318 hp question

-

mimmoson

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
Vineland, New Jersey
Up until 1971 the 318 is listed as making 230 hp. In 1972 and up it drops to 150 hp. What actually made this hp drop? Was it just in how they measured it? Or was it physically something different in the engine, heads, compression ratio, pistons, etc.
 
In '72, the power was dropped because the engine was dyno'd with a fully dressed engine and there is the lower compression ratio. Also, the emission devices (if any) were installed and working.

These engines will respond well to minor changes. Compression being the hardest most expensive way via new pistons. Milling the head as much as needed is cheaper but may introduce more issues with intake manifold fittment issues.
 
Ok. Thanks. Hmmm. I have no emissions crap on mine. Maybe in the short term ad intake with a 4 barrel. Gotta see which way I'm going to go.
 
Compression mostly. They kept it low to keep economy up. But you can still make 300+hp with the stock internals and not having to zero deck the block. I shaved and ported #302 heads a nice .468 .224 cam and went 14seconds at 96mph
 
Mini, I think I'm going to go basically the same route. I'll take her down eventually ( still have a lot of major body and chassis mechanicals to go over) I'll check and freshen the internals as needed, a mild cam, and do some nice heads. All I'm looking for is a nice street runner. Nothing real fancy. I just picked up this project 72 Scamp a couple weeks ago and now I'm layed up with a bad foot and nothing but time to do research and plan this build. Again thanks a million for everyone's input! It is greatly appreciated.
 
For the long run, you may want to consider putting 340/360 heads on it for the better flow and bigger valves. However, you will lower the compression about 1.2 points. To compensate for the loss, the best way to go is to get 10.5 pistons, and with the larger combustion chambers in the 340/360 heads, you will end up at 9.2 compression - perfect for the street.
 
Gross Horsepower vs. Net Horsepower

Thru July 1971

The Car Manufacturers measured Horsepower by using a test rating methodology set by the
Standard of American Engineers {S.A.E} {Code J1349}

This calculated the ouput of a 'bare' Engine on a test stand. With no accessories or belts.
And with 'optimal' timing, adjusted carburetion, free-flowing exhaust and with a correction factor
for atmospheric conditions.

In other words, 'unrestricted' advertised Gross Horsepower at the Flywheel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In August 1971 {for the 1972 Model year}, the Horsepower Rating was changed to {J245 and J1995}
testing methodology.

Now, the Engines were tested with the 'accessories' bolted on the Engine {ie; Water Pump, Fan, Alternator
and Air-Pump, and with the Pulley-Belts installed}.

Also, the timing was 'not' adjusted {advanced} for optimal Horsepower Output, and the Carburetion was
not 'tweaked' for optimal Air/Fuel mixture.

This gave a 'more true' like driving condition Horsepower Rating.

Horsepower was still measured at the Flywheel.

This new testing effected the Gross Horsepower 'read-out' by approximately {10% to 12%}, though it was
the 'same' identical Engine.

Now, add in the fact that the 1972 Engines were equipped with 'lower' Compression Pistons, and early emission
controls {A.I.P. = Air Injection Pump} and {E.G.R. = Exhaust Gas Recirculator} to create a 'de-tuned' Engine,
which lowered Horsepower by another 6% to 8%.
 
Here's another option. I have a 1969 318 block-heads- rotating assembly in the corner. That should have the higher CR. Should I just build that with either the 340/360 heads or a pair of 302 heads?
 
Here's another option. I have a 1969 318 block-heads- rotating assembly in the corner. That should have the higher CR. Should I just build that with either the 340/360 heads or a pair of 302 heads?

