340 Vs 360

[frosty_the_punk]

What even is the argument for picking the 340 over a 360 when starting a new build?

As far as I can tell any potential advantages of a building a 340 over a 360 are unlikely to ever be realized in most street/strip builds.

340 has smaller mains, giving slightly reduced friction. As well as a shorter stroke, possibly reducing windage.

340 has slightly bigger bore, giving slightly less valve shrouding. IMO this is splitting hairs.

340 has a better rod/stroke ratio for high rpm, but in 99% of applications this benefit isn't even measurable since it only becomes relevant at extreme rpm which is $$$.

That's it. These factors aren't even worthy of consideration for most builds.

On the other hand, the 360 has advantages that are basically always relevant, and always be realized.

20 more cubes is almost 6% larger in displacement. That basically means 6% more torque.

Then additionally, The 360 is also far more plentiful and affordable. They made them until 2001!

Bottom line, there may be exceptions to the rule. But as a rule any theoretical architectural advantage of the smaller 340 for extreme rpm development is more than offset by the 20 cube disadvantage which is quite substantial.

340's are cool.
But a 360 makes more sense if you wanna make power.

 

[Mean416]

What even is the argument for picking the 340 over a 360 when starting a new build?

As far as I can tell any potential advantages of a building a 340 over a 360 are unlikely to ever be realized in most street/strip builds.

340 has smaller mains, giving slightly reduced friction. As well as a shorter stroke, possibly reducing windage.

340 has slightly bigger bore, giving slightly less valve shrouding. IMO this is splitting hairs.

340 has a better rod/stroke ratio for high rpm, but in 99% of applications this benefit isn't even measurable since it only becomes relevant at extreme rpm which is $$$.

That's it. These factors aren't even worthy of consideration for most builds.

On the other hand, the 360 has advantages that are basically always relevant, and always be realized.

20 more cubes is almost 6% larger in displacement. That basically means 6% more torque.

Then additionally, The 360 is also far more plentiful and affordable. They made them until 2001!

Bottom line, there may be exceptions to the rule. But as a rule any theoretical architectural advantage of the smaller 340 for extreme rpm development is more than offset by the 20 cube disadvantage which is quite substantial.

340's are cool.
But a 360 makes more sense if you wanna make power.

Yep. You hit the nail on the head. Some people love thinking about the little things. They think if you do all these tiny things they read about in hot rod magazine and all the nonsense you see from the snake oil salesmen on YouTube that all of a sudden you're gonna have a screamer.

That longer arm is gonna trump all those little second order things pretty much every single time.

 

[rumblefish360]

The women replies….
(AKA - Wants to argue….)

Show me the quote, edit* just notice you did lol

In that quote I said displacement not cid, yes displacement can be used for cid

And she turns to “Man-splaining” and word manipulation with twists to prove she is right never admitting there mistake or there wrong.

but obviously that's not what I was talking about, I was talking cubic feet (displacement) per minute CFM.
What I call dynamic displacement (running engine).

Further blueing the message given, not as written she says!
Pathetic!

This thread is 10 years old the argument i've made now is practically the same 10 years ago, i've been pretty consistent.

Consistently wrong.

That's your opinion, but for me to be dead wrong you'd have believe in the opposite of everything I've said which would be ridiculous

Opinion? Oh heck I can’t load enough smiles of LMAO on that one.
I pointed out your own exact words where your wrong and you still argue your right.

A true women!

Your the one who continually asks me explain myself all the time,

Because your unclear and write confusing or contradicting statements.

I rarely start conversations with you anymore cause they go nowhere,

It’s because your womanly instincts forbid you to think logically and accept your wrong or learn anything.

I just made a statement just like everyone else has take or leave I don't care if you agree some do some don't it's all good. So you don't want me answer your questions from now on?

Answer me if you like. If you don’t and it’s a muddy, unclear or wrong statement, I’ll just keep on doing what I do and call you, or anybody else out on it.

If I’m wrong, 99.9% of the time, it gets clearly explained to me. That missing .01% is you.

 

[rumblefish360]

Man! I like the way this guy thinks. It takes extremes to have the small things materialize for that measurable difference. As in the ones you can clearly see at the track. On the street, not so much.

Where ya from Frosty?

What even is the argument for picking the 340 over a 360 when starting a new build?

As far as I can tell any potential advantages of a building a 340 over a 360 are unlikely to ever be realized in most street/strip builds.

340 has smaller mains, giving slightly reduced friction. As well as a shorter stroke, possibly reducing windage.

340 has slightly bigger bore, giving slightly less valve shrouding. IMO this is splitting hairs.

340 has a better rod/stroke ratio for high rpm, but in 99% of applications this benefit isn't even measurable since it only becomes relevant at extreme rpm which is $$$.

That's it. These factors aren't even worthy of consideration for most builds.

On the other hand, the 360 has advantages that are basically always relevant, and always be realized.

20 more cubes is almost 6% larger in displacement. That basically means 6% more torque.

Then additionally, The 360 is also far more plentiful and affordable. They made them until 2001!

Bottom line, there may be exceptions to the rule. But as a rule any theoretical architectural advantage of the smaller 340 for extreme rpm development is more than offset by the 20 cube disadvantage which is quite substantial.

