ...size DOES matter .... ask my wife ................................... she loves 440's .. ahhhhh you thought I meant ....

 

[Garys1969RR]

440 for sure. Use a magnum type cam, stock or alum dual plane, good flowing heads, should do well, and quite reliable.

 

[fatecaptured]

I was thinking of a b- to slant 6 conversion. Any takers.... jk

If figured u horse power whores would want the 440. And im leaning that way too.That poor 383. Its lonely. Will it ever find a home????

 

[RustyRatRod]

Hey don't be a sandy vagina... lol

Sounds like a **** star name. LMAO.

 

[67 coronet]

depending on condition and cost use either one.both will get good street horse power,so build the cheeper one.if cost is the same,go with the 440.it will keep resale value higher and build horse power easyer.:grin:

 

[fatecaptured]

So I'm gonna ask this here. In another thread "383 /915 heads" there is allot of quench talk going on. I'm curious what the highest compression with an iron head and still use pump premium? I recently bout some 906's. I realize the 915's would've been a better choice, but i was certain i needed them (906's)and the added hardened valve seats. Also do u need hardened valve seats if u run an iron head and a quench set up like say a 915 head?

 

[RustyRatRod]

Ask Jim (IQ52). Whatever he says, I would listen to. I know he's gone over 11:1 on pump gas with iron heads, but I don't know specifics.

So I'm gonna ask this here. In another thread "383 /915 heads" there is allot of quench talk going on. I'm curious what the highest compression with an iron head and still use pump premium? I recently bout some 906's. I realize the 915's would've been a better choice, but i was certain i needed them (906's)and the added hardened valve seats. Also do u need hardened valve seats if u run an iron head and a quench set up like say a 915 head?

 

[Sweet5ltr]

I would say 9.75:1 to be on the safe side, when talking 'Iron Headed' compression ratios. 10:1 would be pushing it on the Ethanol induced mixture they call gas at the local stations now-a-days. Will make more power with less compression and more timing, than with more compression and less timing to compensate for the compression and pump gas. 'Believe the Mopar/D.C. Engine Manual states something along these lines as well. Most engine builders I have talked to, or have read statements from, have suggested around 10:1 compression and 30*-32* timing on pump gas; 38* with race fuel or a 50/50 mix.

 

[RustyRatRod]

When you're talking about quench, it's a different animal. Also too, you need to keep the dynamic compression ratio between 7.5 and 8.5 and it will run on pump gas, regardless of static compression ratio, OR quench. Quench simply adds to the efficiency. On paper, my engine build has 7.779 dynamic compression and 10.425 static and I am not afraid one bit that it won't run on pump gas. The key is quench and camshaft specs. ;)

Here's a pretty good read about it. There's lots more out there.

http://www.empirenet.com/pkelley2/DynamicCR.html

 

[fatecaptured]

Where's the "build engines for dummy's" book ,lol. I better reread this when i'm a little more awake. I will book mark it for sure.

 

[fatecaptured]

Like I've stated before. Most of my engine knowledge is from reading, i took automech in high school. Was into fords when i jumped into the mopar camp. I'm here to stay. The 383 made me a believer. Nevet drove a 440 powered vehicle. Will be soon. But I more than likely will keep messing with the 440. I still have sentimental attachment to the 383.

Now another question. Is it true or false that the 383 hp has 10:1 compression? It came up in one of my books, just wanting to know the truth. I'm done giving advise, at least until i know what the hell im talking about! Lol

 

[RustyRatRod]

It's true some were ADVERTISED with that compression. But like all other Mopar engines of the era, their actual blueprinted or measured spec was lower and usually by a good bit. The biggest reason for that was because of the crappy deck height Mopar left on the block. All of them I've ever measured were way high, which would lower compression and none I have ever measured have ever been equal from one side to the other. I would say that was just my personal experience, but others who've done the same thing share similar stories. Plus, I've seen it a LOT more than once, having worked doing machine work. Plus the head chamber volumes, while not as bad as the deck heights, certainly were larger than advertised. I bet with one that the deck heights were way out on and the chambers were well over 90cc's, I bet compression could be as low as 2 points lower than advertised. That is why I've always wanted to get one (383) and blueprint every spec on it and degree in the cam to see what it would make on a dyno. Would it be as advertised? Would it be more? I certainly don't think it'd be less. Interesting to think about for sure. All that above is the reason I always tell people to spend the money on a good and ACCURATE foundation. You'll have more money in it, but it will make more power everytime without fail.