Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical Need some opinions/advice - 383 chrysler build

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Barsteel, May 17, 2016.

  1. 73RR
    Joined: Jan 29, 2007
    Posts: 6,515

    73RR
    Member

    Sadly, nothing to offer...nice intake to have.....

    As mentioned, you are not likely to find the crank drilled deep enough for the input shaft so you will heave to trim the end a wee bit. The sealed roller bearing is the solution as it fits into the converter register (that is the ID of the short shoulder on the face of the crank flange).

    By your report on the test ride, it sounds like a winner.

    .
     
    brad2v and falcongeorge like this.
  2. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    I did a bunch of them with reversed cast pistons, reversed or not, as long as you keep them under 6000 in a 440 or about 6200 in a 383, the cast pistons are fine. Start revving them past that, and they will come apart at the pin boss, whether they are in backwards or not.
    As far as big blocks in pre-67 A-bodys, I never built one, but there was a brown valiant with a tunnel-ram 440 (pretty fast street car) around here back in the eighties, I looked at it, and it LOOKED like he used regular Hooker big block '67-up a-body fenderwell headers, but I wouldnt take that to the bank.
     
  3. 4woody
    Joined: Sep 4, 2002
    Posts: 2,101

    4woody
    Member

    A few years ago I was putting a 383 my '38 Chrysler. I got a 383 off Craigslist and contacted Don "Dolmetsch" via PMs here on the HAMB. He literally wrote the book on these engines.

    I'll cut & paste our conversation below for anyone researching this topic in the future, without comment except to say that I followed his recommendations to the letter and am very happy with the result.

    Conversations from The H.A.M.B. (http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum)
    Title: Looking for some 383 advice:
    Hi Don-
    I've read your Mopar advice in the past and like your approach. I've got my first Mopar V8 (after many years with a flat 6) and if you're willing I'd like a little advice.

    This engine will go in my 4000lb '38 Chrysler. It'll never see a track. Dependability and torque in a slightly better that stock package are my primary interests. Economical would be good too..

    What I've got is a 383 that was rebuilt (and never run after) with 30 over forged SpeedPro 9 to 1 pistons. Stock crank. 906 heads with a fresh valve job. All ARP hardware throughout. The machine shop guesstimates that the compression is really 9 to 1, and says it is balanced and ready to be put back together.

    I need advice on what cam, intake, carb, & ignition to go with.
    On hand I have a stock electronic dizzy, but no box or coil. I have a Torker intake, and a stock 4 barrel cast iron one but expect I probably need a more modern dual-plane of some sort. For a cam I have something no one can identify so I'll be starting from scratch there. The only carb I have handy is a 600cfm Edelbrock w/vacuum advance. I'm thinking of a rebuilt Thermoquad unless you tell me something different there.
    I apprectiate your thoughts on where to go from here.

    Thanks!
    Hugh aka 4Woody

    Title: Oops, Forgot to mention:
    Rear end is geared 3.0 to 1, transmission is a 727, torque converter I have on hand is about 2400 stall.
    Thanks again.
    Hugh

    Title: Re: Looking for some 383 advice:
    From:
    Dolmetsch
    [Sounds like a decent package. I would sell the torker to someone you dont like. A edlebrock peformer would probably be a real good choice. It is a very god manifold and a lot of effort was spent making it decent. With a 383 in a big car you have to be very carful on cam (because of the small cubes. I wuld be ten mpted to to run a 1968 Road Runner grind and no more. That will gve you decent performance but shouldnt kill the car. At 9 to 1 compression it is real hard to put anymore in it with the big car. (there is a very definate relationship between cam choice and compresssion ratio. ) Any mopar box will work. I like besthe Standard Ignition bax (LX101 from bue streak but any replacement box will do a fin job. The car original ballast resitor can be used (I do that on my 63 DOdge too. ) Contraty to all the hype they are EXACTLY the same value as the ones for electronic. Being also a ham radio operator I measured them once and discovered this. Never bought one since! This should give you a real nice working motor with a decent sound in that car and will probably do well on the highway as well. (MPG) The 600 will run , probably quite well in that application. Even though I a an expert on thermoquads or was in my career it would not be my pick. The AFb style is a much better carb design (eddlebrocks are AFBs with a couple of improvements. Hi end carb choice would be a 3310 Holley. Run at the very least a set of the road runner Hi per exhaust manifolds. this will work well with your trans and converter. I think you will be happy with it.
    Don


    From:
    4woody
    Don-
    Thanks for your help. It leads me to a couple/few more questions:
    1. Thats the straight "Performer" you are talking about, not a "Performer RPM" or some other variant, right?

