"The 383 was a bored out 361"?

[j-c-c-62]

It isn't mine, and I have no interest in this ad. I just found it funny that a short bit after reading this thread FB decides to advertise an engine to me. Coincidence? Perfect timing? Or data collection of my browser history...

It's the new normal. LPR's, cameras everywhere, etc It's all about giving up privacy for perceived safety.

. in any case, I don't know all there is to know about early 60's engines from any make, but I do know a lot of them had high compression and were tuned to run on probably the best gasoline ever produced in our history, and they could be real screamers for their time. I imagine a 2x4 big block like this would have some real tire roasting power.

What is so special about the 383, that a later 426 big head wedge with 13.5 CR didn't have?

 

[Lefty71]

but I do know a lot of them had high compression and were tuned to run on probably the best gasoline ever produced in our history, and they could be real screamers for their time. I imagine a 2x4 big block like this would have some real tire roasting power.

You arent wrong....back then tho the cars were huge and heavy. Don Garlits was no fool when he started snagging the drivetrains out of them, meaning big old hemi Chryslers. BTW, I have heard those heads are the earliest wedge heads regarded as HiPo.

 

[Lefty71]

What is so special about the 383, that a later 426 big head wedge with 13.5 CR didn't have?

5 years earlier.

 

[j-c-c-62]

5 years earlier.

"I don't know all there is to know about early 60's engines from any make, but I do know a lot of them had high compression and ........"
So a MW 13.5CR 426 ram 2x4 in 1963 was in the same league as a "screaming 383" CI 2x4 from 1960? A 383 was giving up a lot more than just cubes IMO, and the "screaming" part here is rather subjective.

 

[RemCharger]

What is so special about the 383, that a later 426 big head wedge with 13.5 CR didn't have?

Nada. Small cams, small valves, small ports. Pretty much the same up to 67. But with the flat 2 4 barrel intake.

 

[Detective D]

"I don't know all there is to know about early 60's engines from any make, but I do know a lot of them had high compression and ........"
So a MW 13.5CR 426 ram 2x4 in 1963 was in the same league as a "screaming 383" CI 2x4 from 1960? A 383 was giving up a lot more than just cubes IMO, and the "screaming" part here is rather subjective.

Who are you arguing with?
I would consider a 426 to be early also. IMO, anything 66 and earlier for a Chrysler is in one group, 67-71 in another, and then the hardened valve seat heads and newer in another. Polyhead might as well be a totally separate group of itself.
I also consider the FE Fords from that era to be much more powerful then they state on paper, and stuff like the Packard V8's to be very powerful engines. You don't push a Studebaker Golden hawk to 160mph with some lame duck engine. I think the same thing about Buick Wildcats.
All I am saying is a lot of folks consider late 60's the only "muscle car" era when there were some truly potent engines much earlier than that making cars with terribly inadequate brakes and suspension go very, very fast. I think the fuel also played a part in it.
Example: father in law had a 1964 Ford Galaxy 2 door with a 352HP(high comp, cast iron headers, etc) that car would lay rubber into second gear from a stop light. He used to do that downtown on weekends in Appleton back in the 70's, light turn green, lay double rubber tracks all the way down the block to the next red light.

I am a gearhead through and through, and my loyalty to brands is established but certainly thinner than a lot of people. I consider stuff like this "characteristic" of the car or engine. it is something I learned from seeing Japan's approach in the 90's. The drivetrain and vehicle as a whole is more important then just numbers on paper. I think the early 60's stuff is special, and often overlooked, especially by the youngsters today. But that does not mean "better" or "superior". It just means it has a unique feel and characteristic that should be appreciated. I have never been a "the best" type of person. I worked on Fords in the 90's and into the 2000's, and got away from them because the Ford company doubled down on econobox crap and the mod motors, but more so because the Ford guys were such zealots they would get all worked up just talking about an engine, and nothing on the planet was better than a Ford. Not my style. It is super easy on the internet to start HP wars and start pointing out "the best", that type of conversation I usually walk away from.