The Mad Parrot (Building/racing the 318 Poly)

I read this with interest and look forward to your progress.

At the moment Im driving a 318 Poly daily and love these engines.

I agree Gary knows his stuff and is a great help/guy. It won't be easy to make 500+HP with and only 230cfm airflow as the engine will need a VE approaching or over 100% IF everything works well together as a proper combo it will come close.

From everything I know/have read the heads are the limiting factor here.

IF the engine was stroked it would make a lot more HP/TQ but it would need even more efficient heads to supply the airflow needed to make the power. I believe a stroker would be great using an LA 3.58" or 4" crank which is not hard to do but the heads would need serious reworking to allow the engine to breathe or it will be all over by 5K or so.

What does the rail weigh race ready with you in it and what will you be putting behind it trans wise?

Keep us posted on your project !!

Rat

 

Leaving your slant 6 and going over to the dark side huh ?

 

Don, one question, why only 11/1? Is that all you can get with pistons/chambers you have? Whats the piston/head clearance? With a 286@050 cam on a 110 lda, I would be looking at in excess of 12/1 if I could get it. Have you already got the cam? Any issue with going to a narrower lda? Would probably be the way to go anyway, considering that the engine is somewhat port restricted.

 

Hi Don, good to see you are having a go.

What manifold are you using and what rework have you done?
What valve springs are you planning on using?

The polly heads have narrower exhaust ports and larger combustion chambers that their pre polly counterparts. What are you planning to do with the heads? If your budget allows, have a look at a W2 setup. (Closed chamber)

A

 

I need the duration for the RPM. I may be able to get by with 280. Without duration uou cant make power above a certain RPM even if the engine will rev there. I have developed over the last 40 + years a set of figures i work from to pick duration. It has served me very very well. So until i discover the world had changed i am sticking with it. I have never seen it in print but it works extremely well. Enuf so i dont give a hoot about cam recommends I KNOW how it will work before i buy it. I could run a 108 but a 110 broadens it out just enuf I like it in the smaller engine. In a 400 to 440 I run always 108s.
A stroker will not give more power. It will cost more money. The cylinder head decides the power and you bring everything in line around that. A stroker will make the same power lower in RPM but it will not make it up top as the heads cant feed it. I have built many experimental strokers. They all worked good but I never once ever thought I couldnt do the same easier and cheaper with a stock stroke motor. The main reason to have a stroker is so you can lean on the bar and say "YUP Bubba I am running a stroker. " 230 CFm is adequate for the job and well within the heads capabilties. You need 1 cfm for every 2.2 hp roughly. so ideally 2X230 = 460 +46 - 506HP. (math my way!) I should be able to get close enuf to make it work. 230 is a conservative figure but I shoot for realistic figures so if i am surpised it is a positive.
Why 11 to 1. I am using it as a general figure. but I know from experience it is difficult to get above that without custom forged pistons. I have a budget around $2000 for this build so it aint getting anything like that. When i get the first piston finished and in the engine I can do a proper measurement and see where i wind up. This wont take a lot of money but it will be a lot of work. I will cover the heads. I have done a trial port and I have ported these heads before (first set in the 60s) so I am not new to this engine. I have the valves too. Balance is going to be tricky so I am saving up for that.
And NO I have not nor will I abandon the slant six car and engine. This is a whole new chassis built last year to occupy my spare time. I have never had more fun racing than running the Sr dragster. So worry not.
Don

 

I dont think the engine is port restricted. A chev racer would sell his mother for a set of stock casting flowing 230 CFM. Anytime there is suffucient airflow to feed the cubic inches at the prescribed RPM then it is not restricted. A 906 440 flows only 232 cfm stock . A "honest" porter might if he is really good get 286 with the slightly better 452 casting. So to have 230 on a 333 cu in motor is not a bad deal i think.
Anyway I am going to give it a shot. Maybe i wont hit 500 , maybe only 460 470. I can live wth that. Car will weigh about 1600 to 1700 hundred with driver race ready.
Trans is your normal torque flight with my usual flog and will have one of Franks converters of course. And NO I AM NOT putting a powerglide on it.
Suppose I only make 450 Hp Still plug that in 450 HP ,1700 #, 391 gears, 29.5 tires and two shifts. I will be terrified to say the least!
Don

 

Don, have you run a couple syms with tighter lda's, I would be thinking along the lines of 106 with that duration, 230 cfm and 11/1 comp. Will elaborate on my thinking later. I am at work right now, so gotta keep it short & sweet. By the way, I dont think you are a long way off on the duration, but that is a big cam.

