“Max effort daily driver” 318 build vs “Budget” 400 swap

AJ, there is a lot wrong and arguable in your post.
This does not seem to fit together well with
"max effort daily driver 318"
This is a description open to interpretation and that open area is huge!
The 75 Dart is a fairly lightweight car,
This a weight I’d like to see for clarification.

and for a DD, all you need is a hi-cylinder pressure 318. This will provide all the performance you will ever need in a 3.21 geared automatic daily-driver car.

This is possible but IMO, a looser next to the 400

But I sense from the way the thread went, that you are not fully committed to Daily-Driver status, but are leaning more towards building a modest performance car with daily-driver as an option. Am I right?
I agree
Cuz why else would you even consider a fat-bore short-stroke 400 cuber?
Because making more power with a bigger engine is easier. Due to a shear CID advantage, more and better power can be made easier with less camshaft and still use a low gear set.

My ‘79 Magnum had a 318, Edelbrock 600/4 barrel, performer intake, dual exhaust and a mild cam. I swapped this out for a ‘78-400 and only added a Holley Street Dominator, electric choke TQ (AKA Small primary unit) and Hedman headers into a true dual exhaust with DynoMax turbo mufflers. No cam change.

The 400 slaughtered the 318 everywhere AND equaled it in mileage.

If I'm right, here are My thoughts;
In this thinking, the overall combo is the big deal; and you will want to always keep fuel-economy in all your thoughts.
Wise words
So then;
The very first thing that you will want to do is select a stall-speed,
Horrible advice and a stupendously dumb idea.
Shame on you!
and the Second thing is the camshaft.
Camshaft first once the short block is done. You can start with an idea of a camshaft first as a general idea of where and how the cam will work in terms of performance. That’s where that ends.

After that you would select the grade of fuel that you are willing to pay for, and finally back-calculate the Compression ratio, to achieve the pressure that you can safely run without detonation on that grade of gas.
This is the first step in the whole package. Not the converter or camshaft. With the idea of running only 87 or stepping up to 91/93 it will allow other ideas to roll in and out.
That' all there is to it.
To simple and bad
What I mean is this;
if you intend to run 3.21s and a stock-stall automatic without a Lock-up, this will require a different engine than if running 3.91s and a 3500 stall.
Arguable, very.
By choosing the 3.21s, you have already limited the rest of the combo. Why? Because the engine is gonna be handicapped by lack of torque-multiplication , and the Mopar"s rather large 1-2 shift split, of 59%.
Very arguable!
Let’s say that you are gonna run 27" tires.
Here comes the calculator and assuming long winded writings.
With 3.21s, and in first gear, your speed is gonna run about 9.2mph per 1000 rpm, so 4000 would be 37mph, 5000 would be 46mph, and 6000 is 55mph. The point is this; that is a lotta lotta mph to be stuck in one gear.
Stuck? Define stuck! The driver of such a combo would only leave the car in this gear that long by choice or not care about it. This also assumes camshaft size.
So then, the engine build will need to reflect that, as this is gonna be very nearly the only gear of choice at WOT.
From a dead stop, yes, not traveling down the Hwy.
More assumptions ?

At the shift into Second Gear, the Rs will drop to 59%, which from 5000 is to 2950, so again, the engine build will have to reflect that. That is a Powerband requirement of 2150 rpm, well beyond the usual 1500 rpm band of optimum average power.

A 3K drop? Can anybody else confirm this?


To get the transmission required powerband, to better fit the engine, would require a hi-stall convertor. How high? Well that would depend on the rpm of peak power, which depends on the cam....... but it quickly gets North of 3000, which is usually not the best for fuel-economy.
More assumptions being made!
Such a shame you make such blanket statements chock full of assumptions!

