AJ's Opinion; Just for you 318 streeters

[AJ/FormS]

I am not a 318 hater.
I'm gonna tell you how it is, and you decide for yourselves.
On the street,
hi-rpm power means almost nothing because on the way to 60/65 mph,you only pass thru the power-peak once.
But, the vast majority of the time, a streeter is between idle and less than 4000rpm, and usually at Part Throttle.
Cylinder pressure makes heat, and heat is power.
More cylinder volume when the intake valve closes, at a higher pressure, makes more power, and specifically more low-rpm power; and it can be measured and quantified as V/P. Read about V/P here V/P Index Calculation
Here is my opinion of V/P, on the street;
160 or more is overkill with plenty of tire-frying
140 is a fun number
130 is about the min. for street-fun, barely chirps skinny tires with streeter type gears
120 is way too weak for me
110 is atrocious
100 super lo-performance.
What does it mean?
well, at 800ft;
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P
the '69 hi-C, 9.0 rated 318 comes in at about 129VP
the 8/1 318 with a 340 cam, 84VP
the 10.5 340,........... at about 128
the 8.5 340 at ........................ 97
the 8.5 360 4bbl, at about ..... 104
the 8.0 360 2bbl at ............... 122
So that gives you something to think about. As you can see, the 318 has both the lowest and the highest in this ranking.
So what is it that makes this possible?
Answer; this is a two-parter;
1) Effective cylinder size when compression begins, and
2) the Effective Dcr.
The 8/1 318 with a 2bbl cam has a mathematical cylinder volume of 652.27cc
but by the time the intake closes, the Effective stroke is down to 2.86 inches, so... the Effective cylinder volume is down to 562.7cc, and the Scr of 8/1 has dropped to an Effective Dcr of 6.88
Now, hear this; Any engine no matter it's size, that produces the same or similar VPs, will, at the lower rpms (up to about 3000rpm), have similar performance.
>lemmee show you;
69 440Magnum 134VP/ Effective stroke 2.58/ E-volume of 620cc @ 7.38 E-Dcr
69 318 / VP of 132 / Effective stroke of 2.86/ E-volume of.. 563cc @7.74 E-Dcr
69 340 / VP of 128/ Effective stroke 2.52/ E-volume of ..... 529cc @ 8.06 E-Dcr
So as you can see, the Effective numbers are all over the place. Yet the VPs are very similar. Try this; take the volume and divide it by the E-Dcr.
the 440 comes to ........ 84.0,
The early 318 comes to 72.7
and the 340 to ............ 65.7
Notice the similar progressions.
>Now, as a 318 owner, you already know what the bottom end of your engine feels like. Lemmee show you what happens to it with a bigger cam;
'73 318 at 8/1, VP of 110, Ica of 50*
at 54*Ica, VP drops to 104
at 58*Ica, VP drops to 97, 273 sized
at 62*Ica, VP drops to 91
at 66*Ica, VP drops to 84, slanty sized
Each of these Ica's represents about one cam size. Notice how fast the VP plummets.
Next;
lets raise the compression by .4 per step with the 318 2bbl cam (50* Ica),and see what happens;
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P;
at 8.4 the VP climbs to 118
at 8.8 to 125
at 9.2 to 133 target minimum reached
at 9.6 to 141 fun target reached
at 10.0 to 148
at 10.4 to 156, tire-fryer
You see how FAST the VP climbs?

So now we have seen how the Ica affects the VP in an 8/1 engine, and also how the VP climbs with Scr. Now lets see what happens when we add cubic inches to an 8/1 engine, while keeping the Ica at 50*
the 273 would start out at......................... 95VP
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P
the 340 would come in at 118VP
the 360 at...................... 126VP
the 408 at...................... 143VP
Wow! look at how those numbers jump!
And how about elevation?
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P @ 800ft
By 1600 it has dropped to 107.
By 2400 to 104
by 3200 to 100
by 5000 to 93, back in slanty territory.