Time to elaborate;
The way I look at this, really what you are building isnt a hell of a lot different than a 340 Super Stock motor prior to the head porting rule change in the '90s. mid 280@050, 11/1 compression, 230-250 cfm intake port, 3.31 stroke and a 360 rod is REAL close to a 340 SS motor from the eighties. I dont have the money to run half a dozen different cams through a motor when I dyno it, most of the time, I dont even have the money for dyno time period. So I plagerize other guys stuff. Look at the rollers that are recommended for SS automatic 340s from this time frame. They are all on 105 or 106 lobe separation angles. later I will dig out my catalogs from the time frame and post the baseline SS 340 auto cams from Ultradyne, Comp cams, and Lunati.
The tight lda will pick up power and torque around the shift recovery point a BUNCH, and cost virtually nothing in terms of peak HP. The only thing it will really cost you is that power will fall off faster after peak hp, so it will be a little more fussy on what rear gear you have in it. Try a sym against the 110 lsa, and compare the area under the curve. I think you will see what I am driving at here. Just trying to help. I agree with you about the heads on the poly, they are a good design, better than the stock chevy stuff. Look at the cams for small-block chevy automatic SSers, you will see even tighter lsa's.

 

Agree 100% with your comments re:strokers by the way. What I really love, is not only are all these magazines peddling stroker kits like they are the second coming, they are peddling kits with chinese connecting rods. Oh yea, thats a REALLY good idea, increase the stroke so the peak piston acceleration goes way the hell up, THEN stick a rod in there with suspect mettallurgy and heat treat!!! Where do I sign up? Then I saw some buffoon on another thread on here talking about how stroker kits increase an engines rpm capabilities! The BS these guys read in the magazines!

 

Glad to hear you're not putting a Glide behind an all MoPar combo and youre going with the Poly !!

But I'm a little confused as to why you are comparing one head design to a totally different one...ie: wedge to polyshperic each with its inherent pluses and minuses. Comparing the two is like comparing apples to bananas.

As I said, a stroker will make more HP/TQ at a lower rpm IF the heads are able to feed the engine. Not to be a smartass - a stroker is not for leaning on the bar and bragging to your mates; if you have the right heads/cam/CR it WILL make more power N/A than a non stroked engine. If you don't have the other parts well matched then it doesnt matter for any engine, stroked or non stroked.

The math you are using is correct IF the engine has a killer VE. That's a BIG if as most engines do NOT have over 100% VE.

With old tech chambers/ports/ non swirl tech it will be hard to get a very high VE to support the power you are chasing. With the CR - it is a race car and you are looking at a lot of dur @ .050" - Id be inclined to go with a higher CR. Or perhaps not even choosing a cam till your heads have been developed sufficiently, then go from there.

Re the W2 swap - from what I remember - I believe the old style A engine's block will not accept the later LA engines cylinder heads. The old head is a Polyspheric chambered design/valve layout, the LA head (W2) is a wedge design. Can anyone confirm if the BP is the same as am pretty sure it isnt but stand to be corrected ?

If the heads are worked by a competent porter who knows what the design likes you could get there. I remember reading that the head design will not really allow for significant flow #s (esp ifcomparing to wedge heads - you can't compare these heads to LA or B/RB designs) after porting but that the airspeed in them given the port cc really packs the chamber FAST - allowing for excellent TQ numbers. Imho, if the heads ended up flowing really well (220-230cfm+), you could turn down a cast factory 360 crank, bore the block .090 which will give you a 360 Poly. The rod/crank ration in that combo would be ideal) Or, drop in a 4 inch stroker MP crank (a prepped cast crank is fine at this HP level) and bore the block .090 again = 402ci again, if the heads will support it.

