Technical Chrysler 354 Build Thread!!!

[George]

Originally Posted by D-Russ

Hey George, do you think the progressive Rochesters will provide enough CFM?

Yeah, I'd say so! There's a guy who hasn't finished his engine yet, but is planning on running 2 2GCs on a 2X1 truck intake with adaptors!

[D-Russ]

Originally Posted by George

Yeah, I'd say so! There's a guy who hasn't finished his engine yet, but is planning on running 2 2GCs on a 2X1 truck intake with adaptors!

I think I saw that on TheHemi.com, right?

[31Vicky with a hemi]

Originally Posted by D-Russ

Hey George, do you think the progressive Rochesters will provide enough CFM?

Dave figure
( Cubic inches x ( rpm/2) ) / 1728 = cfm required to feed engine at 100% volumetric efficacy. Reality would be less.

A 354 needs 102 cfm for every 1000 rpm you want to run at.
Your 280 cfm center carb would be good for 2700 - 2800 rpm.

[fuxl]

Originally Posted by D-Russ

That's right Martin, I'd have a rare Fire Power Rocket.

The go for big money on ebay!

Just noticed Dave, once you drop the Hemi in there, you'll have to change your HAMB name to "another 31Vicky with a hemi"!

[D-Russ]

Originally Posted by 31Vicky with a hemi

Dave figure
( Cubic inches x ( rpm/2) ) / 1728 = cfm required to feed engine at 100% volumetric efficacy. Reality would be less.

A 354 needs 102 cfm for every 1000 rpm you want to run at.
Your 280 cfm center carb would be good for 2700 - 2800 rpm.

Thanks man, you're pretty smart.

[George]

Originally Posted by D-Russ

I think I saw that on TheHemi.com, right?

yup!

[D-Russ]

A little update: I'm taking the block, heads and crank to the machine shop at lunch today to get cleaned and magnafluxed. Hopefully they'll get a clean bill of health. I'll also know what machine work the engine will require.

Oh, and these showed up today. I happened to find them on eBay with a buy it now of $99. So I jumped on them. The chrome is a little thin around the bolt holes, but for the price, I'm happy. I also picked up a pair of rechromed original wire covers from hotrodA.

[JeffreyJames]

Damn those look great Dave!!! There has never been a better looking valve cover for a hemi then the original Firepower ones installed from the factory bar none.

Good luck at the machine shop, I hope it all checks out and by some mistake in numbers you end up with a 392 that needs little to no machine work!

[Larry Fulton]

Originally Posted by D-Russ

Rochester 2CGs, progressive. What do you think? I've read that they flow 278 CFM, so three would be 834 CFM, right?

EDIT: My carbs are supposed to be an original J2 set. I just found this:

"Under normal driving road conditions, the center choke equipped 280 cfm Rochester 2G two barrel carburetor fed the big V8. When the accelerator was floored, two more Rochester 2Gs, each flowing 290cfm, opened up, giving the engine the benefit of 860cfm.
The J2's extras bumped the 371's power from its normal 277 bhp up to an impressive 300 bhp and 415 ft/lbs of torque. These were very good numbers for 1957."

If they are in fact J2 Carbs - All 3 carbs will have / should have the 1 1/4" Diameter Venturi bowl sections.

The smaller / more common 1 3/32" Diameter Venturi bowl sections (factory adv. 278 cfm) will work just fine with these 331-392 Chrysler HEMI motors... as they don't need as much carburetor / cfm as one might think.

I'm working on holley / wieand to re-introduce the WC3D...
I'll let everyone know here when this happens.

Nice looking project... Keep up the good work!!

[D-Russ]

Originally Posted by Larry Fulton

If they are in fact J2 Carbs - All 3 carbs will have / should have the 1 1/4" Diameter Venturi bowl sections.

The smaller / more common 1 3/32" Diameter Venturi bowl sections (factory adv. 278 cfm) will work just fine with these 331-392 Chrysler HEMI motors... as they don't need as much carburetor / cfm as one might think.

I'm working on holley / wieand to re-introduce the WC3D...
I'll let everyone know here when this happens.

Nice looking project... Keep up the good work!!

Mr. Fulton, I was just looking around on your site for a Chrysler hemi 3x2 intake. It would be AWESOME if you reproduced the WC3D! Sign me up.

Eelco and Vintage Speed both say they're in the process of repoping it, but they don't have the corporate backing of Weiand and Holley.

What is your development timeline? When will they be available?

And how would I measure the venturi bowl section on my carbs? Where is that exactly?

[TR Waters]

Please let us know how those valve covers fit and seal.

[D-Russ]

Originally Posted by TR Waters

Please let us know how those valve covers fit and seal.

Will do. I have the same concern.

On the trial fit they fit just fine, I'll report back on the sealing part.