But of course no sane 318 owner, when contemplating performance, desires to keep the cam stock. Why? Aye there's the rub. Cuz they all want their engines to have that big cam sound, right.
But as I have shown you, that later-closing intake valve, drives the Dcr right into the basement, and low-rpm performance, right along with it.I mean look at the 318 with the 340 cam above; the 8/1 318 with a 340 cam, 84VP. 84 is slanty territory! Do you really want your burbling 318 to take off with slanty performance?
So there you go, you decide.

Each one size bigger cam, with NO OTHER changes, will move the top of the powerband up about 200rpm. While also moving the Torque-peak up a similar amount, and the bottom end torque falls away easily half that, because of the loss of cylinder pressure/VP.
Going from a 318 cam of 50* Ica to just two sizes bigger, say 58*Ica, will move the power from about 4200 to 4600. That 400rpm is where the power comes from. Say you had 280 ftlbs at 4200= 224 hp. Now say you moved that 280 up to 4600; the new power would be 245 hp sounds sweet right. But what about the power loss at say 2000 stall? That's gonna hurt. And there is only one way to get it back,namely more pressure/more VP.
Now, you can work around it with a higher stall, and or a bigger rear gear. But those carry other downsides. And they do not address the fact that the low Dcr is affecting the power of your engine all the way from stall to shift rpm. AND by the time you pay somebody to install the TC and gears, you could have fixed the problem by one of the other three ways namely; cylinder pressure, Ica, or cubes.
You decide...............

Now, for Performance, here are the yardsticks I use;
10 pounds per horsepower/ 1.0hp per cubic inch.
why?
well, cuz these numbers make for a fun car. By the time you get to 12 pounds per cubic inch, at 1.0 hp per cube, maintaining the performance is gonna take gears and stall. Pretty soon the car is no longer a DD and no longer a dual-purpose machine. So it sits in the carport 6 days out of seven, with the gas going stale, and the brake rotors rusting, and the tires rotting. Time goes by and you realize that, you almost never drive it any more. But you got 20/30G stuck in it, which you will never get out of it. Then one day you hit the starter, and three valves are stuck in the guides, and that's that.
So, by my yardstick, a 318 is fine in a race-ready 3180 pound car at 318 horsepower. That will be a lot of fun at 800 ft elevation. The same amount of fun as a 360/360hp in a 3600 pound car. Or a 4400 pound pick-up with a 440/440hp.
I don't hate the 318
It's just hard to find a 3180 race-weight chassis, me in it. and
building a 318/318hp is NOT cheap nor easy.
You decide.
Why does it have to be 318/318 hp?
Cuz if Ima gonna spend all my hard earned cash, I don't want no slouch engine. And I don't want to do it twice or three times anymore.
1.0 hp per cube is a fairly realistic and easy target to attain.The engine is street friendly if a lil hard on gas. After that it starts getting expensive, and
by 1.1 it's getting harder/ pricier, especially with the smaller, small-blocks..
By 1.2 the engine is or has, leaving/left streetability behind.
By 1.3, honestly, give your head a shake, you shouldda started with a bigger engine.
You decide.
I tried to keep my bias out of this as best as I could.

 

[AJ/FormS]

I tried to keep my bias out of this as best as I could.