If the heads and cam are up to scratch and you can get approx 220-230 cfm, you could make approx 430-450HP, turn the engine less harder at lower rpm and it will last longer/be easier on the valvetrain too.

In a light race car like your rail - it'll be scary fast, remember you will ET with TQ. TQ is your friend as long as you can get it to hook lol!!

Keep us posted with the progress !!

Just some food for thought - any comments?

Rat

 

I will carefully consider what you said. I havent played with SS combos. i am a low buck hi perf bracket guy. I usually since long time ago quit looking at others combos. Maybe I should open my mind a bit. But here is how i got there. In the seventes I built a lot of BB mopars. iIused a lot of the recommendation from the mopar book and to be honest they were fine motors in their day. One day though a customer wanted a similar race only bracket motor built from a 6 pack basic block. I found one at Minaklrs , a NOS fitted 6 pack block. I reversed the pistons , clearanced it, put in the good rings and reworked oiling etc. i ran the same cam I had been using, a sig erson grind. I was astounded how well that car worked without the big $ stuff. It was every bit as good as the best engine we had then. In fact first day out it won a 2nd . That motor by the way is still alive and well over in Trenton. I built it in 1973 or 74. I was asked to freshen it once. It was minor as it was in perfect condition. That got me interested. Why did the low buck deal run so well. I had built a few stockers for fellows and they worked good too. Often the stocker engines would outperfom some hi buck stuff. I began trying stuff and searching. I had by mid 90s run some 23 cams in a 440 block. I learned a ton. No 1 thing I learned is we had been led down the garden path by momma mopar. Mostly so they could sell parts. Much of what they recommend they have never tried. I have, so I lost interest in what they said. With my nephew we bought a 74 charger. We installed a roll bar did the suspension and built a six pack style block now known around the world as the OR build or Old Relaible. It ran 11.49s at 119 in that car which with Richard driving weighed 4150 lbs. With me add another 100 . I weigh 306. I drove it 11.51s on more than one occasion. The cost of that motor including the used carbs was in total in 1990 $1625.00 Since I did my own machine work add $1000. Still cheap. Hp works out around 550. I had trouble at first with too much torque. I eventully had to retard the cam 1 degree neg to get it drivable. Two companies supplied the best cams Both Lunati and Racer Brown ran exactly the same to the 100th of a second. The Lunati though was murder on valve springs. The Racer Brown had no such bad manners. These cams were al l108s. The ultradyne was not in the running and was 3 tenths slower despite at the time being touted as THE MOST POWERFUL SOLID CAM for the 440. Now the 440 is very tolerant of duration. It would difficult to ver cam it dration wise. (Lift is another story) WHEn I do a ch@#$&%^let and i have done a lot of them I usually run a wider centre. They seem to like that. With a Hemi i go for tight centre and extreme rpm . With my slant six I have a had a couple of custom grinds made. because it is so small. (246 cubes) I widened the lobe centre to see if it liked it . It did. I cant afford a narrow powerband when I have a 391 gear and a tiny engine. So I am still thinking that way. It is not likely i will settle on one grind . This will be the beginning of several experiments I think. This is where i would like to start. I have a lot of experience with Sb mopars as well. My carreer has been spent going fast beating the$ guy with a good sound combo. You mentioned rollers . There is no way I can afford rollers. This will be a solid cam. I cant exlain all my thinking or i would be typing al night but i have choosen this as my jump off point if you will. I will mull over carefully what you said but in all probablilty will start where I have planned just because it is my way of thinking at the moment. I tend to do stuff that way. Sometimes for no other reason than to see of my conclusions are right or wrong. I dont have much money to spend. i have been living off the stock market since 1997 and you know how the last two years have been. I probably shouldnt be even building this but it just seems to be building itself almost. I am very curious about it. I dont generally ever look to see what someone else is doing. It is the way I am made I guess. Stubborn, pig headed or it may be my heritage or all of the above. When i am in the zone so to speak I stay focused and calm. I try to learn from every mistep and explore as much as I can. This is what i enjoy. I dont know how else to explain it. I cant not try the 110 first because then i will never know but always wonder. Does that explain it any better? And if Ed Hamburger or Dave Wren or someone else famous runs it different. Frankly Scarlet------.
Don