    2. Can you correlate the '68 RRunner cam to a Lunati, Comp Cams, or something else readily available over the counter? (I think my engine originally came out of a Jensen Interceptor, so maybe that somehow accounts for our inability to make its existing cam I.D. numbers mke any sense).

    3. I don't have the original ballast resistor, but I assume that is pretty generic given your comments.

    4. Standard cannister coil with the Mopar ignition, or something else?

    5. I'm not sure on the Road Runner Hi Per exhaust manifolds as space gets pretty congested back by the firewall especially on the driver's side. Something center-dump would certainly be easier. I was thinking shorty headers, or maybe even the center dump 440 truck manifolds (I don't know the I.D. of the truck manifold, but assumed it was big-ish since it was original on the 440..)

    I think I'm done...
    Thanks again!

    Hugh

    Yes just "Performer" for that application.
    Stock coil is fine.
    You want to keep the build conservative to get great perfomance in that bigger car. Self discipline is often the key to success. Never "follow the herd." If you're an old farm boy you already know why.
    If headers of any type are in your budget it would be money well spent- shorty would be fine.
    Comp cams number I would use is 21-670-4
    Have fun,
    Don




    I'm no farm boy, but as a retailer (Bicycle shop) I see people waste effort and money all the time. You can tell them the best thing to do, but you can't make them do it.

    I've read plenty of your posts, liked what you had to say, and plan to follow your advice.

    Just to clarify: That was "No" on the 440 truck manifolds? Yes on headers instead?

    Thanks again!
    H


    Ok- Got it. I imagine I can afford some headers. In for a penny...

    I went and looked at that cam you suggested. I wasn't aware of those before so I'm glad you suggested it. While I was looking at that I did find that you can still get the '68 RR cam from RockAuto of all places. That surprised me.

    Thanks for all your help.
     
  4. saltflats
    Joined: Aug 14, 2007
    Posts: 10,440

    saltflats
    Member
    from Missouri

    So I have to ask what the reason for reversing the pistons on the rod
     
  5. Corrects the rod angle or loosens things up. Anyway it is free torque and a few extra revs.
     
    saltflats likes this.
  6. saltflats
    Joined: Aug 14, 2007
    Posts: 10,440

    saltflats
    Member
    from Missouri

    Would one do that with a combo that has already seen some track time?
     
  7. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    more power, especially on either side of peak torque.
     
  8. One could, the pistons don't care.
     
  9. saltflats
    Joined: Aug 14, 2007
    Posts: 10,440

    saltflats
    Member
    from Missouri

    Interesting
    I have been thinking about a cam and head upgrade
     
  10. Barsteel
    Joined: Oct 15, 2008
    Posts: 726

    Barsteel
    Member
    from Monroe, CT

    Ok, the plot thickens. I put a deposit on the motor. He wanted the alternator, and the one on my 383 is new, so I said sure, but I want the brackets. Ok. He also wanted the power steering pump and brackets because they came with the car. I have manual steering, so I said fine. I also got the distributor and and box, which was good 'cause I didn't have an electronic one.

    The carb is a tricked out Holley 800. No choke, has purple metering plates, dual feed. I have no idea what was done to it. I want an engine that's not super tempermental, so he said that he had a Thermoquad that we could use that would be more street friendly. I know NOTHING about Carter Thermoquads, other than that Chrysler used them. Good? Bad? Run? Take the Holley, sell it and buy a more street friendly one?

    The '67 GTX the car is in is a B body. I did some reading, and from what I can tell, the existing headers (Hooker Super Comps) will not fit my C body, so I'm going to have to order a pair from TTI. Sticker shock...$718 + shipping. They need a mini starter as well, but the car already has one, so I should be good there.

    Last comment. There was a TINY bubbling leak at the edge of the valley pan. He said that he'd pull the pan and reseal it no problem, but offered to put in a pan that blocked off the exhaust gas crossover.

    Would I want that? Why?

    Sorry if the answers are obvious, learning a lot on this thread.

    Chris
     
  11. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    Take the holley and use it. And in my opinion, the only time an aluminum intake needs open heat risers is a daily driver in Alaska. Ok, maybe I'm exaggerating a little, but not much. Aluminum heat soaks much faster than cast iron, and blocking the heat risers will help power, assuming the carb is right.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2016
    73RR likes this.
  12. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    I would like to run a Tarantula with my 950 3bbl on the 440 in my Satellite. I have a bunch of other circa early '70s Mopar parts I'll be using on it, the tarantula fits in with the rest of that.
     