And now, the rest of the story.
Most of our long wb A-bodies are gonna come around 3400 pounds plus driver. Duster and Demons being lighter. For me that sums to 3650 in my 68 Barracuda tank. Power steering, Power brakes, Four speed with a GVod, and an 8.75 in the back. NO A/C,lol. Heavy everything; springs,bars,shocks, tires; but lightweight wheels.
By my yardstick a 3600pound car then needs a [email protected]/cube.
but lets say your 318 car comes in at 3200 pounds with you in it. At 1.0 hp per cube=318 hp. You got the power. But that power is at 5200 or more rpm. At 2500 to 3500 where you do most of your driving, you gave up low-rpm power to get that hi-rpm power. So the bottom has gone soft. So you slap a 3000TC on it and 3.91s and everybody is happy, right. Well maybe, if you don't mind 65=3400 rpm, and 9 mpgs.
Say your engine makes 280 ftlbs at 3000 stall, that is 160hp at WOT. Say your car requires 40 hp to cruise at 65mph; that is 25% of available power.
Say you had a 360/318hp which is .88hp per cube. But with the extra cubes comes more low-rpm torque. Furthermore, the much smaller cam required to make the smaller absolute power, also makes more low-rpm torque. So now, you don't need to run the 3000 anymore, nor the 3.91 gears. You still need the same 40 hp to cruise with, so say you choose a 2400TC and 3.23s. Now 65=2750 or so. Suppose this 360 makes the same absolute power of 160hp but now at 2750 rpm. And you are still using 25% of it to cruise with...... but the rpm has dropped from 3400 to 2750. That's down to 81%; good deal. And you still have the same 318 hp at the top, but now maybe it comes in 600 rpm sooner; that's an even better deal.
Of course, with the 360, you could run a lil more than 3.23 gears and a bit more than 2200 stall, and have a whole lotta more fun, versus the 318 which, as to streetability, is as good as maxed out.
Now, you might think that from 3180 pounds to 3600, is only 420 pounds, which is correct, but that 420 pounds at WOT represents 42 hp. And to take a 318 from 318 hp to 360hp without killing the bottom-end, normally aspirated, is as good impossible, unless your pockets are very deep indeed.
There's lots of ways to get 318hp from a 318. But to get to 360hp is gonna take a very specific plan.
There's lots of more ways to get to 318 hp from a 360, and 360 hp is not very difficult. In fact, the 360 practically falls together at 320 hp. And 360hp is only two cam sizes away. And 400 hp is still only 1.1 hp per cube. Hi compression, good flowing heads, and a 230* cam will get you there at 800ft elevation. At 3600 pounds this is 9pounds per horsepower, and I guarantee you, this is really big street fun. Second gear drifting with 3.23s kindof fun.Two-gear tire-frying, all the way to redline. And sub 8 seconds to 90plus mph, kindof fun..
Now, at 3180 pounds, this would be entirely doable with a 318; see,
I am not a 318 hater.
Now go find a 3180 pound, you in it, A-body, and knock yourself out.

This is why the 340 Dusters and Demons got the reputation; 3300 pound car including driver, lots of tire space, and with close to 300hp, without headers! All you had to do with those cars was install headers, and a bigger carb, and you were in the 13s. Wait, who else was in the 13s? Hyup, stock hemi-Es; Challengers and Cudas.. In that era, 13s was fast.
Chit, a 13 second streeter is still fast today, lol.

 

[shittyslant6]

I am not a 318 hater.
I'm gonna tell you how it is, and you decide for yourselves.
On the street, hi-rpm power means almost nothing because on the way to 60/65 mph,you only pass thru the power-peak once.
But, the vast majority of the time, a streeter is between idle and less than 4000rpm, and usually at Part Throttle.
Cylinder pressure makes heat, and heat is power.
More cylinder volume when the intake valve closes, at a higher pressure, makes more power, and specifically more low-rpm power; and it can be measured and quantified as V/P. Read about V/P here V/P Index Calculation
Here is my opinion of V/P, on the street;
160 or more is overkill with plenty of tire-frying
140 is a fun number
130 is about the min. for street-fun, barely chirps skinny tires with streeter type gears
120 is way too weak for me
110 is atrocious
100 super lo-performance.
What does it mean?
well, at 800ft;
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P
the '69 hi-C, 9.0 rated 318 comes in at about 129VP
the 8/1 318 with a 340 cam, 84VP
the 10.5 340, at about 128
the 8.5 340 at 97
the 8.5 360 4bbl, at about 104
the 8.0 360 2bbl at 122
So that gives you something to think about. As you can see, the 318 has both the lowest and the highest in this ranking.
So what is that makes this possible?
Answer; this is a two-parter;
1) Effective cylinder size when compression begins, and
2) the Effective Dcr.
The 8/1 318 with a 2bbl cam has a mathematical cylinder volume of 652.27cc
but by the time the intake closes, the Effective stroke is down to 2.86 inches, so... the Effective cylinder volume is down to 562.7cc, and the Scr of 8/1 has dropped to an Effective Dcr of 6.88
Now, hear this; Any engine no matter it's size, that produces the same or similar VPs, will, at the lower rpms (up to about 3000rpm), have similar performance.
>lemmee show you;
69 440Magnum 134VP/ Effective stroke 2.58/ Effective volume of [email protected] E-Dcr
69 318 / VP of 132 / Effective stroke of 2.86/Effective volume of [email protected]
69 340 / VP of 128/ Effective stroke 2.52/ Effective volume of [email protected] E-Dcr
So as you can see, the Effective numbers are all over the place. Yet the VPs are very similar. Try this; take the volume and divide it by the E-Dcr.
the 440 comes to ........ 84.0,
The early 318 comes to 72.7
and the 340 to ............ 65.7
Notice the similar progressions.
>Now, as a 318 owner, you already know what the bottom end feels like. Lemmee show you what happens to it with a bigger cam;
'73 318 at 8/1, VP of 110, Ica of 50*
at 54*Ica, VP drops to 104
at 58*Ica, VP drops to 97
at 62*Ica, VP drops to 91
at 66*Ica, VP drops to 84
Each of these Ica's represents about one cam size. Notice how fast the VP plummets.
Next;
lets raise the compression by .4 per step with the 318 2bbl cam (50* Ica),and see what happens;
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P;
at 8.4 the VP climbs to 118
at 8.8 to 125
at 9.2 to 133
at 9.6 to 141
at 10.0 to 148
at 10.4 to 156
You see how FAST the VP climbs?