 

First I dont meed Over 100% VE. I just need close to it. Strokers are for the bar talk. Strioker have come and gone my entire hot rod life. I have written a study of pros and cons several years ago and it is probabky still floating aorund somewhere on the net. Strokers raise piston speed. Often beyond normal safe standards. Typically they run for a short time then go bang. I do not like to have stroke beyond 90% of bore. It is my rule. My slant six is way out there where I dont like being and I am constantly striving to keep RPM where it belongs and still make good power. I have firiends who spend 25000 to 35000 dollars per year on motors often twice in the year. I have no intention of ever going there. WHen piston speed exceeds 4000 ft per minute you are in the danger zone. You may get by with good parts and a lot of luck. When it gets near 5000 ft per minute you are going to be doing heavy maintanance cause if you dont "poof." I built the first 460 cu mopar (Chrysler Power Mag 97 $1500 Econo Big block.) I built a lot of strokers for the same guy. They all worked but the engine in my charger would trim the wick on any of them running a similar cam.
I dont think comparing different heads is wrong. I hada flow bench for many yearsand did a lot of testing. (I made the bench too) The engine doesnt care much about what the head looks like. Like a baby it just want to be fed. Been a nice quite winter and now here I am knee b deep in contraversy about how i should build MY engine. Here is the bottom line. Build one yourself.
New technology? There is no such thing. We are still struggling in this day and age to beat mr Millers mark of 2.2 Hp per cubic inch cept maybe for the formula one boys. And he did that before all of us were born and probably before some of our parents were born. You know I have sat at the track too many times and taken the gold with our car or watched one of my customers win the championship or runner up for the whole year only to have some low life come over after and say "yeah it worked good but Dulmage is only old technology." I never said it but I felt like saying to the losers "well then maybe you should have got some of that." I also have seen folks take over a cars maintanance after i sold my first shop or retired. I would get a phone call . It would go like this. "We fixed all the stuff you did wrong but we cant get the car to run like it used to. what should we do.?" I always answer the same. "make it all wrong again" Sure we have parts now we never had and a better selection of cams avaiable to wider range of people but nothing new. And for this engine there is little avaialble for it. That is fine by me. More fun less money for parts. Anyway I am not going to justify what I am doing any more. For those interested i will show since they asked. For those with a better plan. Build it.
Don

 

Don, I like reading your stuff. You don't let anyone change your mind. LOL

 

I have taken several of your comments that I found interesting.
1) I am ALWAYS interested in what other guys are doing, even the dumb-ass crap that is written up to sell parts in the magazines. Once I have absorbed it and mulled it over, I might dismiss alot of it as BS and hogwash, but I always really look at it, examine it, and mull it over first, and I often find at least some part of it is something that I want to examine further. I never dismiss anything until I feel I really understand it, and am comfortable that I can see how they wound up coming to an incorrect conclusion. If I cant get there, I dont dismiss it, because I figure it may be something that I havent understood YET, and I may come to see it in the future, after I have learned more. Some of the stuff I read on Speedtalk still leaves me reeling, and I have been at this for a while now. Theres ALWAYS more for me to learn. The day there isnt, I'll probably die.

2) Yes, now theres an old Mopar guy trick that REALLY is worth something, and that I like to keep under my hat. If you are interested in reading it, I have a 2-part article by the Smoke on this very subject that I can email you. It was obvious to me the first time I did it, all I had to do was visualize the position of the rod @tdc, and it was a clear as a bell why it was worth power.

3) Agreed on a lot of counts. Nonetheless, there is a LOT of useful information in the old DC manuals, as well as a lot of bunk. The front end stuff is GOLD.

4) again, damn straight. My second car was a street-driven 440 duster with a 440 straight out of a new yorker, ball honed it, re-installed the stock pistons reversed, decked the hell out of it, set of heavily ported 906s, a torker and a 950 3bbl, 268@050 hyd. (about the longest duration hyd. i have ever seen) junkyard refuge ran 11.0's @ 121, pulling 4.30s.