Furthermore, your take-off performance depends entirely on how much torque gets to the tires at zero mph. This depends a lot on the various gear ratios and the basic engine torque.
WTF? LMAO!!!!
Your ratios are already selected as 2.45 x 3.21=7.86.. And at zero mph the Torque convertor will multiply that by about 1.8....
Assumptions

but this number quickly diminishes towards something like 1.1 as the car starts to move.

More assumptions


So whatever torque is coming out of the crank, gets multiplied by these numbers.
Say you have a stock stall of 2000ish rpm, and say your engine makes 200 ftlbs at 2000. Therefore 200 x 7.86x 1.8=2830ftlbs briefly, diminishing to 200 x 7.86 x 1.1=1730 ftlbs as the rpm starts to build. These are lackluster numbers. And you are not a happy guy. So you swap out that convertor for a 3000, and at this rpm say your engine is now making 327 ftlbs. Your new numbers are 4626 diminishing to 2827ftlbs which is a chitload better than 2830/1730. In fact, as you can see, the max at zero mph and 2000 of 2830 ftlbs, is now about equal to the minimum achieved by the 3000 stall TC@2827.
2827 is not that great, but not so bad either, and for a DD I would gladly be happy with that. Now, I'm not saying that you need a 3000 stall Convertor. I'm just presenting a thought-process.
Lets move on; With 27" tires and 3.21s, 65=2600 at Zero slip, could be 100/150 either way on the tach. So for optimum fuel usage, the thought is to have a stall no higher than this. But if your leaning more towards performance, I can tell you that I really really liked my 2800 Turbo-Action, which I purchased back in the late 70s and at that time, it had the name of Dirt-Jerker. Great TC. I still have that TC today, still installed, having been thru many combos.
If yur still reading;
Now we have the basic combo worked out which is ;
318/904/3.21s/2800 stall.
Next up is the gas, what octane are you willing to pay for. This will determine NOT the compression ratio to run, but the maximum cylinder pressure.
Here are the typical pressures to octane numbers, for an iron open-chamber :
87 at 150psi
89 at 155psi
91 at 160psi.
A Quench-design will usually tolerate about 5 more psi.
For max-torque, you would build to the highest pressure
For max-Power at high rpm, whatever octane is sufficient to suppress detonation.
For max fuel economy, you would build to the cheapest gas
Lets say you choose 89, and 155psi, as a happy medium.
Now we're getting into the nitty gritty.
Now is the time to pick the cam.
Getting back to the 3.21s being a handicap, and the 2800 stall, we are looking at a power peak of ;
2800 plus about 1500=4300 This is just about exactly equal to the stock 318 cam.
But this is a DD, so it doesn't have to be a super gas-sipper.
Lets stretch the power band out to fill up all of First gear and if it falls on it's face on the 1-2 shift, we won't lose any sleep over it....... cuz it's a DD; ok?
So then you gotta chose an rpm limit, at which the engine will survive say 100,000 miles, cuz longivity also plays into fuel-economy. Ok then, we know that Mopar small-blocks tend to throw rod bearings with stock oiling systems, after 6000, so lets sneak in at a 5500 rpm shift.
Allowing just 300 rpm past peak for the factory heads, this gives us a power peak of around 5200. Oh well that's just swell, this allows a cam of up to [email protected] which for a 318 is really big and NOT suitable for getting fuel mileage.
WTH!!!!!!

And… a cam of 230@050?
Oh boy….
Ima gonna arbitrarily cut that back to a [email protected] cuz I know I can push that to close to mid 20 mpgs, with iron heads, from point-to-point.
Now where talking
Ok , see how this is working out?
Ok now, using David Vizards "128rule", for performance, this cam should be on a 108LSA. But we're NOT targeting performance exactly, so a 110 will be fine.
And a wider LSA is loosing torque, follow the rules and it’s a 107 w/a 1.78 valve if the compression ratio is 10/10.5-1. Since most cams do not get cut like this, (Thumper) drop it down rather than move up.

