The 340

Dave-R · Post by **Dave-R** » Mon Mar 25, 13 9:19 am

And just to add now I am awake Carl.

You are talking about a quarter inch difference in stroke length. 0.27-inch.

You really think a quarter inch is going to make one engine a low rpm tractor engine and the other a screaming F1 engine?

I think you are just over complicating and over thinking the whole thing. As well as listening to "old wives tales".

When i was a lad all the UK car magazines used to describe American V8 engines as "big lazy American V8s" because they were all seen as low rpm torque monsters.

For 20 years at least everyone (including American racers) were calling the 400 inch B-Block a usless "smog motor" not good for anything. When in fact it is actually the best engine of the lot!

All the Mopar V8s are well designed and very versitile engines. The only factors you have to think about are parts availability and intended power level. Obviously bigger and lighter is better. But you can make any of these engines fit that profile.

Carl · Post by **Carl** » Mon Mar 25, 13 11:31 am

Jon Connolly wrote:Carl

What are you hoping for 1/4 mile timewise from your set up ??

I can`t remember ... is it a 340 stroker with Edelbrock heads ??

Hi Jon, to be honest I have no idea what the car will do at the moment as the Engine was built before I owned it. At the moment its got....

Edelbrock RPM Intake

Edelbrock RPM Heads

750 Vac sec Thinking of replacing with a 850 DP

Comp XE274 Camshaft Quite a mild cam by all accounts so room for improvemnt there I think.

And im sure Simon said its got 3.9's at the rear

So I guess its just a matter of seeing what it does and go from there. I may put the 850 DP on before the Nats though.

Pete · Post by **Pete** » Mon Mar 25, 13 11:35 am

DP will wake it up a bit, but as said the biggest change will be in a cam swop out.

However, in your quest for speed you can probably say bye-bye to realistic fuel consumption......

"Now, I like 18mpg, but I like 12 second quarters; but which is best????"

Carl · Post by **Carl** » Mon Mar 25, 13 11:37 am

Dave wrote:And just to add now I am awake Carl.

You are talking about a quarter inch difference in stroke length. 0.27-inch.

You really think a quarter inch is going to make one engine a low rpm tractor engine and the other a screaming F1 engine?

I think you are just over complicating and over thinking the whole thing. As well as listening to "old wives tales".

When i was a lad all the UK car magazines used to describe American V8 engines as "big lazy American V8s" because they were all seen as low rpm torque monsters.

For 20 years at least everyone (including American racers) were calling the 400 inch B-Block a usless "smog motor" not good for anything. When in fact it is actually the best engine of the lot!

All the Mopar V8s are well designed and very versitile engines. The only factors you have to think about are parts availability and intended power level. Obviously bigger and lighter is better. But you can make any of these engines fit that profile.

No worries dave I take your point

certainly not gonna become bad friends over it.

Carl · Post by **Carl** » Mon Mar 25, 13 11:43 am

Pete wrote:DP will wake it up a bit, but as said the biggest change will be in a cam swop out.

However, in your quest for speed you can probably say bye-bye to realistic fuel consumption......

"Now, I like 18mpg, but I like 12 second quarters; but which is best????"

I make you right Pete I would take the 12 second quarters over economy any day, just owning a v8 I've kissed goodbye to economy so a few less mpg wont make any difference to me, its not a daily driver so bring it on i say

Cannonball · Post by **Cannonball** » Mon Mar 25, 13 12:09 pm

Dave wrote:And just to add now I am awake Carl.

You are talking about a quarter inch difference in stroke length. 0.27-inch.

You really think a quarter inch is going to make one engine a low rpm tractor engine and the other a screaming F1 engine?

I think you are just over complicating and over thinking the whole thing. As well as listening to "old wives tales".

When i was a lad all the UK car magazines used to describe American V8 engines as "big lazy American V8s" because they were all seen as low rpm torque monsters.

For 20 years at least everyone (including American racers) were calling the 400 inch B-Block a usless "smog motor" not good for anything. When in fact it is actually the best engine of the lot!

All the Mopar V8s are well designed and very versitile engines. The only factors you have to think about are parts availability and intended power level. Obviously bigger and lighter is better. But you can make any of these engines fit that profile.

dave its not the best engine of the lot... as is, but the block is,
i would like to see a 400 thats kept that size and has the regular mods a 440 gets lets see what it can do so long as you can get the comp in the 10 range,

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Mon Mar 25, 13 12:22 pm

If we are talking of the Mopar engines of the past then the 340 rightfully stands out as one of the greats. But if I was building a small block Mopar today, it would be 360 based.

But to start a little more controversy.......
I firmly believe that the best engines of the muscle car era were the Mopar Hemi and the big block Chevy, - and not necessarily in that order.

