400's are they any good?

-
http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1i95accclc47qie57un5r2bff4&topic=78039.0

The 400 is a great block. You can throw just about anything you want to at the 400 block, with just main studs installed. I've a 400 shortblock in the storage room that we are in the process of detuning. It has run as high as 787HP with ported Edelbrock Performer RPM heads, single Dominator, solid roller and 93 octane. All motor, no bottle, no boost.

I guess the url won't post because of the space between the letters in "topic". The engine is listed on dodgecharger.com under 'proven engine combos', 451 with 500+ tq from 3500-7500+ rpm
 
Running a mostly stock 400 in my barracuda. Only modifications are 600cfm carter carb, K&N x-stream filter, 1/2" carb spacer, MSD digital 6AL, Mopar adjustable distributor, crappy headers made for a b-body, and a cheap summit camshaft (very mild grind). Transmission is the stock 727 that came with it, very low stall on the torque converter. 3.23 sure-grip out back with 14" wheels and tires.

Ran a best of 14.60 at 98mph this summer on street tires shifting at 5,000rpm. Much better than I expected for a pretty much stock 400
 
blackhand said:
Running a mostly stock 400 in my barracuda. Only modifications are 600cfm carter carb, K&N x-stream filter, 1/2" carb spacer, MSD digital 6AL, Mopar adjustable distributor, crappy headers made for a b-body, and a cheap summit camshaft (very mild grind). Transmission is the stock 727 that came with it, very low stall on the torque converter. 3.23 sure-grip out back with 14" wheels and tires.

Ran a best of 14.60 at 98mph this summer on street tires shifting at 5,000rpm. Much better than I expected for a pretty much stock 400
Click to expand...

That would pick up signifiantly I bet if you ran a better matched carb.
 
im actually running the same smogger 400 and summit cam with headers a performer intake and a holley 750. i made one free pass a few weeks ago and my mph was pretty close to his. traction was non existent for me though and i ran a 15.4. i think mine should go 13.9 but im going to need a good tire. even with the 750 i was thinking even being so close to stock, it would still like more carb, i used the performer becasue i only had the 666 square bore iron intake and i wanted to run a TQ i tried and it was like an animal when the secondaries opened but i had to ditch it for other issues. im thinking it might take an intake swap to an RPM to get me there, but i need tires first.
this wasnt built to go fast. its a cruiser and was a temporary mill to figure out what i want to build. i would havce gone with a different cam and definitely not the performer if i wanted to go fast. i put almost 5,000 miles on it from when i put it in and drove it for the first time in june.
 
StrokerScamp said:
That would pick up signifiantly I bet if you ran a better matched carb.
Click to expand...

The 318 we have a in 68 Coronet 440 2 door hartop with Summit Racing K6900 cam, electronic ignition, summit headers, weiand 8007 intake, and open element filter and an Edelbrock 1406 600 cfm with a stock/converter 904 and 2.76 gears on 245/60/14 tires ran 15.2 @ 92 mph supposedly.
 
blackhand said:
Running a mostly stock 400 in my barracuda. Only modifications are 600cfm carter carb, K&N x-stream filter, 1/2" carb spacer, MSD digital 6AL, Mopar adjustable distributor, crappy headers made for a b-body, and a cheap summit camshaft (very mild grind). Transmission is the stock 727 that came with it, very low stall on the torque converter. 3.23 sure-grip out back with 14" wheels and tires.

Ran a best of 14.60 at 98mph this summer on street tires shifting at 5,000rpm. Much better than I expected for a pretty much stock 400
Click to expand...

That's real respectable for a stockish 400 with a 3.23 gear. Bigger carb would juice it!!
 
jamesdart said:
the key word
Click to expand...

Yeah, I wish I had a timeslip for our car but, anyways let me know what you think. If you think even stock 400 with a performer intake and good ignition and headers will out run this? Here's the 318 described above now keep in mind the speedometer is off by about 5 mph at 60 mph because of the 275/60/15 tires and the engine does have some blowby and around 185k miles on it?

 
i changed my mind. 400s are all junk. i will take them off your hands and get them out of your way for you for scrap price...
 
400ci Bigblocks are awesome. 4.34" bore (like a .020" over 440) and a 383 stroke......stock.

all are 8.5:1 smog engines....and likewise come with 452' casting heads with hardened valveseats.

btw

I have a 9077S thermoquad off a running good 400 I would sell/trade. I changed to a edelbrock for tuning reasons.

If anyone wants it PM me....I am sure we can reach an agreement.

:cheers:
 
StrokerScamp said:
That would pick up signifiantly I bet if you ran a better matched carb.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm keeping an eye out for a 750 AVS, probably an Edelbrock thunder series. They pop up on craigslist every now and then for $150 or so. Love the adjustable secondaries.
 
DusterKrazy said:
That's real respectable for a stockish 400 with a 3.23 gear. Bigger carb would juice it!!
Click to expand...