5) Being a old school Mopar guy from the NW, I know Dave, have been talking to him at the track since I was a scruffy long haired teenager in the early seventies. A REAL character, and from what little I know of you on the HAMB, has a lot in common with you. You two would get along well, I suspect. He is one wily old racer. One of my favorite Dave Wren stories, back around 1998, he was out at Mission with a tired, SS/D legal 10.5/1 short block, an old Rat Roaster with a cross-ram top he had modified himself, and he was running 9.30s in his SS/AA cuda with this mess, and won the stock/super stock combo. Pretty decent for a bunch of "worn out, outdated junk" as some of the other SS guys were calling it.

One more comment on the LSA thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but until recently, you have been using fairly conservative converters, right? I remember reading your post on getting the Lupo converter behind your six. The tight LSA also makes the curve fall off more rapidly below peak torque. If your previous experience has been with 11" converters, the combinations you have been running would not respond as well to a cam with a tight LSA. Tight LSA's tend to make more peak torque, but the power band does become narrower at both ends, in other words they are peakier. But they will generally have more power between peak torque and peak horsepower. Run a sym. See what you think. Now that you have a really serious converter, I think you will find a tight LSA might work better for you. But hey, try both, and let us know what you find.

Good exchange of ideas here Don, I am enjoying it. Not near enough of this on the HAMB.

 

Interesting thoughts Falcon George - great reading for sure!!

Wow take it easy Don - no need to get upset as Im not trying to build your engine for you nor did I ask you to justify what you are proposing. Yes there is a diff b/w hi $$$ and low tech effectiveness but just for our sake ...lets just look at this a different way. Im aware oif the BS that exists in the aftermarket = have been for years. Many have gone FAST with lo tech but well though out combos. Im not advocating hi tech in any sense, but more well thought out stuff as well - but some hard facts remain. Hi tech stuff isnt ALL crap either.

Im just another MoPar lover like you. Its just perhaps another way of looking at things - I respect all opinions including yours as there is often more than one way to skin a cat as you know and never ragged on what you were trying to do. I understand you have a lot of hand on experience but many others do too you know?

Yes a stroker's piston speed goes up - but only to a point as rpm required is a function of engine design/purpose. I've seen many strokers (esp MoPar strokers) go fast, for long, and never go bang. Its kinda relative to rpm you know?
How hard do you need to turn this engine ? How will it be geared? At .090" over and with the 3.58" stroke = 360ci you will have a very nice rod ratio. There IS some science here. A nice 'bore to stroke' ratio is around 90%, so with a 4 inch bore, the stroke technically should be around 3.6" inches. The 3.58" of the factory cast crank is almost bang on for a 90% ratio and its CHEAP. Could you please explain where the problem is b/c Im not sure where this could cause any issues?

IF you have the cubes and the heads to feed them then you should'nt need to be turned hard/ orgear it as hard due to better TQ down low which is TQ that will get you out of the hole FASTER. Piston speed may hurt the engine at HIGH rpm, but if you don't NEED to turn it as hard then it does'nt really matter? More TQ with the stroker will mean less gearing which means less rpm to do the job. That means reliability which means piston speed is not a factor.

Yes I agree the flow bench does'nt care about what name is stamped into the valve cover. But it does care about port design, port velocities, port volume, porting techniques, chamber shape/design, valve sizes etc. All of which are totally different from a Wedge design to a Poly design and affect what you have to work with in the first place. If there was no difference then the Hemi design in racing would have been dumped 50 years ago right? Nor would there be a plethora of more efficient cyl head designs in the aftermarket today, SBM guys like me have been screaming for years for a decent alternative to the W2, W5, etc to compete better with the brand Xers - we have them now and some truly tough street engines are being built everyday which is directly attributable to cyl head and cam design tech that never existed 25+ yrs ago. I cant argue with thr reults - its NOT the same old hat as the HP/TQ figures are light years ahead of where they were even 10-15 yrs ago. The Poly doesnt have that luxury - so you are stuck with 50yo design that IS limited - it just makes sense.

