383 = no love

-
...i wonder how a 340 with a 3.79 stroke would stack up to a stock .060 over 383 with similar flowing heads and the same cam and carb.Both would be about 389 cu. in.
the 340 would be 3.79 stroke but the 383 would be 3.38?

Probably pretty similar to the 383 Chev vs mopar. Unless we're talking about a rpm 3.79 can't turn and some point the bigger bore will win.
 
Some of yall are forgetting something. Marketing. The 340 was always a performance engine. It never came with a two barrel. It was never a low performance engine.

The 383 was. It served in everything from grandma's Sunday go to church car to taxi cabs, dump trucks, and everything in between.

Had Chrysler advertised the 383 strongly, it might have over shadowed the 340.

Sorta like Chevy. The Corvette LT1 in 1970 was 370HP. The same EXACT engine in the Camaro was 360HP. The Corvette had to be king of the hill....just like the 340.

Yall keep beatin the dead horse, but the 340 will lose every time in an equal playing field.
 
would the longer 3.79 stroke make more torque at lo rpm, say 2000- 2500 rpm?

That was the point I was trying to make with that shootout that it's cubic inch that makes torque so at low rpm there both even.
 
I'm a fan of the 340 just like any mopar guy, but I also love the 383. I like 318 will runs comparison. Take a 71 RR, same options, gearing, tranny, etc. 383 vs 340. Okay there you go. 340 a bodies were one thing, but not a fair comparison to a heavier 383 b body.
 
I'm a fan of the 340 just like any mopar guy, but I also love the 383. I like 318 will runs comparison. Take a 71 RR, same options, gearing, tranny, etc. 383 vs 340. Okay there you go. 340 a bodies were one thing, but not a fair comparison to a heavier 383 b body.

That's right. With the 340 A body, it's about the whole package. Equal the packages out and the BIG BLOCK will beat the SMALL BLOCK.
 
Some of yall are forgetting something. Marketing. The 340 was always a performance engine. It never came with a two barrel. It was never a low performance engine.

The 383 was. It served in everything from grandma's Sunday go to church car to taxi cabs, dump trucks, and everything in between.
Advertising dollars, achieved by advertising hype. Young kids wanted fast cars, advertising inflated numbers helped profit margins...
Had Chrysler advertised the 383 strongly, it might have over shadowed the 340.

Sorta like Chevy. The Corvette LT1 in 1970 was 370HP. The same EXACT engine in the Camaro was 360HP. The Corvette had to be king of the hill....just like the 340.

Yall keep beatin the dead horse, but the 340 will lose every time in an equal playing field.
 
That's right. With the 340 A body, it's about the whole package. Equal the packages out and the BIG BLOCK will beat the SMALL BLOCK.
not only beat it, but spank it. lol been there done that ! stroked 340 is the exception. lmao he still can't beat the truck.
in the early days, the 383 was easy to hop up for serious street duty in a light weight car. my brother and I were shoehorning big blocks in a-bodys in the 70's,
my 383 67 fastback , a 65 and 67 440 powered darts. my brothers 65 was flat out nasty and dangerous.
 
not only beat it, but spank it. lol been there done that ! stroked 340 is the exception. lmao he still can't beat the truck.
in the early days, the 383 was easy to hop up for serious street duty in a light weight car. my brother and I were shoehorning big blocks in a-bodys in the 70's,
my 383 67 fastback , a 65 and 67 440 powered darts. my brothers 65 was flat out nasty and dangerous.
First experience,in a Mopar: 383 stock short block: WELL PORTED 906's, .484 Purple,TM-7, 4:56 - ish gears.... Went a best of 11.70 @ 114 at Bakersfield...... Any guess,on my choice?
70 Challenger,full trim...b.t.w.....
 
Some of yall are forgetting something. Marketing. The 340 was always a performance engine. It never came with a two barrel. It was never a low performance engine.

The 383 was. It served in everything from grandma's Sunday go to church car to taxi cabs, dump trucks, and everything in between.

Had Chrysler advertised the 383 strongly, it might have over shadowed the 340.


This is pretty much on the money.

I've got a buddy who insists the 360 is junk while never thinking the 360 is a smog era engine. And, much like the 383, served duty in everything across the board. It's funny the 400 has never been seen that way, even though it took over the roll.

The 383 doesn't get a lot of love simply because it's not associated with performance. Too many people think about the 383 two barrel grandma had in her Polera. That and the fact that dollar for dollar it's the same cost to build a 440. Why start at the disadvanatage of the smaller cubes? It's the same never ending debate when people build a 318.

I've got a soft spot for 383's. You can usually pick them up cheap and with a little bit of love and not a lot of money, they can be made to run.
 
Doesn't matter which is faster or more powerful.
It was the reputation the smaller 340 in an A body had in the late 60's,when quite often they outperformed 68 383 Chargers or Roadrunners on the street and the strip.
You can build your 383 to 660 hp but to the guys who lived through that era the 340 will always be their favourite.
 