Thanks. My 2.42 second 60' times didn't help. Had to launch at about 900 rpm and feather the gas pedal really lightly to keep from spinning the tires. With the 98mph trap speed and horrible 60' time it's easy to see that there's a lot left on the plate. Hopefully my new leaf springs and adjustable shocks will help with this.
 
blackhand said:
Agreed. I'm keeping an eye out for a 750 AVS, probably an Edelbrock thunder series. They pop up on craigslist every now and then for $150 or so. Love the adjustable secondaries.
Click to expand...

Nice carb,I had a 650 on my 318 and loved it. Easy to get parts and change jets etc.

My second choice would be a TQ,but not so easy getting the parts you need.

I wish the aftermarket would step up with a tq tuning kit,like what used to be available. Why? I just think it's a better design..
 
Prine said:
400ci Bigblocks are awesome. 4.34" bore (like a .020" over 440) and a 383 stroke......stock.

all are 8.5:1 smog engines....and likewise come with 452' casting heads with hardened valveseats.

btw

I have a 9077S thermoquad off a running good 400 I would sell/trade. I changed to a edelbrock for tuning reasons.

If anyone wants it PM me....I am sure we can reach an agreement.

:cheers:
Click to expand...

Not all are junk engines. Some of the 4 speed ones had a forged crank. Additionally, I have 346 casting heads on the 400s we have in possession. It is a 73 casting date I think.
 
yeah i thought some came with 346 heads. i also heard of some with forged cranks
 
Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong but, I read from a magazine that one of the reason's the 400s and 440s were kept around through the late 70s was because Chrysler Corp was going to build a "Ball Stud" Hemi off them but, due to regulations and financial pressures the idea was scrapped but, also it is one of the reasons the 400 was also built with a thicker webbing in the block in mind.
 
magnumminded said:
Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong but, I read from a magazine that one of the reason's the 400s and 440s were kept around through the late 70s was because Chrysler Corp was going to build a "Ball Stud" Hemi off them but, due to regulations and financial pressures the idea was scrapped but, also it is one of the reasons the 400 was also built with a thicker webbing in the block in mind.
Click to expand...

Maybe? Thy did build a mock up ball/stud motor and showed it to nascar.
 
magnumminded said:
Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong but, I read from a magazine that one of the reason's the 400s and 440s were kept around through the late 70s was because Chrysler Corp was going to build a "Ball Stud" Hemi off them but, due to regulations and financial pressures the idea was scrapped but, also it is one of the reasons the 400 was also built with a thicker webbing in the block in mind.
Click to expand...

Sure enough...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_ball-stud_hemi

Damn, that's interesting! What could've been...
 
Estimates of the number built vary from three to twelve.


Hmmm and only 1 survived? Wonder which chrysler engineer got that one!
 
I have good things to say about the 400 also. A bigger 383 with low compression. I had a 73 from a C-Body I put in my Challenger with a 727 and 3.55 8 3/4. Rebuilt .030 over, 9:1 pistons, 383 Magnum cam & intake, electronic ignition, headers and a Holley 650 spread bore: great on the street.

They are great stroker candidates and as someone said, some '72s had forged crank.
 
magnumminded said:
Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong but, I read from a magazine that one of the reason's the 400s and 440s were kept around through the late 70s was because Chrysler Corp was going to build a "Ball Stud" Hemi off them but, due to regulations and financial pressures the idea was scrapped but, also it is one of the reasons the 400 was also built with a thicker webbing in the block in mind.
Click to expand...

blackhand said:
Sure enough...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_ball-stud_hemi

Damn, that's interesting! What could've been...
Click to expand...

As I understood it, before reading the write up, which IMO, is incorrect to a degree from other material I have read...... The big blocks were kept mostly due to NOT having a replacement and used until there need/demand dropped badly with no doubt, cause from emissions standards and what they had to do in order to keep it legal.

My '78 P code 400 was what? A whooping 190 - 210 HP or some crazy tihng like that.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but, one of the reasons the 360 was brought out was to offer an alternative at first to the 383 2bbl engine. Anyways, let's not forget about the 400HP engines with the higher lift camshaft that was rated between 245-255 ponies depending on the year and application.
 
magnumminded said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, one of the reasons the 360 was brought out was to offer an alternative at first to the 383 2bbl engine.
Click to expand...

IDK about that. I never heard of that. What I heard .....LOL..... was the 400 was brought out to replace the 383 and the 360 was brought out to replace the 340.


Anyways, let's not forget about the 400HP engines with the higher lift camshaft that was rated between 245-255 ponies depending on the year and application.
Click to expand...

Considering the engine output in the way it was measured, I think with the old method, the numbers would have been very comparable to the 383. With both engines, ( 360 - 400 ) The Government emissions standards killed the rated HP. Between the two, Gov. reg's and new way of testing HP, these engines got a bad rap. "It's a P.O.S. smog motor. Worthless."
 
Yeah the net ratings are more true except for the earlier 383HP which was what it was and had the pistons not too far down in the chamber. Now the 71 383HP is a different story. The 400HP is the same power when you convert from gross to net power figures.

Here's something to think of though. If the 360 was a replacement for the 340 then why was it not offered the the lighter cars it's 1st year out. In 71 it was available in the C-Body and not sure about truck/van applications. Just something to think about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top