You mentioned that a Chev racer would sell his mother for a set of stock casting flowing 230 CFM. Not to be argumentative but just trying to illustrate, stock Poly heads won't even crack 190cfm peak....and last time I checked, SBC production Vortec truck heads flow 240 cfm STOCK. Not bad for a factory stock truck head. Hell even big port 340/360 3418915 heads barely flow 200cfm stock and the exh ports are not flash at all. If you can get 240 cfm or it will be killer !!

Just a thought - in all honesty, will you be having a cam ground with 50 yo design in its lobes/specs/rate of lift/area under the curve or will you capitalise on having a pro grind a cam for you to take avantage of new camshaft technology? If not, then you will be behind your competition.

A far as building one goes - we have built plenty of LA engines - stroker and non stroker. Id love to build a Poly but am in the middle of a Blown 330 Hemi build which you can search out on here if you like. All have run hard and run fast with very good aftermarket head designs as the std heads left a lot to be desired on the table, esp with the exh port design.

So relax, all I was trying to say in my original post was given the design attributes of the Poly head - high cfm's after porting probably won't be realised which could hurt OVERAL HP making ability thats all. The air speed generated in the ports is a Poly head's greatest strength and airspeed will contribute to great low down TQ and nice mid range HP...but high HP may be limited.

Never did I try to discourage from building a tough Poly.....the challenge will be to build it for low $$$.

Good luck and keep us posted Don, look forward to the updates !!

Rat

 

--------------
A turbo'd slant-6 in a '66 Belvedere wagon, ok......but
with *only* six Mikunis???

Mart3406
=====================

 

Until recently running conservtive converters. I guess you have not read my book . Old Reliable. I have been using Franks converters since the 90s and other way baxck into the seventies. . The slant six car was originally built simply to try the six snowmobile carbs as it was something I wanted to do for 30 plus years. Once i satisfied that deal i started seeing what it would do and when i needed a converter to go with the new custom made cam I called my friend Frank and he looked after me. I run way more converter than most would ever try having learned to trust him. The fisrt one of his in the charger was 5100 and later he upped it a bit more. It would leave so hard i had to get a new driver because my nephew was having neck problems driving it during our weekly racing schedule. 1.52 shorts. which is decent for a 4150 # car in 10.5 tires.
If I stroke the engine it is not a 318 anymore. I have a good crank now . If I stroke it I also will need more cylinder head. More intake. Right now everything is in the window. I built a 380 inch 340 probably before anyone else. many many years ago before mopar even sold the cranks. In fact there is one under my shop bench right now. I am not stroking this one. Stroking is like alcholism. It is hard not to partake if you become addicted. Self diiscipline in life and in engines is often the key to success. Too much of anything is too much. The 318s advantage (and the 400 BB as well) is they have a shorter stroke than the 350 chev. They are able to run up the rpm range safely for ever. I have a road race motor running in Europe which is a 400 for instance. It will be over five years running this season and the licking it takes is unbelieveable. A 440 or hemi would have died already. To stroke it is to remove that advantage forever and become just another bellybutton on the road of life. You can follow if you want. As an old farm boy I remember what you are walking in when you follow the herd. I am totally untouched and unaffected by what is going on around me. I have disciplined myself to be that way otherwise you are always second guessing yourself. Make a plan , stick to it.
Don

 

Good stuff Don.

You have mentioned that 400 on here before. Some day and in another thread I would like more details on that one. I think the 400 is a secret weapon that has not been capitalized on by mopar freaks - they either tend to build 451's out of them or just go to a 440.

In stock form they suffer from low, low compression (probably 7.5:1 in most cases) and a very very heavy piston. I have a stock bottom end 400 in my truck (not done yet) with the heads milled .060 to get the compression up to 9:1, but I have thought of pulling it down and putting lighter pistons in it to bring the compression up that way. I have built a few 400's and always kept the revs down under 6000 because I am afraid of the pins pulling out of the pistons. Anyway, if I get a better job, hit the lottery or find a sugar mama (my wife has already said she is okay with a secondary income) I will explore the 400 much farther.

You go Don, use that stubborn nature to make power, you need to answer only to yourself.