[George]

Originally Posted by TR Waters

Please let us know how those valve covers fit and seal.

And if they rust in a couple months like the Chinese air cleaners do...

[D-Russ]

Originally Posted by George

And if they rust in a couple months like the Chinese air cleaners do...

Hey now, my expectations aren't too high – I bought them assuming they were foreign-made. I don't have that much invested in them so as long as they don't leak too badly, I'll be happy with my purchase. And for what it's worth, they won't rust at all on my watch.

[Larry Fulton]

Originally Posted by D-Russ

Mr. Fulton, I was just looking around on your site for a Chrysler hemi 3x2 intake. It would be AWESOME if you reproduced the WC3D! Sign me up.

Eelco and Vintage Speed both say they're in the process of repoping it, but they don't have the corporate backing of Weiand and Holley.

What is your development timeline? When will they be available?

And how would I measure the venturi bowl section on my carbs? Where is that exactly?

D-Russ
1. the other two you mentioned here are endorsing their own design & manufacture (if they ever become avail??) and are not re-pops of WC3D

2. My timeline and avail?... call me and we'll discuss this (i'm out of town still until monday).

3. the venturi is measured at the narrowest point of the bores in the bowl section (where it rolls down and then splays back out)... and actually, some of these sizes are cast (not stamped) onto the bridge that separates the two bores making I.D. more than easy (1." - 1.3/32" - 1.1/8" - 1.1/4")... btw - I've never seen a 1.5/32" size as documented on some other sites)... inside / outside mics will certainly confirm what you have, if there is no casting I.D.

[D-Russ]

Originally Posted by Larry Fulton

D-Russ
1. the other two you mentioned here are endorsing their own design & manufacture (if they ever become avail??) and are not re-pops of WC3D

2. My timeline and avail?... call me and we'll discuss this (i'm out of town still until monday).

3. the venturi is measured at the narrowest point of the bores in the bowl section (where it rolls down and then splays back out)... and actually, some of these sizes are cast (not stamped) onto the bridge that separates the two bores making I.D. more than easy (1." - 1.3/32" - 1.1/8" - 1.1/4")... btw - I've never seen a 1.5/32" size as documented on some other sites)... inside / outside mics will certainly confirm what you have, if there is no casting I.D.

Thank you for the measurement details Larry. I'll give you a call next week.

[D-Russ]

I didn't see a size on the center carb, but venturies on the two outers measure 1-1/4".

[Larry Fulton]

Originally Posted by D-Russ

I didn't see a size on the center carb, but venturies on the two outers measure 1-1/4".

Dave, Post a photo of the center carb also and I'll i.d. it for you (and you can also, by visually comparing the ends with your center)...

btw - some of the true 1.1/4" venturi carb bowls didn't have the numbers cast into them either (they we're smooth on the bridge), so chances are all 3 are @ 1.1/4"

Dave, another thing I see here, on both of your end carbs.... corrosion is obvious as the tops of the blades look to be pitted pretty and the blade screw heads are nearly gone... so you'll want to be sure to check that bores of the base plates are smooth & true, and that the blade edges themselves are sealed tight / completely when closed... (I do have new blades, shafts & linkage if needed).

We'll talk this next week. Larry

[D-Russ]

Well, I just heard from the machine shop on the condition of the 354. The heads and crank are great cores, but the block isn't perfect.

One of the bores has some notable rust pitting. The block is currently standard bore BTW. My machinist says he's happy to bore the damaged cylinder in stages until he reaches .060, but he's not sure that will clean up all the pits.

Even if .060 will clean up the pits, I'm not really all that thrilled with a .060 bore because I want to use cast pistons. And as some of you have pointed out earlier, when using stock, cast, 9:1 pistons the compression will likely be lower than advertised as the bore gets bigger.

He is suggesting putting a sleeve in that cylinder. I don't like sleeves because I've had a bad, expensive experience with using them in the past. An OT 4.2 liter AMC I built needed two sleeves because of cracks in two bores. The cracks were found through magnafluxing. Other than that the block was deemed good. Two sleeves were installed, remaining machine work performed and the motor was assembled. As soon as i fired it, a crack appeared on the outside of the block at one of the sleeved cylinders, and it started leaking coolant. My assumption is that the crack, obviously in a water jacket, occurred when the sleeves were inserted. This might be a rare freak occurrence, but it left me with a very bad opinion of sleeves.

Now back to my 354. I guess a sleeve would be OK if the necessary boring for the sleeve doesn't get into the water jackets. The good thing about the sleeve is that it would allow me to get away with perhaps a .020 or .030 overbore which would help keep the compression up.

So do you fine folks have any input or advice on sleeving the cylinder? What about cutting into the water jackets to fit the sleeve? Will it inevitably leak water into the oil?

[D-Russ]

Bump.