360 vs 383

383 or 360 ?

  • overall, 383 all things considered

    Votes: 31 58.5%

  • overall, 360 all things considered

    Votes: 22 41.5%
  • Total voters
    53
-
318willrun

318willrun

Utube channel 318willrun
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
21,641
Reaction score
28,066
Location
I'm here
Didn't want to derail stroked 340's thread any further. I think this is a really good comparison. I have both now, and in the past. Can we put aside our bias and speak facts, functions and possibilities?

Lets assume same car/gear/transmission & converter. Which do you like best in these 4 scenarios :

  1. 360 4bbl stock vs 383 4bbl stock.
  2. Mildly hopped up for the street
  3. Decently built bracket car engine
  4. Well built-high horsepower race engine.
 
HP matters?? How much HP can a stock 360 block take? How much HP can a stock 383 take? How big can each grow if stroked and bored .060 over? What is the end potential?

Daily Driver? In a daily driver, which is easiest to work on? Does MPG matter? Fitment? Price of parts? Performs well to task be it a pickup or B-body?
 
318willrun said:
Didn't want to derail stroked 340's thread any further. I think this is a really good comparison. I have both now, and in the past. Can we put aside our bias and speak facts, functions and possibilities?

Lets assume same car/gear/transmission & converter. Which do you like best in these 4 scenarios :

  1. 360 4bbl stock vs 383 4bbl stock.
  2. Mildly hopped up for the street
  3. Decently built bracket car engine
  4. Well built-high horsepower race engine.
Click to expand...

Easy, having had all engine and transmission combinations in an A-Body and a 1968 383 Formula S fastback, #1 and #2 scenarios 383 any day, all day.
Not interested in #3 and #4 scenarios
 
Other than size and weight which I don't think either is that good of a reason to discount a 383, the main advantage over 360 obviously is bore size, factory stroke with steel crank gives you the ability to turn just about any rpm you want, Vs a 408 an overbore 383 is fairly close to the 408 in size and add a stroker crank to a 383 will eclipse a 408 in size. Plus it's not hard to get heads with enough port volume for the larger displacements. 383 suffers the same fate as a 318 even though there's nothing wrong with it, other than Chrysler also produced a lot of 400/440 making it the least desirable choice of the 3.

And for the 360 it obviously can make the power most require out of them 300-450 hp and with stroker cranks can go 450-600 hp without crazy rpms, it is smaller and lighter most already have invested in a decent amount in parts for the small block platform for a lot it doesn't make sense to switch.
 
273 said:
Plus a 383 especially rebuilt with an overbore is close enough to 408 size (torque)(lower rpm power), spend the stroker money on the top end instead.
Click to expand...
These are just the "quick and easy" kits available and most commonly used. What it shows is that the 23 cubes difference can end up being 88 cubes difference in a click of a button and about 500 more bucks. There are some wild and crazy builders that do more cubes than these kits, but for the 99.8%, these are the kits used.
 
I'd like to see the #1 and # 2 scenarios as well.
 
Super-Cuda said:
I'd like to see the #1 and # 2 scenarios as well.
Click to expand...
Factory rated in stock form, but there is a big catch in the fact that one is Gross and the other Net.
  • 1968/69 383 4bbl = 335 HP/ 425 ft trq (Gross)
  • 1974 360 4bbl = 245 HP/320 ft trq (Net)
But then there were variances of the 360 4bbl, like the LRE trucks or police cars.
 
318willrun said:
Didn't want to derail stroked 340's thread any further. I think this is a really good comparison. I have both now, and in the past. Can we put aside our bias and speak facts, functions and possibilities?

Lets assume same car/gear/transmission & converter. Which do you like best in these 4 scenarios :
Click to expand...
Problem with same gear & converter is it almost always favors the larger displacement.
318willrun said:
  1. 360 4bbl stock vs 383 4bbl stock.
  2. Mildly hopped up for the street
  3. Decently built bracket car engine
  4. Well built-high horsepower race engine.
Click to expand...
 
OK FACTS. Here are the only two that matter.

360 = 4.00" bore.

383 = 4.250" bore.

Nuff said.
 
I do agree bore size is the main advantage of the 383, mainly cause it allows bigger valve sizes.
But to play a little bit of a Devil's advocate here, a 273 to a 400 bore size difference is 0.715" with just under a 4" being midway so basically 318/360/340. Even a 318 bore is capable of making enough hp to satisfy most even a tiny 273 can make enough for a majority of the people. So a bigger is definitely an advantage but it's an advantage most won't make use of, but for those running 400+ cid and or 600+ hp you probably could take advantage of the bigger bore.
 
This is a good comparison. IMO, both were pretty much dogs from the factory because they were saddled with small hydraulic cams and heavy pistons. I have direct experience driving thousands of miles behind both engines in essentially stock form and I can say with 100% certainty neither were very exciting. Similarly, both run out of air just over 4,000 rpm but that's mostly the cams fault (again, in stock form). I'm not sure if there is a slight torque advantage with the 383 but if there is, it's minimal at best.