340's are cool.
But a 360 makes more sense if you wanna make power.

 

[Mean416]

if you give the 360 all the 340 attributes...better heads, higher compression etc. then you
have to give the 340 a 3.58 stroke, lighter pistons etc.
You 360 guys all want to use the good 340 parts but keep the larger displacement advantage.
if you match each with parts that are useable and shared the 340 will have smaller bearings and
a bigger bore.

Who are "360 guys"?

Your logic is flawed. The comparison is between a 340 and a 360. Stock for stock, yeah a 340 probably will win but who here cares? Answer nobody.

Now, given two generic engines, otherwise similarly built, similar quality parts, machining etc, the one with the longer stroke will win 99% of the time.

You might even say I'm a "big stroke" guy. I'll let the "little stroke" guys worry about little stuff.

 

[NC Engine Builder]

Yep. You hit the nail on the head. Some people love thinking about the little things. They think if you do all these tiny things they read about in hot rod magazine and all the nonsense you see from the snake oil salesmen on YouTube that all of a sudden you're gonna have a screamer.

That longer arm is gonna trump all those little second order things pretty much every single time.

Jesus H christ be careful......there are UTG fanboys and now david vizard fanboys that would have a mental breakdown if they read that. And your correct

 

[rumblefish360]

Jesus H christ be careful......there are UTG fanboys and now david vizard fanboys that would have a mental breakdown if they read that. And your correct

Some just can’t accept the bigger is better notion that’s been proven over and over.

In the long run, build what ever makes you happy and to have fun! Dang!

 

[fishmens67]

The cylinder head and intake are the defining factor in making power.
You can have all the stroke in the world, without a good flowing cylinder head and intake it's just another tractor motor.

 

[Mean416]

Some just can’t accept the bigger is better notion that’s been proven over and over.

In the long run, build what ever makes you happy and to have fun! Dang!

Hahaha yeah you're right. I hope to one day graduate to the big block forum so I can argue about 440s v 400s.

 

[fishmens67]

The 440 was a factory tractor motor. lol

 

[Mean416]

Sure thing lol

 

[a-bodyguy]

The 440 was a factory tractor motor. lol

spray fixes that quick
cheats it anyway

 

[318willrun]

The 440 was a factory tractor motor. lol

the 440 is one of the few "factory" motors that I can say pull in 3rd gear (727) like it's in first gear. The biggest difference with the 440 and per say a "spunky" 340 isn't so much in the stop light wars, but when the gearing unfavorable and the wind resistance is a force, the 440 pulls like no other engine (factory). One that was on que with it was my brothers 71 (or was it '70 ??) 454 vette, that somebody changed to headers. I think that 454 had over 500 ft lbs and 390 hp is what the console plate said ??????

 

[TF360]

Who are "360 guys"?

Your logic is flawed. The comparison is between a 340 and a 360. Stock for stock, yeah a 340 probably will win but who here cares? Answer nobody.

Now, given two generic engines, otherwise similarly built, similar quality parts, machining etc, the one with the longer stroke will win 99% of the time.

You might even say I'm a "big stroke" guy. I'll let the "little stroke" guys worry about little stuff.

I don't think so. The 1974 E58 360 made more power than the 72-73 340, and just as much as the 70-71 340. They were only rated differently gross-net. Same 1/4 mile times

 

[TF360]

None of the 74's had the 3:91 gearing either

 

[Mean416]

Again, I just find all this bickering about 318 v 340 v 360 crap is asinine, and worse, it's misleading to people who are trying to learn.

Nobody really gives two shts about a stock 1970 340 vs a stock RAM 1500 with a 318 vs a 1974 charger with a 360. All SB mopars are good motors with good power potential.

Except for 273s now those are worthless.....

 

[rumblefish360]

 

[rumblefish360]

 

[Mean416]

 

[crackedback]

the 440 is one of the few "factory" motors that I can say pull in 3rd gear (727) like it's in first gear. The biggest difference with the 440 and per say a "spunky" 340 isn't so much in the stop light wars, but when the gearing unfavorable and the wind resistance is a force, the 440 pulls like no other engine (factory). One that was on que with it was my brothers 71 (or was it '70 ??) 454 vette, that somebody changed to headers. I think that 454 had over 500 ft lbs and 390 hp is what the console plate said ??????

You get a whole different pull from a well tuned hemi car...

 

[Mean416]

You get a whole different pull from a well tuned hemi car...

No... that's just torque. That's a tractor motor.

 

[fishmens67]

Sure thing lol

The 440 was a factory tractor motor. lol

They ran out of poop at 1310 ft only to be passed in the end. lol

 

[fishmens67]

No... that's just torque. That's a tractor motor.

Can't compare a 440 to 426 hemi or 413/426 max.
440 was just a passenger car engine in respect to those, 440 was suited for moving heavy cars and trucks. tractor. lol

 

[Mean416]

Hey. To each his own. You do you. I'd gladly take a nice tractor motor. Especially once that makes my car wheelie.

 

[a-bodyguy]

You get a whole different pull from a well tuned hemi car...

ls-6 was rated 450 hp
it however did not make that number with exhaust manifolds
overrated hp from the factory
my buddy had one 2 1/8 headers tunnel ram 2 660s m-22 3.55s sounded insane those carbs