 

I agree . the 400 is an unsung hero. I had to build an engine that would last in Road Racing in Europe. I would not be there to look after it. He wanted 400 HP said 450 would be bonus. It produced 510 best case 485 worst case so he is very happy. It is 9.6 to one. (I was restricted to 95 octane fuel) had the pistons made for that engine and it has a lot of good parts.
I have also built it here with 440 pistons 030 over which is 10 over in a 400. That engine ran 11.55s on it first pass in a 3400 LB Mirada. It had my own special hydraulic cam (as does the one in Europe and my Street piece made) The master made for me by a friend in the business almost 35 years ago here in Canada.
As to breaking your stock pistons/ It will never happen. They are indestructable. The 460 stroker was built with stock cast 400 pistons and we still have them to this very day. A rod fell in half during a violent burnout after 9 years of punishment but the pistons didnt even feel it. However KB now makes a 10 to 1 piston for the 400. When I built this one they did not. Which brings me to this. When we started working with BB mopars no one made hardly any internal parts for them. We made our own valves and pistons and such from similar size parts for other engines. There were no special heads no big valves no decent cams save stocker cams or Racer brown.. No stroker cranks , no super rods (No, 426 hemi is not the same . it is longer) maybe that is why i dont copy. There was no one to copy then! If you didnt make it you didnt have it. Period. Maybe some didnt understand that.
You can find a lot of video of the European 400 running at St Crioux, Lemans , Nurburgring for instance. It is now painted orange. Itwas the driver training and practice car for the NASCAR Returns To Lemans project with Christophe Schwartz. There are two cars. The race only car which is a tube fram with a Ray Barton hemi and the practice car which is an actual 72 Dodge charger. You can tell the difference as only one (the 400 car) has doors. They approached me. I didnt even know about the project.
Don

 

No, I havent read your book. just found your website, when I have more time, I am going to spend some time checking it out.

 

Thanks Don, I will stop worrying about the pistons in my 400 - I still won't rev it over 6000, no point really with the mild cam and street exhaust.

Your motor is in good company there with the Barton Hemi (I bet he charged them a bit more for the Hemi!)

Is your book still available anywhere? Don at FBO used to sell it but I don't see it on his site anymore.

 

You're right on-the-money there, Don.

More power to ya!

~Jason

 

Yes, I am interested too, thats how i wound up at your website.

 

I have it now on DVD in a PDF file. After 7 paper printing I changed to this for a bunch of reasons. Not the least was my publisher went bankrupt , was bought out twice and no one there now seems to give a rip. If you go to the 1962to1965moparornocar mail list web site they have provided a complete link with all necessary details. I believe there is even an order form. The DVD also has an interview with me done by TV producer Steve Sheehan. It is on as normal video on the same disc.
I dont want to say too much here because I am not sure on Ryan's rules here as to selling stuff. I really do try to avoid trouble
Don

 

I should say that I watched Dave Wrens carreer which is how I know his name. I was searching for two names and his was right near the top of my concious thought I respect him and wish him no disrespect . (However I wont be phoning to see what to do. ;>)
Don

 

Man, I am always intrigued by your threads and methods...your ass backwards way of doing things (compared to the mass produced way most of us grew up) are completely refreshing and inspiring...I'll surely be picking your brain when it comes time to stuff my dual AFB 361 big block mopar into my '40 Plymouth drag car...I found the pushbutton trans input shaft swap parts you and 73RR recommended I use to update to a modern torque converter...I'm interested in what sort of tricks you have up your sleeve to cross-reference parts to build a 400hp/450lb ft of torque 361 based motor with nearly zero aftermarket support for piston size and a minimal budget (I suppose it helps that I'm a machinist by trade for the past 13+years)...keep on making progress, I can't wait to see how hard that little Poly pulls on a dyno...