Doesn't matter which is faster or more powerful.
It was the reputation the smaller 340 in an A body had in the late 60's,when quite often they outperformed 68 383 Chargers or Roadrunners on the street and the strip.
You can build your 383 to 660 hp but to the guys who lived through that era the 340 will always be their favourite.


True that..
 
I had a completely stock 66 Chevelle SS 396, 325hp. On 205/75/14 white walls, it ran low 15s. It was sad but that's about all they did.
Now that was a taxi engine. No offence intended. Actually a station wagon engine like the Ford 390. Now the L78, that 396 moved, forged crank, solid lifter and all!
 
Doesn't matter which is faster or more powerful.
It was the reputation the smaller 340 in an A body had in the late 60's,when quite often they outperformed 68 383 Chargers or Roadrunners on the street and the strip.
You can build your 383 to 660 hp but to the guys who lived through that era the 340 will always be their favourite.
And when I a kid, my brother had a 340 Demon. He built the engine and took out everything and everybody. Big Block chevies... didn't matter. As I've stated, the 340 is an awesome engine. However, was the mentality that lame that folks couldn't see why a 3100 lbs '70 Duster with 340 and 3.55's could take out a 3900 lbs '70 Coronet 383 with 3.23's? lol....
 
This is pretty much on the money.

I've got a buddy who insists the 360 is junk while never thinking the 360 is a smog era engine. And, much like the 383, served duty in everything across the board. It's funny the 400 has never been seen that way, even though it took over the roll.

The 383 doesn't get a lot of love simply because it's not associated with performance. Too many people think about the 383 two barrel grandma had in her Polera. That and the fact that dollar for dollar it's the same cost to build a 440. Why start at the disadvanatage of the smaller cubes? It's the same never ending debate when people build a 318.

I've got a soft spot for 383's. You can usually pick them up cheap and with a little bit of love and not a lot of money, they can be made to run.

My uncle is like that and thinks 360 and 383 suck cause he smoked them all day long with his 340 duster. It's just no one built them up back then. Just like my 400 ford it's considered a turd of an engine until it's started winning engine masters challenge.

Just like 340 440 gets all the love in the big block arena for good reason biggest engine with almost the biggest bore. Same with 400 no one cares to build them stock stroke since they win biggest bore slightly and are low deck they make a great 450-500 cid engine while 440 is better over 500 cid.
I'd probably never build a stock stroke 383
even thought after boring it's just slightly under everyone's favorite 408 for a lot less dollars and just as capable. But just a simple 440 crank swap brings it to an almost 440 size engine 431 with a decent bore just slightly under stock 440 after boring far from small and can be stroked to 496 if needed.

If you going for 450-550 hp I think 383 is a perfect platform it's only gonna be about 20 cid less than the same stroked 400. It's definitely not a small bore but after boring it's pretty much on part with stock 440 bore.
If stroked out to 431 it's gonna make the 450-550 hp in the 5000-6000 peak range which is see as perfect as a decent hot street engine.
 
Yup the 383 is the weakest of the big blocks..just like the 318 is the lamest of the small blocks:D:D
oh my.....:rolleyes:
If we made a list of the dumbest quotes in 2016, you'd own the whole list no matter how long... (sigh)
FYI, they made a 361 big block. The 383 is a bored out 361. No, the 383 is not the weakest of the big blocks.
And, the 318 is not the weakest of the small blocks. They made a 273. The 273 2bbl had no chance against a 318 2bbl. I've owned both and driven both many times.
 
Someday...this will rise from the dead!

Engine (2).jpg
 
Same with 400 no one cares to build them stock stroke

Seems that way. They either turn them into a 451 or they don't use them.
I only know what I experienced. I think the 400 is just a load of potential waiting to be released. I took a 400 2bbl and threw it in a D150. I didn't rebuild it, nor did I even check it out to see what the compression or anything was. I just threw a 4bbl and headers on it when I installed it.
I ran 14.50 with it. Yes, that's right! See how many factory muscle cars ran faster, including the beloved 340 Dusters. And I put it in a truck, not a Duster....

:eek:Wait, not a D150 with 3.21's and a LC 400 2bbl motor that the long block had never been taken apart? Your talking the lowest compression (factory), a broom stick for a cam, untouched 452 heads, 3.21 gears.
:eek:

If I would have cleaned up the heads, put a little healthier cam in it, and raised the compression, this truck would have been a rock'n and a roll'n. Not to mention if I'd of added gears.... or a decent converter.
 
And when I a kid, my brother had a 340 As I've stated, the 340 is an awesome engine. However, was the mentality that lame that folks couldn't see why a 3100 lbs '70 Duster with 340 and 3.55's could take out a 3900 lbs '70 Coronet 383 with 3.23's? lol....

Exactly the reason 383 gets no love!
The 3900 lb B body with the 335 hp 383 was just a poor package for high performance, and that's what everybody remembers.
...Just don't underestimate a built 383 with gears and a converter!
 
-
Back
Top