Dave-R · Post by **Dave-R** » Mon Mar 25, 13 12:51 pm

Cannonball wrote:dave its not the best engine of the lot... as is, but the block is,
i would like to see a 400 thats kept that size and has the regular mods a 440 gets lets see what it can do so long as you can get the comp in the 10 range,

Yeah as stock it wasn't producing much but at a time when they were trying to save money and use as little steel as possible, they put it in all the right places in that block.
It came with two easily fixed drawbacks. Low compression and small crank mains.
But you and me both wouldn't build any block exactly as it came from the factory.
If I was building a street/strip big block I would use a 400 as the base if possible.
440 as second choice.
But we all know there is only so much power you can get from a stock big block before they start to break apart. The 440 will start breaking long before the 400 though unless you got lucky with a particulaly good casting.

Lucky for us there are stronger aftermarket versions.

If I were building a small block I would use the 340 or 360 and wouldn't worry about which one I had.

If I had the money I would be building engines all the time. There is nothing i like doing more.

Hopefully in a few years I can build something again. And if I am lucky it will be a small block E-Body.

Dave-R · Post by **Dave-R** » Mon Mar 25, 13 12:54 pm

Jim wrote: But to start a little more controversy.......
I firmly believe that the best engines of the muscle car era were the Mopar Hemi and the big block Chevy, - and not necessarily in that order.

Can't disagree but you have to put the 426 wedge and 440 in there too. The 440 in particular not just for it's power, but because it was such an affordable and mass produced engine (as was the BBC) and the 440 was a much better all round Muscle car engine than the Hemi.

DaveB · Post by **DaveB** » Mon Mar 25, 13 12:59 pm

Sorry Jim,BB chevys are rubbish,only good because of the aftermarket support,they have odd size intake runners,the valve train needs a girdle to stop it falling apart,the dizzys at the wrong end,need four bolt mains cause the two bolt mains fall off,water goes through intake,oil pump inside engine and pick up falls off

440s the best motor by a mile

Dave999 · Post by **Dave999** » Mon Mar 25, 13 1:25 pm

a good engine is one where you throw away the fewest parts in order to go as fast as you want

most mopar engines are like that

the iron cranks are good
the rods are forged and most of them had the small ends kinda in the middle of the small ends
a jammed lifter does not cut off oil to anything else
oil and Dizzy drives don't load up the drive gears tooo much

its all good

although you can of course spend and fortune and use nothing standard

bigger valves cam lifters intake and exhaust

will see you go a long way

use dynamic CR to assist you with choosing your cam and avoiding detonation you can run 11.5:1 12:1 static CR if you want but best work out if it falls into sensible Dynamic CR range when many other aspects are taken into account

use tha calulator at the bottom of here

http://cochise.uia.net/pkelley2/DynamicCR.html

PS not the be all and end all but usful none the less

Dave

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Mon Mar 25, 13 2:11 pm

Dave wrote:
Jim wrote: But to start a little more controversy.......
I firmly believe that the best engines of the muscle car era were the Mopar Hemi and the big block Chevy, - and not necessarily in that order.
Can't disagree but you have to put the 426 wedge and 440 in there too. The 440 in particular not just for it's power, but because it was such an affordable and mass produced engine (as was the BBC) and the 440 was a much better all round Muscle car engine than the Hemi.

Dave, - Couldn't have put it better myself.

Pete · Post by **Pete** » Mon Mar 25, 13 2:34 pm

I like the B - R/B because of its "minimalist" design.

Very simple, very effective.
A Truck engine pressed into service on large passenger cars and then "performance" cars.

Some great features that DaveB has mentioned - dry manifold for quick cam changes, External oil pump for improved internal clearance, and a distributor you can actually get to (a bit like a big Buick).

Things I don't like -
Not enough thrust surfaces on the crank so lots of end float - especially on 4 speed cars. That is probably quite a common one....

Bolt holes that go into the water jackets. Who has been caught out by that one???

You could quibble about 4 bolt mains, but in reality the weak point is the web from the cam gallery.

Poor standard oil feed routeing to the pump. Not great to the top end and lifters in terms of flow and flow control, but again built to a budget for hydraulic lifters.

I can NEVER get a rocker box hasket to seal....

However, all in all a great street and stip engine that was / is cheap to buy, maintain and improve..

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Mon Mar 25, 13 3:15 pm

DaveB wrote:Sorry Jim,BB chevys are rubbish,only good because of the aftermarket support,they have odd size intake runners,the valve train needs a girdle to stop it falling apart,the dizzys at the wrong end,need four bolt mains cause the two bolt mains fall off,water goes through intake,oil pump inside engine and pick up falls off

440s the best motor by a mile

Always a Mopar man through and through eh Dave.....

Dave-R · Post by **Dave-R** » Mon Mar 25, 13 4:13 pm

Pete wrote:I like the B - R/B because of its "minimalist" design.

Very simple, very effective.
A Truck engine pressed into service on large passenger cars and then "performance" cars.

Well that is certainly true of the BBC. Not so sure about the RB engine?

I thought the raised deck 426 wedge was developed mainly for racing? As was that other 426 with the Austin-Healey copied combustion chambers.

Oh and take note Carl. They took the 383 and made a longer stroke version for RACING! that is what the 426 and 440 are. Long stroke "B" engines.