340 Vs 360

[justinp61]

A 3.58" stroke isn't a very long stroke. Taking an equal built 340 and 360, 4-5-600hp where is the shorter stroke in an advantage? I doubt that 98% of Mopar guys will ever build an engine to take advantage of the rpm capability of the .27" less stroke.

 

[crackedback]

The tit for tat BULLSHIT of breaking quotes. JUST ******* STOP. Take it to PM's if you have to romper room **** up the thread. Embarrassing to say the least. Grow the **** up.

Have a great evening.

Can't compare the engine in any factory produced state. 360 was crutched by emission laws. Only way to figure it out is build similar engines, comp, cam heads and go at it.

Heck I beat Usain Bolt in a footrace the other day, kicked his ***. I broke both his ankles right before the starters gun went off. Same deal with 340 v 360, one being compromised.

 

[rumblefish360]

@crackedback

Not looking to start ****, just clarification, no BS.

A 3.58" stroke isn't a very long stroke. Taking an equal built 340 and 360, 4-5-600hp where is the shorter stroke in an advantage? I doubt that 98% of Mopar guys will ever build an engine to take advantage of the rpm capability of the .27" less stroke.

This is true IMO. While the advantages are there for this or that thing, it takes extremes to see any benefit or take that advantage.

Making a mention of such advantages or disadvantages is one thing but to preach it as why you should or should not use a particular engine/stroke etc…. Is kind of ridiculous at most levels of engine building to I’d guess an easy 95% of this board and the usage of that percentage builds an engine for.

Lord knows I’ll more than likely not get there myself since the expense of an extreme build is beyond my meager pocket depth.

Anytime anybody brings up a 340 vs 360 question/thread it always turns into a debacle. To split hairs on such items when building a typical street machine or a in general “Hop Up” engine plan is insane. But people love to do it. They can’t help themselves.

Everyone breaks out there slide rulers, abacus’s, scientific calculators, old articles from the old Tyne greats, drag runners, circle track guys, enduro guys, etc right on down the line and profess there accomplishments as if there the right and only way to go about engine building is one of the most funniest things I constantly read over and over again.

Then there’s the outrageous claims like someone has been there and done that down to the engineering level of why and what happens and all I see is **** talking morons making no sense at all.

I’ve had the good fortune of speaking with men that have experimented with the old “ alternative fuel” (Nitro methane) back in the ‘50’s and how they did what they did and why. I wouldn’t apply half of what they did today but yet some guys here will state it as if it’s the way to do things.

Nooooo thank you!

When it comes to a small block build, IMO, just have at it and have freakin fun while you do it.

Follow the 5C rule and you’ll be good to go.

 

[Hellrats]

10 years of this BS and you guys still haven't figured it out? They are both great engines!

 

[justinp61]

@crackedback

Not looking to start ****, just clarification, no BS.


This is true IMO. While the advantages are there for this or that thing, it takes extremes to see any benefit or take that advantage.

Making a mention of such advantages or disadvantages is one thing but to preach it as why you should or should not use a particular engine/stroke etc…. Is kind of ridiculous at most levels of engine building to I’d guess an easy 95% of this board and the usage of that percentage builds an engine for.

Lord knows I’ll more than likely not get there myself since the expense of an extreme build is beyond my meager pocket depth.

Anytime anybody brings up a 340 vs 360 question/thread it always turns into a debacle. To split hairs on such items when building a typical street machine or a in general “Hop Up” engine plan is insane. But people love to do it. They can’t help themselves.

Everyone breaks out there slide rulers, abacus’s, scientific calculators, old articles from the old Tyne greats, drag runners, circle track guys, enduro guys, etc right on down the line and profess there accomplishments as if there the right and only way to go about engine building is one of the most funniest things I constantly read over and over again.

Then there’s the outrageous claims like someone has been there and done that down to the engineering level of why and what happens and all I see is **** talking morons making no sense at all.