But is the future engine a 10-1 or 10.5-1? And running on 87?
And we don't want to get into a messy intake exhaust system with a lot of overlap, so at [email protected] and a 110,
That 110 is a basic go to. How does that make a messy intake and exhaust system?

we should be good at 65=2650
So this dials our cam in at 218/110 so far.
Not really as there is a variance in an acceptable cam duration ether way.

What a load!
From experience, I know building pressure with a 318 is a pile of work,
Must have low experience


so I'm gonna want to run this cam advanced And I know the factory heads need all the help they can get, so I'm gonna recommend a split pattern with about 8 extra degrees on the exhaust, giving us 218/226/110, Awright now we're getting somewhere.

Assumptions being made! You could a lot worse.

Now, you can get this cam with acceleration ramps from say 58 degrees down to maybe 44 degrees lets go with a typical 48* and that, makes advertised numbers of; 262/270/110
Next lets build the cylinder pressure up to a minimum of 155psi with that cam . In at 109, the Ica is 60* and at 800ft elevation, the Wallace kicks out [email protected] Scr; BadBoom!
Here are all the events;
262/120/114/270/46 in the order of
intake/compression/ extraction/exhaust/overlap
what do they mean?

Probably more than he is interspersed in but it’s all good.
(Enter the laughing emoji you hate so much! LOL! :poke: )
So all this calculation is done with what piston, head gasket and cylinder head cc?


Well you can't mess with the 120 compression, cuz that is making your 155psi. Tthe 114* extraction is a generous amount with which to make fuel economy. The 46* is a modest amount of overlap, which won't muddy up the exhaust, yet will put a modest yank on the plenum.
Finally, this is an install at 109, just 1* advanced. To fine tune it in your combo, you can advance it 4* to increase the pressure,
Get the right cam in the first place and you won’t be bothered in playing around with advancing the cam.

if you change your mind and are willing to run 91 gas at WOT, should you need it. Or you can retard it say 4* which will decrease the pressure and move the power up a few rpm. Point being, this size of cam is tuneable to your combo. When it gains pressure, the engine will gain a lil take-off performance. When it loses pressure, it will trade low-rpm torque for a lil high-rpm power.
Now
Before somebody says that AJ said that you gotta run a 228/110 cam, read the post again. I arbitrarily reduced the permissable 230* cam, to a 218* cam. And altho I recommend this size of cam, it only applies to all the assumptions I made in setting up the combo.
If you swap out the 3.21s for 3.91s moving your combo OUT of the realm of DD, then the 218/110 cam is wrong!
Is it really?????
If you stick with the factory 2000 stall, I think this cam will still be right, but if you get into lo-rpm detonation, yur gonna have to deal with that.
I’ve used several cams very very close to your specked 318-218/226 cam and that is NOT an ISSUE at all.
If you want more performance, this engine build is wrong. Well the whole combo is,lol.
Nothing like writing out a ton of dribble and stating it’s wrong.
If you get a trans with a Lock-up convertor, then you don't have to be limited by a 2800 stall.
LU converters equal big bucks
If you are not limited to the 2800 stall, then the 3.21s can move down a size, without compromising the as-built combo.
And finally;
I don't see much value, in terms of fuel economy, in running a smaller cam. The 262 is a nice all-round performer.
The next bigger cam of same FTH design, will definitely suffer a decrease in fuel economy.
If you are willing to upgrade to a Solid lifter cam, there are gains to be had either way.
If you are willing to install alloy heads, and a Quench chamber, you can safely run the pressure up to 200psi on best gas, decreasing about 5psi per grade. And you can upcam one size without sacrificing fuel economy, so long as you maintain the pressure. In fact, if you do both alloy heads and a Solid cam, you can upcam two sizes, and move the LCA back to 108 where it should be. I only chose the 110, to not have the overlap that a 108 would bring, a concession to fuel-economy.
Ok, those were my thoughts.
My eyes are bleeding…..