  13. 73RR
    Joined: Jan 29, 2007
    Posts: 6,515

    73RR
    Member

    ...and here I thought that I was the only guy with old 3-bbls on the shelf....;)

    .
     
  14. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    I have two, one to use and one thats NOS never had fuel through it, kinda silly I know, but its nice to look at, and takes me to my happy place...:D
     
  15. 73RR
    Joined: Jan 29, 2007
    Posts: 6,515

    73RR
    Member

    They do bring back some old memories....I have several of the 950 and one 1050, all veterans of the street wars...

    .
     
    falcongeorge likes this.
  16. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    A tarantula with a 950 3bbl, my cast iron tach drive distributor, and some vintage cal-custom valve covers would definately make a statement...:)
    3bbls.jpg
    DSCF0153[1].jpg
     
    warbird1, saltflats and brad2v like this.
  17. DDDenny
    Joined: Feb 6, 2015
    Posts: 14,278

    DDDenny
    Member
    from oregon



    Yep, me too, wtf is that all about?
    Honestly, my wife thinks we all need professonal help.
    I have quite a bit of NOS (GM) stuff and I just get "giddy" every time I look at it.
     
    brad2v likes this.
  18. acpat
    Joined: May 10, 2016
    Posts: 12

    acpat

    I installed a roller dakota pilot bearing in my 68 valiant sedan. Motor was 360 magnum (98) converted to carb, and 71 close ratio 4 speed, Mcleod flywheel, centerforce clutch. 8 3/4 and 2800lb ss springs. was my daily driver until sold last week. My point is I prefer the roller pilot bearing over the bronze bushing 10x. The thermoquad takes a special kind of person to make one work. Parts are unobtainable etc. You could buy a boxcar full of them for what the holley costs. You can't run a thermoquad on anything without a bread wrapper tie. :)
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2016
  19. acpat
    Joined: May 10, 2016
    Posts: 12

    acpat

    headers will fit if you swap to a 68-70 B body K frame fyi. car won't be super stock legal either as it sets motor back slightly . some of above BB A-body posts are funny and brought back memories. we used B body engine steels and dodge truck small block motor mounts. burn rubber out of mounts in trash barrel and bolt one side to B body steel and other to K frame. shim engine till level and insert lincoln stick welder. 1/2 spacer between K frame and frame and poof you have cool nose heavy tire cooking toy. Ask yourself do I need a 7-8 hundred dollar set of headers for a non competition car ? They sound the same as 200.00 sets when you whack a speed bump. remember don't ever ever bolt slicks on it and you probably will be okay. My valiant grenaded a 8.75 power loc unit fyi. It was just a stock dodge magnum motor out of a truck. In the power lok's defense the 3500 rpm side stepping the clutch and yanking second (without aid of clutch pedal) at 5500 might have helped its departure.
     
    warbird1 likes this.
  20. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    FWIW, they tested the Performer on the same engine that I posted the dyno numbers for the Torker and RPM from, it was an average of 8 ft lbs down from the torker from 2500-6000. But I know this is the the hamb, little details like that dont matter, especially when they interfere with a good story. The DP-4B was also stronger than the Performer across the board on that particular engine, which was a mild, 906 head, 450 hp 383.
    You shoulda seen what the Torker did to the RPM dual plane on Vizards Iron Air Hammer...
     
  21. Dan Timberlake
    Joined: Apr 28, 2010
    Posts: 1,293

    Dan Timberlake
    Member

    =============

    I always wonder how the driveability and street performance of the dyno winners and even the ones generating the best quarter mile time/mph compare to the inferior combos.
     
  22. 73RR
    Joined: Jan 29, 2007
    Posts: 6,515

    73RR
    Member

    On the particular dyno session George refers to, and the admittedly small deviations from manifold to manifold,
    I'm not thinking that there is an inferior combo, more like...the old Torker still works fine.
    From personal experience waaay back in the early 70's I can say that the Torker was just fine on a street car with a
    TF and 3.23 gear.
    .
     