302s would be your cheapest bet. Although you would make up the price in porting them to get decent flow. I spent 20+ hours on mine to get them to flow decent. If you get a set of say 596 heads with a chamber of around 69-72cc, get them cut .025 and end up with a nice 64-66cc that would net you a compression of around 9.0-9.5:1. Just a suggestion and option! Correct me if I missed something
 
Johnny,

'Here Tis'

1968 ~ '318/230 HP'_____________________________________________1972 ~ '318/150 HP'

* Compression Ratio ......... 9.00-1 ......................................................................... 9.23-1
* Piston Type.................... Flat Top ....................................................................... Flat Top
* Piston Height................. {-.029"} Below Deck ..................................................... {-.056"} Below Deck
* Gasket.......................... .020"............................................................................ 036"
* Cylinder Head................ #2843675 .................................................................... #2843675
* Combustion Chamber...... 60.6 CC {Open Chamber} .............................................. 61.0 CC {Open Chamber}
* Valves.......................... 1.78" Intake ~ 1.50" Exhaust........................................... {same}
* Camshaft 'Hydraulic'...... .390"/.420" Lift ~ 240*/248* Duration ~ 20* Overlap ......... {same}
* Valve Springs................ #108 lbs. Valve-Closed ~ #148 lbs. Valve-Open.................. {same}
* Intake Manifold............. #2468960 ..................................................................... #2951185
* Carburetor.................... Carter BBD #4420 ~ {275 CFM} ~ 1 7/16" Throttle Plates ... Carter BBD #6149 {285 CFM}
* Exhaust Manifold Outlet... 1.75" ........................................................................... {same}

Mopar Advertised Specifications
* 230 Horsepower @ 4400 RPM's ....................................................................... 150 Horsepower @ 4000 RPM's
* 340 Ft/Lbs. of Torque @ 2400 RPM's............................................................... 260 Ft/Lbs. of Torque @ 1600 RPM's

NHRA 'Refactored' Horsepower Rating per Year
* 1968....... 230 HP
* 1978....... 210 HP
* 1985....... 200 HP
* 2002....... 195 HP
* 2004 ...... 185 HP
* 2012....... 172 HP
 
230 is the gross rating. 150 is the net rating. Any other differences is hardly worth mentioning. I will mention them anyways. The '69 will have a little lighter rod (quicker rev) but it's not quite as strong. No, you will not feel the "lightness" off the rod by the seat of your pants, and no, it won't kick a rod either. The compression is 8.5 to one vs 9.0. No, you will not feel this by the seat of your pants either. Use the best motor of any you have, because the little differences that I pointed out is not worth the discussion on the performance. Oh, by the way, the heads on the '69 will need hardened seats for todays gas. I would not put any money into those heads. Too many good options out there to be messing with an old set of 318 heads. I have cut 360 heads .040 and never had a problem bolting on the intake. Actually, the intake fit better (I didn't use the cork end gaskets, just a beam of RTV)
 
how much HP are you looking for? stock 318 heads 675's will make340 hp with just a good valve job and a mild .450lift cam.with matching springs do you want more?( this is more hp then a stock 340/383 cu.in from the factory. with the smaller displacement torque would be lower.
 
That's pretty close to my number! 375 hp would be ideal. Is that really so, a 69 318 with stock 675 heads with a good valve job and a mild cam will be near 340 hp. If so that is awesome. I could go with the 360 heads with the hardened seats and shave them down. I have a cast iron 4 barrel intake with a quadrajet also laying around. Wonder what that would do for it.
 
I had a 1972 318 Dart , with heads shaved a little porting , headers , Holley street dominator intake and an 850 thermoqaud off a 1974 440 Road Runner it ran strong , very strong . Kept up with Firechickens and Camaros .
With a few aftermarket parts they go well , nothing wrong with a 318 , besides the plastic timing gear , that should be replaced , have 3 hanging on the wall of my garage . Double roller timing chain is a needed upgrade .
 