I’ve had the good fortune of speaking with men that have experimented with the old “ alternative fuel” (Nitro methane) back in the ‘50’s and how they did what they did and why. I wouldn’t apply half of what they did today but yet some guys here will state it as if it’s the way to do things.

Nooooo thank you!

When it comes to a small block build, IMO, just have at it and have freakin fun while you do it.

Follow the 5C rule and you’ll be good to go.

Thank you, that is exactly the explination that I was hoping would get posted. I've said for years that in most builds the short stroke advantage isn't something most guys aren't capable of taking advantage of me included. It will continue to be a virtue to be spouted by internet experts for years to come.

 

[rumblefish360]

And hence why I make plenty of questions.

And then I’m the bad guy…..

LMAO

 

[Rat Bastid]

Thank you, that is exactly the explination that I was hoping would get posted. I've said for years that in most builds the short stroke advantage isn't something most guys aren't capable of taking advantage of me included. It will continue to be a virtue to be spouted by internet experts for years to come.

Exactly. If RPM isn’t your thing you give up power not doing it. Most guys don’t have the stomach for big RPM and that in todays world is 8500 and up.

Building an engine for 6500 RPM in my world is a waste of power.

But cheap assed Chrysler guys want to run the cheapest **** they can find, so that’s what you get.

RPM is King of horsepower. A quick trip to a dragstrip (excluding bracket cars which has retarded engine development by decades) you’ll quickly learn that big torque numbers don’t matter.

And in fact it doesn’t really matter for street/strip either because torque doesn’t move the car.

Those who love to read and speculate but don’t actually test what they read still think torque moves the car and makes it faster, regardless of proof.

As an example, I’ve asked on multiple platforms for years and years to show me a single power/speed calculator based on torque.

Answer: there isn’t one because it’s not what moves the car.

 

[justinp61]

I wonder at what rpm a longer stroke becomes a handicap. Guys like Brett Miller are building high rpm small blocks with longer 4"ish strokes that make huge power and are routinely turned 8500-9000 rpms.

 

[ir3333]

A lifelong racer in my area who has dedicated his life to racing Mopars wrote a book detailing many things he did and why. Most notably was the fact that the engines he raced that produced the highest horsepower never E.T'd the best at the drag strip.The 340 was not a big torque or big hp engine. It was not overly fast back in the day. But it was quick if that makes any sense.It's quick revving characteristics helped it beat many bigger engines making more hp.
There is more to this hobby than who can make the most hp.

 

[Rat Bastid]

I wonder at what rpm a longer stroke becomes a handicap. Guys like Brett Miller are building high rpm small blocks with longer 4"ish strokes that make huge power and are routinely turned 8500-9000 rpms.

Thats right. It can be done. But what is that?? .0001% of Chrysler builds?

 

[rumblefish360]

Building an engine for 6500 RPM in my world is a waste of power.

That’s street machine power, general hot rodding rpm.

And in fact it doesn’t really matter for street/strip either because torque doesn’t move the car.

Those who love to read and speculate but don’t actually test what they read still think torque moves the car and makes it faster, regardless of proof.

As an example, I’ve asked on multiple platforms for years and years to show me a single power/speed calculator based on torque.

Answer: there isn’t one because it’s not what moves the car.

Where’s 273 now?

I wonder at what rpm a longer stroke becomes a handicap. Guys like Brett Miller are building high rpm small blocks with longer 4"ish strokes that make huge power and are routinely turned 8500-9000 rpms.

Ultimately? As in ultimate rpm?

Notice how and what Brett is doing. VERY CAREFULLY

A lifelong racer in my area who has dedicated his life to racing Mopars wrote a book detailing many things he did and why. Most notably was the fact that the engines he raced that produced the highest horsepower never E.T'd the best at the drag strip.The 340 was not a big torque or big hp engine. It was not overly fast back in the day. But it was quick if that makes any sense.It's quick revving characteristics helped it beat many bigger engines making more hp.
There is more to this hobby than who can make the most hp.

Combo combo combo!