  23. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    Yup, thats pretty much the size of it at the 450hp level, the Torker actually comes out best across the board, but the margin is so small that I wouldn't go out and replace the performer or RPM with the Torker either. At that power level, all three are within 10 ft lbs of each other, and the DP-4B falls in the same range. As the power level (you can substitute cylinder head flow numbers in here) goes up, the Torker will flat out bury the other two. As the power level crests 500, the tarantula and street dominator will start to show a clear advantage over the torker, and as you close in on 600, the street dominator pulls away from the tarantula, and the victor will start to have a clear advantage over both of them.
    The idea that you should replace a torker with a performer is "amusing". The performance edge of the Torker over the RPM is small, but repeatable over most other tests I have looked at, until the power level gets up there, then it widens.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2016
  24. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    Just wanted to mention here,@73RR and @Bandit Billy both went out of their way to help me ALMOST snag a TM-7 last night. Gary spotted one on Portland craigslist and pmed me, and Bandit Billy was ready and willing to drive over there and pick it up and ship it to me. Unfortunately the guy sold it before we could get organized, but its the thought, not the deed that counts. Big kudos to both these guys
     
    brad2v and Old-Soul like this.
  25. 73RR
    Joined: Jan 29, 2007
    Posts: 6,515

    73RR
    Member

    ...bummer...when I spotted the listing it was something like two weeks old.
    I guess that I need to be more attentive.:(

    .
     
  26. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    Its all good Gary, thanks for pm'ing me.


    :D
     
  27. saltflats
    Joined: Aug 14, 2007
    Posts: 10,440

    saltflats
    Member
    from Missouri

    Got to be my favorite saying
     
  28. Perry Hvegholm
    Joined: Apr 16, 2018
    Posts: 113

    Perry Hvegholm
    Member

    Ok. I know this thread is old AF, but I am curious as to what became of the OP's build. There were also some unanswered questions that others might also like to know....AND...given that people often cruise such threads looking for info, soooo...

    OP quote: "Last comment. There was a TINY bubbling leak at the edge of the valley pan. He said that he'd pull the pan and reseal it no problem, but offered to put in a pan that blocked off the exhaust gas crossover. Would I want that? Why?"

    Answer: It may seem counter-intuitive to block off a heat crossover passage. It goes like this. If you are daily driving this car, in the dead of winter, in a region of the country where the mean winter seasonal temp hovers somewhere below freezing, then you should probably retain the heat crossover. What does it do? During cold weather operation there is a valve that closes on the passenger side exhaust. It redirects hot exhaust gasses from the number 4 cylinder and forces them to "crossover" in a passage beneath the carburetor, then exit into the #5 cylinder on the opposite cylinder bank and into the exhaust. This provides heat for your carburetor to warm up quickly in very cold weather. In anything but very cold tempertures, having hot exhaust gasses passing beneath your intake manifold's fuel charge produces a significant impact upon horsepower and performance.

    Simply put....if this motor isn't going into a truck that you use to plow wintery roads in January... you should block off that crossover for certain. There will no ill effects from doing so in warm weather operation and you will see higher horsepower numbers due to a colder, denser intake charge. No BS. A lot of the aftermarket companies producing aluminum heads that are intended for use on street cars have completely eliminated the crossover feature completely. There is no need to block it off because it simply isnt there.

    OP Quote: "Can these heads give me the torque needed to get the Fury rolling, or should I spring for aftermarket heads?"

    Answer: In short, no. My older brothers and their hardcore mechanic friends were where I absorbed much of my gearhead proclivities. They used to tell me that "there are three elements to making big power. The first two are cylinder heads. The third element and most important, is cylinder heads."

    It wasn't that long ago that if you wanted to make big power in a Mopar B or RB engine, you had few options. You could port a tired set of iron heads and hope that the man with grinder doesn't destroy the integrity of the heads. You could buy all out race heads (Like B1s) or you could try to hunt down Max Wedge port heads (without mortgaging your home in trying to acquire them). That was pretty much it. B and RB engine enthusiasts are living in a golden age. Cheap (relatively) stroker kits abound. Blocks are still abundant. Heads however...we have a wealth of new BB Mopar head castings in aluminum. Some are better than others, but the best question here is....

    If you could purchase a set of high flowing ported aluminum heads for $2000. that are capable of 550 easy HP (with the right build), look stock and are stone reliable..why would you waste money on old, tired, small valve iron. If I were you, i'd look at 440 Source's stealth heads (I like the CNC) or if you're really serious about power, the new Trick Flow castings. The only issue with TF is that you have to buy expensive rocker gear. The Stealth heads allow you to use your stock rockers, unless you start getting crazy with the spring pressure. But seriously. A 383 or 440, relatively stock, will net you the single greatest power gains when topped with decent, affordable aluminum heads. AND you shave like 100lbs off the nose of the car, up high. This right here...is where i'd focus your investment.