 

MY dyno is 1320 feet long and a set of scales Far more accurate than any machine. Car will never go any faster than it has the HP to do so. Not once ever.
Your Plymouth sounds like fun. You are in the right business for such a project. Well you need some more compression. I usually look for a pistons with a bit more compression distance similar bore and pin size. Or I order a set from Ross if I dont feel comfy with my choices or it is a severe use engine. When searching for pistons I usually search by pin height or compression distance.That will narrow it down to three or four pistons and then it is the one size wise that will work. I buy one if possible and try it which i did here. I think it will work as i have it modified but my pal got ahead of me as he was looking for NOS pistons and found a place that had a complete set of these I had choosen and was willing to part with them cheap. He ordered them without asking me . We work a lot back and forth so even if it is a bust he will never know . He was trying to help and I appreciate that. And even if they are junk I am ok since he has given me so much over the years I wont worry about it. I appreciate your comments however I am scratching my head over a--- backwards thinking. I thought it was completley logical and based on facts and science. My wealthy friends are always telling me "why dont you phone Htcch--son or someone famous and just pay them for a combo. Meanwhile i have helped some of their poorer ($$$$)competitors and those cars have gone faster then they are going. I just grin and think ???????????
I really do understand what I am doing very cleary despite how it may appear. There is no mystery to engines. You figure out exactly what they need to do what you want and you make sure they get exactly that, no more no less. Too little and too much produce exactly the same result , too slow. Right is might. Always was. Always will be. All the shiny magazine pages and all the experts overa beer dont make any difference. The motor doesnt care. It needs this much duration to make power at this rpm. Its head can only flow to this lift so you dont go beyond that. With this much duration it needs this much compression. (one of the greatest speed secrets and the key to the whole ball of wax) More will slow it down because it takes power to make unecessary compression. You dont want to waste anything. Intake must be able to handle the rpm. Carb size should be as close as you can make it to engne requirements (2 X Cu inches ) More is less. Then engine must be survivable ,meaning it has to be able to live at what you are asking it to do. Piston speed in feet per minute and oiling system become super critcal. It must be clearanced properly. Ie nothing touching but nothing loose so it could pound out. Over the last 40 plus years I learned to do that. That is the thought process for me. And I love a challenge which this will be. When i sold the OR engine to a mud racer he won the big block championship for the whole year with it. I sold him the freshened block assembly for seveteen hundred and fifty dollars and guided him through a 452 head mod job. At the awards ceramony the runner up told him you must have a lot of $$ in that motor" He said "not really , why" The fellow went on to say he had spent over seventeen thousand on his BBc@##$%^&*y and still couldnt go by him. That is what I do or did and what I live for. And it is an absolutey true story and there are many others similar. If that is backwards so be it.
Don

 

What I said was your methods are opposite to the way most of us young kids have been raised on catalog parts and being confined to "in the box" thinking...it was a compliment of sorts ...

 

Yes I understood what you meant and took no offense from it.
I get lot of flack though. Usually from folks we beat. They explain yes we won but we use old technology and they say it with great disdain. I have to hide my smile when I hear that. First off they have no idea of what we use.
Anyway I am enjoying this build and the ones before it were fun too.
Don

 

"When i sold the OR engine to a mud racer he won the big block championship for the whole year with it. I sold him the freshened block assembly for seveteen hundred and fifty dollars and guided him through a 452 head mod job. At the awards ceramony the runner up told him you must have a lot of $$ in that motor" He said "not really , why" The fellow went on to say he had spent over seventeen thousand on his BBc@##$%^&*y and still couldnt go by him. That is what I do or did and what I live for. And it is an absolutey true story and there are many others similar. If that is backwards so be it.
Don"

I love that! Chevy guys, tell me again that it is cheaper to build and race Chevies! My old Duster showed many a Chevy and Ford it's tail lights with a stock bottom end 360 in it - I still have that motor under my bench.

Don is not self promoting on here, but here is the link with the info for getting his book on DVD:

http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/oldreliable.html

I will get a check out to you today Don.

 

Seems like every time I read a post by you a light goes off in my head and things become clearer...it makes perfect sense now that high compression can rob power if the rest of the components don't need the compression...do you base your decisions on equations or experience and educated guesses?...because I love equations and am very fond of finding order amidst chaos...I'd really love to sit down and discuss at length exactly what I have at my disposal for this 361, what I want out of it and hear your thoughts on how best to achieve that...I've been searching for an online source or paper reference of piston dimensions for different engines so I can find one to make work in the 361...I look forward to learning more...