So now we have seen how the Ica affects the VP in an 8/1 engine, and also how the Scr climbs with Scr. Now lets see what happens when we add cubic inches to an 8/1 engine, while keeping the Ica at 50*
the 273 would start out at......................... 95VP
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P
the 340 would come in at 118VP
the 360 at...................... 126VP
the 408 at...................... 143VP
Wow! look at how those numbers jump!

But of course no sane 318 owner, when contemplating performance, desires to keep the cam stock. Why? Aye there's the rub. Cuz they all want their engines to have that big cam sound, right.
But as I have shown you, that later-closing intake valve, drives the Dcr right into the basement, and low-rpm performance, right along with it.I mean look at the 318 with the 340 cam above; the 8/1 318 with a 340 cam, 84VP. 84 is slanty territory! Do you really want your burbling 318 to take off with slanty performance?
So there you go, you decide.

Each one size bigger cam, with NO OTHER changes, will move the top of the powerband up about 200rpm. While also moving the Torque-peak up a similar amount, and the bottom end torque falls away easily half that, because of the loss of cylinder pressure/VP.
Going from a 318 cam of 50* Ica to just two sizes bigger, say 58*Ica, will move the power from about 4200 to 4600. That 400rpm is where the power comes from. Say you had 280 ftlbs at 4200= 224 hp. Now say you moved that 280 up to 4600; the new power would be 245 hp sounds sweet right. But what about the power loss at say 2000 stall? That's gonna hurt. And there is only one way to get it back,namely more pressure/more VP. Now, you can work around it with a higher stall, and or a bigger rear gear. But those carry other downsides. And they do not address the fact that the low Dcr is affecting the power of your engine all the way from stall to shift rpm. AND by the time you pay somebody to install the TC and gears, you could have fixed the problem by one of the other three ways namely; cylinder pressure, Ica, or cubes.
You decide...............

Now, for Performance, here are the yardsticks I use;
10 pounds per horsepower/ 1.0hp per cubic inch.
why?
well, cuz these numbers make for a fun car. By the time you get to 12 pounds per cubic inch, at 1.0 hp per cube, maintaining the performance is gonna take gears and stall. Pretty soon the car is no longer a DD and no longer a dual-purpose machine. So it sits in the carport 6 days out of seven, with the gas going stale, and the brake rotors rusting, and the tires rotting. Time goes by and you realize that, you almost never drive it any more. But you got 20/30G stuck in it, which you will never get out of it. Then one day you hit the starter, and three valves are stuck in the guides, and that's that.
So, by my yardstick, a 318 is fine in a race-ready 3180 pound car at 318 horsepower. That will be a lot of fun at 800 ft elevation. The same amount of fun as a 360/360hp in a 3600 pound car with 360 horsepower. Or a 440pound pick-up with a 440/440hp.
I don't hate the 318
It's just hard to find a 3180 race-weight chassis, me in it. and
building a 318/318hp is NOT cheap nor easy.
You decide.
Why does it have to be 318 hp?
Cuz if Ima gonna spend all my hard earned cash, I don't want no slouch engine. And I don't want to do it twice or three times anymore.
1.0 hp per cube is a fairly realistic and easy target to attain.The engine is street friendly if a lil hard on gas. After that it starts getting expensive, and
by 1.1 it's getting harder/ pricier, especially with the smaller small-blocks..
By 1.2 the engine is or has, leaving/left streetability behind.
By 1.3, honestly, give your head a shake, you shouldda started with a bigger engine.
You decide.
I tried to keep my bias out of this as best as I could.