    Stroker kits make amazing engines...especially the 400 block. The 470 kit yields amazing power. I am in the process of building one now, but such motors are $7500 to $10000. In the interim, I dropped a 40k low mile 440 smog engine into my 70 Challenger and topped it with 440 Source CNC Stealths. The stealths will move to the 470 stroker someday...but im having so much fun flogging a 1975 low compression smogger 440 thats laying down 475hp with nothing more than the heads, Comp Cam, RPM intake, 800 AVS (not the AFB) carb. The swap won't be completed until I feel like it. Im into the 440 for a total of 3 grand, including buying the motor and trans from a guy taking a cream puff new yorker to derby.

    OP Question: 5) "Of course, there's the camshaft question, which I haven't even started looking into, although I will very likely be staying with a flat tappet hydraulic cam. Thoughts on Specs? 440 Source seems to love Comp Cam Xtreme Energy Hi-Lift .545 and Comp Cam Xtreme Energy Hi-Lift .564"

    One thing you need to understand when building "a street motor that will never be run down a track and I just want it to be a fast street car with massive torque".

    Mopar B and RB engines are torque monsters in their stock form. The torque comes on early and instead of a peak, its more a plateau in the low 400 range. Steady from 2500 to 5800, where its all in. What you want to do is wake up the horsepower end. Problem is...the bigger the camshaft, the more it bites into your low end grunt.

    It's tempting to select a big, rumpety cam. Some choose cams for sound (like the hughes "shitlash" cams..stay away!) But the bigger you go on camshaft, the more overlap you have and with that comes compression loss. You want to choose a cam carefully. I like the Comp Extreme Energy cams. I put the .480 cam into my 440. Mild for sure but it brought HP into the mid 400's and preserved all of that wondrous low end torque. Stay away from old, antiquated grinds like Mopar Purple shaft. They were great back in the day. Not so much now.

    OP Question: "Ive heard mopar exhaust manifolds flow well"
    Mopar exhaust manifolds flow ok for what they are: log manifolds. If you're trying to build a hot street car and plan to use manifolds, you may as well just turn around, pull out your wiener and piss directly into the wind. Seriously. You could stick a cork in your exhaust pipe and have the same power choke point that manifolds provide. Buy headers. It's well known that they add power and torque in noticeable quantities and you also get that sound from your tail pipes. No down side here.

    So to the OP I would reiterate: I hope you built your shortblock fairly cheap, chose some good aluminum aftermarket heads that flow well. I hope you threw y0ur aluminum intake and carb atop it all, popped on some headers and duals with a crossover...then raced off to have fun.
     
  29. Barsteel
    Joined: Oct 15, 2008
    Posts: 726

    Barsteel
    Member
    from Monroe, CT

    Well, you took the time to answer my questions, old as they may be, so I guess I owe you a response.

    I was putting a lot of research into the build when I remembered a piece of wisdom I learned a LONG time ago when building my first engine at age 18..."It's a LOT cheaper to buy a built, running engine than to build one yourself". I learned that the hard way.

    Anyway, I took a quick glance at Craig's List and lo and behold found a freshly built, in the car and running 440. Story was that the owner built it for his Satellite, but then a friend of his had a "sick stroker motor that he's never sell", decided that he wanted to sell, so the guy wanted to unload his freshly built 440. It had a tricked out custom built Holley, about 850cfm IIRC, an Edelbrock Performer intake and a Hughes cam, along with new bearings, rings, gaskets, etc. The motor was a low mileage (60k or so) 1970 440 from an Imperial. Anway, I drove an hour, and when I got there, the guy took me for a ride in the Satellite. He warmed it up, pulled it out into the street, and then dropped it in low and crawled down the street at about 15 mph. Then he dropped the hammer. You could hear the roar from 2 blocks away, the car fishtailed a bit, the tires hooked up, and it snapped my head back and buried me 3 inches into the seat while my face got pushed out of shape and my cheeks flapped in the breeze.

    SOLD!!!!!!

    I paid $3K for a freshly built 440 that ran like a scalded cat, so I'd say I did pretty well.

    I yanked the tired 383 and dropped in the 440. The mounts weren't correct, so I had to drill and tap the block for conversion mounts, but that was the only real issue. I got C-body specific headers (NOT CHEAP), and had to message them to clear the pitman arm, but everything fit.

    The car is now the fastest car I own. I do not yet have a Posi rear, so the right rear tire has a tendency to break loose whenever you give it more than 1/4 pedal. That's the next project, although I'll probably have a local machine shop do it.

    I still have the original motor, but don't see any reason to build it at the moment.

    Chris
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.