In general, I'll take the 360 due to less weight in the front especially in an A body. In a B body I'll take the 383 mostly because a big block fills up the engine bay better. Small block B bodies just don't seem right, ya know?

For me, unless you build either one to rev the piss out of it, both are best when stroked, at least on the street. Don't see half as many stroker 383s out there but there are plenty of stroked 360s. I'm not sure what that says about either engine but there must be something to the fact that people tend to ignore 383s more than 360s.

I built a mild stroked 383 for a friend a couple years ago. It did OK.

438" on the dyno

Race engines are obviously a different story. I'm not going to try and find the current factors/records for each in NHRA stock eliminator but that would be the best measure of their capabilities in non-stroked form. If I had to guess I'd say the 383s might run a bit better but that depends on the combo and class. There's probably stout examples of both.

Maybe old magazine road tests would shed some light on the subject. There was only one year where both were in production at the same time so it may not be apples to apples.
 
  • rmchrgr said:
    This is a good comparison. IMO, both were pretty much dogs from the factory because they were saddled with small hydraulic cams and heavy pistons. I have direct experience driving thousands of miles behind both engines in essentially stock form and I can say with 100% certainty neither were very exciting. Similarly, both run out of air just over 4,000 rpm but that's mostly the cams fault (again, in stock form). I'm not sure if there is a slight torque advantage with the 383 but if there is, it's minimal at best.

    In general, I'll take the 360 due to less weight in the front especially in an A body. In a B body I'll take the 383 mostly because a big block fills up the engine bay better. Small block B bodies just don't seem right, ya know?

    For me, unless you build either one to rev the piss out of it, both are best when stroked, at least on the street. Don't see half as many stroker 383s out there but there are plenty of stroked 360s. I'm not sure what that says about either engine but there must be something to the fact that people tend to ignore 383s more than 360s.

    I built a mild stroked 383 for a friend a couple years ago. It did OK.

    438" on the dyno

    Race engines are obviously a different story. I'm not going to try and find the current factors/records for each in NHRA stock eliminator but that would be the best measure of their capabilities in non-stroked form. If I had to guess I'd say the 383s might run a bit better but that depends on the combo and class. There's probably stout examples of both.

    Maybe old magazine road tests would shed some light on the subject. There was only one year where both were in production at the same time so it may not be apples to apples.
    Click to expand...
    Great post! Thanks! Yes, what car they are going into would be a major factor to me also on which would have the advantage. Fitment is important to me.
 
1971 Polara offered both the 360 2bbl and 383 2bbl. By their numbers....
  • 360 - 255 gross HP / 360 ft lbs
  • 383 - 275 gross HP / 375 ft lbs
 
rmchrgr said:
This is a good comparison. IMO, both were pretty much dogs from the factory because they were saddled with small hydraulic cams and heavy pistons. I have direct experience driving thousands of miles behind both engines in essentially stock form and I can say with 100% certainty neither were very exciting. Similarly, both run out of air just over 4,000 rpm but that's mostly the cams fault (again, in stock form). I'm not sure if there is a slight torque advantage with the 383 but if there is, it's minimal at best.

In general, I'll take the 360 due to less weight in the front especially in an A body. In a B body I'll take the 383 mostly because a big block fills up the engine bay better. Small block B bodies just don't seem right, ya know?

For me, unless you build either one to rev the piss out of it, both are best when stroked, at least on the street. Don't see half as many stroker 383s out there but there are plenty of stroked 360s. I'm not sure what that says about either engine but there must be something to the fact that people tend to ignore 383s more than 360s.

I built a mild stroked 383 for a friend a couple years ago. It did OK.

438" on the dyno

Race engines are obviously a different story. I'm not going to try and find the current factors/records for each in NHRA stock eliminator but that would be the best measure of their capabilities in non-stroked form. If I had to guess I'd say the 383s might run a bit better but that depends on the combo and class. There's probably stout examples of both.

Maybe old magazine road tests would shed some light on the subject. There was only one year where both were in production at the same time so it may not be apples to apples.
Click to expand...
Mopar joe weighed a BB/SB and found just under 60lb difference(i believe it was).. wouldn't the extra bb torque/power make up for that?
 
318willrun said:
1971 Polara offered both the 360 2bbl and 383 2bbl. By their numbers....
  • 360 - 255 gross HP / 360 ft lbs
  • 383 - 275 gross HP / 375 ft lbs
Click to expand...
IMO, it's pretty much a wash and only just proves there's no replacement for displacement. 15 lb/ft of torque is nothing. And at what RPM does the 383 achieve that 20 more hp? Chances are you'd never get to that point with either engine, especially with highway gears in a heavy car. My guess is the only place you'd notice the difference might be when passing someone on the highway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top