AJ's Opinion should be its own article in a magazine.
lot of info

 

[318willrun]

LOL... I love AJ and I love 318's... I couldn't read it all. I could hardly read the beginning. I'm a bad reader. It's my fault, not yours AJ.

Here is my 2.76 geared, factory stock converter, NO headers, 318 with factory stock - never disassembled short block and less compression than the factory with the .050 thick head gaskets I used and with 1200 cfm's sitting on top. Everything that you wouldn't want for a 318..... First 45 seconds of the video

 

[yellow rose]

I am not a 318 hater.
I'm gonna tell you how it is, and you decide for yourselves.
On the street, hi-rpm power means almost nothing because on the way to 60/65 mph,you only pass thru the power-peak once.
But, the vast majority of the time, a streeter is between idle and less than 4000rpm, and usually at Part Throttle.
Cylinder pressure makes heat, and heat is power.
More cylinder volume when the intake valve closes, at a higher pressure, makes more power, and specifically more low-rpm power; and it can be measured and quantified as V/P. Read about V/P here V/P Index Calculation
Here is my opinion of V/P, on the street;
160 or more is overkill with plenty of tire-frying
140 is a fun number
130 is about the min. for street-fun, barely chirps skinny tires with streeter type gears
120 is way too weak for me
110 is atrocious
100 super lo-performance.
What does it mean?
well, at 800ft;
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P
the '69 hi-C, 9.0 rated 318 comes in at about 129VP
the 8/1 318 with a 340 cam, 84VP
the 10.5 340, at about 128
the 8.5 340 at 97
the 8.5 360 4bbl, at about 104
the 8.0 360 2bbl at 122
So that gives you something to think about. As you can see, the 318 has both the lowest and the highest in this ranking.
So what is that makes this possible?
Answer; this is a two-parter;
1) Effective cylinder size when compression begins, and
2) the Effective Dcr.
The 8/1 318 with a 2bbl cam has a mathematical cylinder volume of 652.27cc
but by the time the intake closes, the Effective stroke is down to 2.86 inches, so... the Effective cylinder volume is down to 562.7cc, and the Scr of 8/1 has dropped to an Effective Dcr of 6.88
Now, hear this; Any engine no matter it's size, that produces the same or similar VPs, will, at the lower rpms (up to about 3000rpm), have similar performance.
>lemmee show you;
69 440Magnum 134VP/ Effective stroke 2.58/ Effective volume of [email protected] E-Dcr
69 318 / VP of 132 / Effective stroke of 2.86/Effective volume of [email protected]
69 340 / VP of 128/ Effective stroke 2.52/ Effective volume of [email protected] E-Dcr
So as you can see, the Effective numbers are all over the place. Yet the VPs are very similar. Try this; take the volume and divide it by the E-Dcr.
the 440 comes to ........ 84.0,
The early 318 comes to 72.7
and the 340 to ............ 65.7
Notice the similar progressions.
>Now, as a 318 owner, you already know what the bottom end feels like. Lemmee show you what happens to it with a bigger cam;
'73 318 at 8/1, VP of 110, Ica of 50*
at 54*Ica, VP drops to 104
at 58*Ica, VP drops to 97
at 62*Ica, VP drops to 91
at 66*Ica, VP drops to 84
Each of these Ica's represents about one cam size. Notice how fast the VP plummets.
Next;
lets raise the compression by .4 per step with the 318 2bbl cam (50* Ica),and see what happens;
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P;
at 8.4 the VP climbs to 118
at 8.8 to 125
at 9.2 to 133
at 9.6 to 141
at 10.0 to 148
at 10.4 to 156
You see how FAST the VP climbs?