When I bought my '69 Barracuda it had just had the engine overhauled even though it was a low mileage car, the guy was restoring the car. I wanted better flow and better exhaust so I bought some 302 castings, did some mild porting and had SS valves installed. The original '69 low mileage heads are now sitting on the shelf collecting dust. Both heads had 69 cc chambers so my stock compression didn't change (9.2 to 1 by the original 69 service manual). I did measure the piston height when I removed the heads and it was right around .029" below the deck. This makes a big difference....the 73 318 short block I have has pistons .100" below the deck. So pistons make a difference and heads do also. The 73 318 has never been fired, it has new pistons, rings, cam and bearings but I really bought it to build a stroker (390). I didn't notice a real big difference in power after I installed the 302 casting, but there was some difference. I would have thought that the 340 exhaust manifold and magnum passenger manifold coupled with the 302 casting would have made a big difference?? But now that I've installed the 2004R and fixing to put some 3.73 gears in the rear I should notice a really big difference.

treblig
 

Attachments

  • DSC01623.jpg
    42.7 KB · Views: 651
  • DSC01625.jpg
    34 KB · Views: 438
  • DSC02674.jpg
    42.1 KB · Views: 401
  • DSC03371.jpg
    35.7 KB · Views: 386
  • DSC03389.jpg
    34.2 KB · Views: 395
  • DSC03400.jpg
    42.7 KB · Views: 425
Most concise explanation of gross/net and easily confused concurrent compression ratio reduction I've seen. Thanks.
 
Here's another option. I have a 1969 318 block-heads- rotating assembly in the corner. That should have the higher CR. Should I just build that with either the 340/360 heads or a pair of 302 heads?

You wouldn't have the compression ratio with the old 318 engines as if you went with 10.5 pistons and 340/360 heads.

Here is a thread on how to check compression ratio in an engine:

http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=278215


I like to run 9.2 - 9.5 compression on the street. If you have less, you loose some efficiency. As long as you stay out of spark knock, the higher your compression, the higher the efficiency.


The late 60's engine with the 308 heads may also work, but I haven't had any experience with the 308's.
 
The easiest way to upgrade the 318 is with early and well prep'd bowl ported 360 heads milled to keep the compression up, RPM, headers into a 2-1/2 pipe, a good distributor and ignition along with the cam of your choice. Add the proper stall and rear gears, you'll have a good runner for cheap. The timing gear upgrade that 318willrun suggested is an excellent idea. Heck! Since you have the front off of the engine anyway! Ya might as well do it!
 
The easiest way to upgrade the 318 is with early and well prep'd bowl ported 360 heads milled to keep the compression up, RPM, headers into a 2-1/2 pipe, a good distributor and ignition along with the cam of your choice. Add the proper stall and rear gears, you'll have a good runner for cheap. The timing gear upgrade that 318willrun suggested is an excellent idea. Heck! Since you have the front off of the engine anyway! Ya might as well do it!

X2. Even though I went the 302 route, the amount of work it took to make them flow was a sh&* load.
 
how much HP are you looking for? stock 318 heads 675's will make340 hp with just a good valve job and a mild .450lift cam.with matching springs do you want more?( this is more hp then a stock 340/383 cu.in from the factory. with the smaller displacement torque would be lower.

On a very friendly dyno at 2000' below sea level.....:)

I respectfully disagree with anything close to a streetable compression ratio on that combo. I'd be thrilled with a "real" mid 200's number using 9ish compression and some bolt on's.
 
Untouched or little work 318 heads would have a hard time to break 300hp with low CR 9:1 and less and street cam 270 or less. It would take a lot of CR and duration to get much above. 340/360, magnum or ported 318 are the way to go. 340/360 are a good swap with high CR piston gets you a streetable 9:1 CR with enough flow to make decent power with a streetable 270 ish cam.
 
Untouched or little work 318 heads would have a hard time to break 300hp with low CR 9:1 and less and street cam 270 or less. It would take a lot of CR and duration to get much above. 340/360, magnum or ported 318 are the way to go. 340/360 are a good swap with high CR piston gets you a streetable 9:1 CR with enough flow to make decent power with a streetable 270 ish cam.

Correcto Mundo,

The 318 needs the 360 Heads {1.88" Intake x 1.60" Exhaust} off the 1971 360 Engine.

Compression of {9.30-1} works well with the 'open chamber' #3418915 Cylinder Head.

That's a good start.
 
-
Back
Top