 

[rumblefish360]

Thats right. It can be done. But what is that?? .0001% of Chrysler builds?

Brett is using some higher end stuff regular street guys consider race only material. This! IS! The mind set. That’s why. IMO

 

[Rat Bastid]

That’s street machine power, general hot rodding rpm.

Where’s 273 now?

Ultimately? As in ultimate rpm?

Notice how and what Brett is doing. VERY CAREFULLY

Combo combo combo!

That might be street machine stuff in the crowd you hang with but 7500 is street/strip stuff IF you take the Chrysler guys out of it.

Ive said this before but it’s sad that the Chrysler guys are so backwards on this.

7500 is NOTHING. But of course, you can’t run 3.23 gears, a 2200 converter and junk like that.

 

[Rat Bastid]

Brett is using some higher end stuff regular street guys consider race only material. This! IS! The mind set. That’s why. IMO

What “high end“ stuff? A Ritter block? That should be STANDARD on anything making 600 honest HP.

Decent rods? That’s a no brainer.

Crank? You almost never see a broken crank and when you do it’s from a garbage damper.

Heads??? Yeah, if you want to run something with stock architecture then you get what you get. Low power. It is what it is.

Rocker gear? Chrysler guys are the ONLY ones I know who ***** about buying shaft rockers. Every other group writes the check and does it with a smile.

So what exactly is exotic in his builds as far as hard parts go?

 

[rumblefish360]

That might be street machine stuff in the crowd you hang with but 7500 is street/strip stuff IF you take the Chrysler guys out of it.

Generally guys that “Hop Up” there ride don’t turn last 6K and maybe some “Hot Rod” stuff makes it last 6500. The reasoning is street majors and the extra block mods considered to be a lot for a driver air hot driver. In my world, that’s AKA. Baby cams and a drivetrain that grandma can drive.

I agree! An actual street machine is like a bad *** thing to many.
My daily drivers are 6K and I’m fine with it. The S/S rides are at least a min of another 800 rpm.

Ive said this before but it’s sad that the Chrysler guys are so backwards on this.

IDK what to tell ya there!

7500 is NOTHING. But of course, you can’t run 3.23 gears, a 2200 converter and junk like that.

Exactly! A 22/2500 converter is grand man’s daily driver.

 

[justinp61]

Thats right. It can be done. But what is that?? .0001% of Chrysler builds?

Probably. But it’s probably about the same percentage of other makes too.

 

[frosty_the_punk]

Exactly. If RPM isn’t your thing you give up power not doing it. Most guys don’t have the stomach for big RPM and that in todays world is 8500 and up.

Building an engine for 6500 RPM in my world is a waste of power.

But cheap assed Chrysler guys want to run the cheapest **** they can find, so that’s what you get.

RPM is King of horsepower. A quick trip to a dragstrip (excluding bracket cars which has retarded engine development by decades) you’ll quickly learn that big torque numbers don’t matter.

And in fact it doesn’t really matter for street/strip either because torque doesn’t move the car.

Those who love to read and speculate but don’t actually test what they read still think torque moves the car and makes it faster, regardless of proof.

As an example, I’ve asked on multiple platforms for years and years to show me a single power/speed calculator based on torque.

Answer: there isn’t one because it’s not what moves the car.

You're right that horsepower is what moves the car.
Horsepower = Torque x RPM / 5,252

But RPM can't be king. Neither can torque.
It takes both.
Taking one variable in an equation and calling it "the king" doesn't work, that isn't science.

My issue with "rpm is king of horsepower" is that it's just the reverse argument of "torque is king of horsepower"

They're both neglecting the importance of the remaining part of the equation.

Let's really bench-race here.

If you built 21 different small block mopar engines, all with the same compression, cylinder head, cam, intake, etc.

All with an equal bore, let's say 4.04"
But each one had a different stroke length.