So now we have seen how the Ica affects the VP in an 8/1 engine, and also how the Scr climbs with Scr. Now lets see what happens when we add cubic inches to an 8/1 engine, while keeping the Ica at 50*
the 273 would start out at......................... 95VP
the '73 8/1 smoggerteen comes in at about 110V/P
the 340 would come in at 118VP
the 360 at...................... 126VP
the 408 at...................... 143VP
Wow! look at how those numbers jump!

But of course no sane 318 owner, when contemplating performance, desires to keep the cam stock. Why? Aye there's the rub. Cuz they all want their engines to have that big cam sound, right.
But as I have shown you, that later-closing intake valve, drives the Dcr right into the basement, and low-rpm performance, right along with it.I mean look at the 318 with the 340 cam above; the 8/1 318 with a 340 cam, 84VP. 84 is slanty territory! Do you really want your burbling 318 to take off with slanty performance?
So there you go, you decide.

Each one size bigger cam, with NO OTHER changes, will move the top of the powerband up about 200rpm. While also moving the Torque-peak up a similar amount, and the bottom end torque falls away easily half that, because of the loss of cylinder pressure/VP.
Going from a 318 cam of 50* Ica to just two sizes bigger, say 58*Ica, will move the power from about 4200 to 4600. That 400rpm is where the power comes from. Say you had 280 ftlbs at 4200= 224 hp. Now say you moved that 280 up to 4600; the new power would be 245 hp sounds sweet right. But what about the power loss at say 2000 stall? That's gonna hurt. And there is only one way to get it back,namely more pressure/more VP. Now, you can work around it with a higher stall, and or a bigger rear gear. But those carry other downsides. And they do not address the fact that the low Dcr is affecting the power of your engine all the way from stall to shift rpm. AND by the time you pay somebody to install the TC and gears, you could have fixed the problem by one of the other three ways namely; cylinder pressure, Ica, or cubes.
You decide...............

Now, for Performance, here are the yardsticks I use;
10 pounds per horsepower/ 1.0hp per cubic inch.
why?
well, cuz these numbers make for a fun car. By the time you get to 12 pounds per cubic inch, at 1.0 hp per cube, maintaining the performance is gonna take gears and stall. Pretty soon the car is no longer a DD and no longer a dual-purpose machine. So it sits in the carport 6 days out of seven, with the gas going stale, and the brake rotors rusting, and the tires rotting. Time goes by and you realize that, you almost never drive it any more. But you got 20/30G stuck in it, which you will never get out of it. Then one day you hit the starter, and three valves are stuck in the guides, and that's that.
So, by my yardstick, a 318 is fine in a race-ready 3180 pound car at 318 horsepower. That will be a lot of fun at 800 ft elevation. The same amount of fun as a 360/360hp in a 3600 pound car with 360 horsepower. Or a 440pound pick-up with a 440/440hp.
I don't hate the 318
It's just hard to find a 3180 race-weight chassis, me in it. and
building a 318/318hp is NOT cheap nor easy.
You decide.
Why does it have to be 318 hp?
Cuz if Ima gonna spend all my hard earned cash, I don't want no slouch engine. And I don't want to do it twice or three times anymore.
1.0 hp per cube is a fairly realistic and easy target to attain.The engine is street friendly if a lil hard on gas. After that it starts getting expensive, and
by 1.1 it's getting harder/ pricier, especially with the smaller small-blocks..
By 1.2 the engine is or has, leaving/left streetability behind.
By 1.3, honestly, give your head a shake, you shouldda started with a bigger engine.
You decide.
I tried to keep my bias out of this as best as I could.

Don’t ignore overlap. And 6500 RPM is nothing.

 

[MOPAROFFICIAL]

318 stock or stock rebuild with a 340 cam and some 920 style heads , headers and performer intake/carb is a nice street motor. Especially in a 4 spd car with some gear 3.91/3.73 typical gears.

Does it have the tq of a 340? no.
Does it rev like a 340? Yes.
Is it fun to drive like a 340? Yes.