1st) with 4.00" stroke
2nd) with 3.900" stroke
3rd) with 3.800" stroke
4th with 3.700" stroke
..etc
...etc
21st) with 2.00" stroke

The biggest engine is a going to displace 410ci, the smallest engine is a 205ci

Do you think *any* of the smaller engines could ever realistically create more horsepower than the larger 410ci with the 4.00" crankshaft?

 

[rumblefish360]

What “high end“ stuff? A Ritter block? That should be STANDARD on anything making 600 honest HP.

What’s a Ritter block cost? It’s high end. If you don’t think so, please shine the light on me who has the better block that’s high end but yet not exotic. I’m all ears on this one for sure.

How about a MP R/R3 block for 600hp?

Decent rods? That’s a no brainer.

Myself and the forum would like to know what you think about what rod for what purpose?

Crank? You almost never see a broken crank and when you do it’s from a garbage damper.

Heads??? Yeah, if you want to run something with stock architecture then you get what you get. Low power. It is what it is.

Yup! It only goes so far. Far enough for a reasonable street car I think.

Rocker gear? Chrysler guys are the ONLY ones I know who ***** about buying shaft rockers. Every other group writes the check and does it with a smile.

I like busting my Chevy friends chops when they say, “Inwas thinking about converting to a shaft rocker, what do you think “

Me; “Should have got a Chrysler because they came stock with that ****!”

So what exactly is exotic in his builds as far as hard parts go?

IDK? I said high end and not exotic. To different categories to me.

 

[justinp61]

Ultimately? As in ultimate rpm?

No, as a 340 vs a 360. At what point does the short stroke become an advantage, power wise? This would be to engines built with the same quality parts.

 

[rumblefish360]

Gotcha. Good question.

This is what I was describing earlier and the person stated he was bowing out of the conversation/thread. That and a few other things.

I’d imagine at the extremes? LOL!

 

[crackedback]

There is NO WAY you can build a series of engines with the same camshaft/valvetrain components in each engine to get the results that the stroke of the engine would require.

That 2" stroke engine is going to have to spin hard to make good HP. Like comparing a nascrap 358 engine that turns 8-9K and an F1 2.4L engine turning 18K while making the same peak 850 HP. One has a 3+ inch stroke the other about 1 5/8" IIRC. There is a reason that F1 cars have 7 speed gearboxes. If given the choice, F1 would run more ratios like 10. Keep the engine in the max power level at all time.

 

[justinp61]

Rumblefish, Thats what I think too.

Unfortunately we as Mopar fans don’t really have any relatively “cheap” blocks or good heads capable of making real power and available components are pretty slim pickings too. For the most part though good or decent rotating parts are a wash across the brands. Mopar guys have never had the parts to choose from that gm and ford guys have, and we never will.

IIRC my T&D rockers were well over $1200, I’ll admit it did make me tear up a bit when I wrote the check. LOL

 

[rumblefish360]

Don’t worry, the Chevy guys are laying that just for the rockers never mind what they mount to and… and!!!!

Make them work right.

Yep! Ahead of the curve yet again…..

 

[273]

A 3.58" stroke isn't a very long stroke. Taking an equal built 340 and 360, 4-5-600hp where is the shorter stroke in an advantage? I doubt that 98% of Mopar guys will ever build an engine to take advantage of the rpm capability of the .27" less stroke.

The rpm advantage of stroke, pistons speed for most don't come into play especially if we're talking same crank material. It's head flow a 360 is gonna need more port to turn the same rpm as a 340.

There one thing were leaving out is a 360 is less than 6% bigger, even though torque is tied to displacement in a narrow ish range but range* is huge enough that a 340 could make same even more torque just needs 6% + more in lbs-ft per cid .

*1:1 to 1.6+:1 lbs-ft:cid

 

[Ironracer]

I agree they run and run good on the street and can be alot of fun. I will always look at a v8 318 valiant or dart even a 4 door they are fun to drive on the street. But I would instantly think"swap in a 360 with 2.5 inch exhaust LOL!"

We bought a 4 door Dart with a cop 360. 400 bucks... Thing was badass, daily driver,drove it home that day