2 out of 3, good enough for me.

That said, add heads....
Or a 4" crank.
Will a 390 stomp a 360, yes.
It's more often apples to oranges in the real world aka anything can be made to out perform.
So this becomes more of a.. what I'd do vs what they'd do, you'd do etc...

 

[rumblefish360]

I disagree.
1st, he starts off by saying he is not a 318 hater but yet proves it over and over again through out his various posts.
2nd, he about never helps a forum member with there 318 be it a from scratch build or a good running engine to hop up. Instead, he instantly goes right to the 360 and suggests he builds it his way. A broken record plays yet again.
3rd, He automatically dismisses the 318 on every level when a member seeks advice and/or help by down playing the engine.
4th, “I tried to keep my bias out of this as best as I could.” but fails. As well as assumes to much.
Like this: “Cuz they all want their engines to have that big cam sound, right. ”
Biased and/or disrespect?
“But of course no sane 318 owner”
And by this description, In his opinion, by the proceeding paragraph, you’ve built a a huge cam er monster with only a cam of two steps larger, which is super vaudeville Vague.
“Pretty soon the car is no longer a DD and no longer a dual-purpose machine. So it sits in the carport 6 days out of seven, with the gas going stale, and the brake rotors rusting, and the tires rotting. Time goes by and you realize that, you almost never drive it any more. But you got 20/30G stuck in it, which you will never get out of it. Then one day you hit the starter, and three valves are stuck in the guides, and that's that.”

He assumes waaaaay to much here!

AND the last sentence is “You should have started with a bigger engine.

For a been there and done that guy who is currently active not only here as a member but routinely does you tube videos, turn to 318WILLRUN.

Now I don’t disagree with AJ on many levels but often call him the 318 hater because he doesn’t help anyone with there 318. But I’ll also say that if you have the coin, a bigger engine is better. I like the 360 very much myself. (Double check the screen name.)

So why does AJ always suggest the 360? Well, for the most part there easy to find. Even more so the Magnum versions. For streeter builds and easy in on street power, IMO, it’s the go to engine even though the smaller 340 is a better bet, but more expensive. But why not suggest a stroker AJ? Bigger is better right?

(Which is another thing to look at. If you’d going to rebuild a small block, I suggest for a few bucks more, stroke it.)

Many here have said this over and over again. So one more time can’t hurt.
Be careful of your cam choice on a 318 (and smaller engines) since it is easy to install the wrong cam. Bigger cams move there timing events in ways a small engine doesn’t appreciate in the street driving theater.

And above all, be careful of the over all combination of the engine no matter what size engine your building.

 

[yellow rose]

And now, the rest of the story.
Most of our long wb A-bodies are gonna come around 3400 pounds plus driver. Duster and Demons being lighter.
By my yardstick a 3600pound car then needs a [email protected]/cube.
but lets say your 318 car comes in at 3200 pounds with you in it. At 1.0 hp per cube=318 hp. You got the power. But that power is at 5200 or more rpm. At 2500 to 3500 where you do most of your driving, you gave up low-rpm power to get that hi-rpm power. So the bottom has gone soft. So you slap a 3000TC on it and 3.91s and everybody is happy, right. Well maybe, if you don't mind 65=3400 rpm, and 9 mpgs. say your engine makes 280 ftlbs at 3000 stall, that is 160hp at WOT.Say your car requires 40 hp to cruise at 65mph; that is 25% of available power.
Say you had a 360/318hp which is .88hp per cube. But with the extra cubes comes more low-rpm torque. Furthermore, the much smaller cam required to make the smaller absolute power, also makes more low-rpm torque. So now, you don't need to run the 3000 anymore, nor the 3.91 gears. You still need the same 40 hp to cruise with, so say you choose a 2400TC and 3.23s. Now 65=2750 or so. Suppose this 360 makes the ame absolute power of 160hp @2750 rpm. And you are still using 25% of it to cruise with...... but the rpm has dropped from 3400 to 2750. That's down to 81%; good deal. And you still have the same 318 hp at the top, but now maybe it comes in 600 rpm sooner; that's an even better deal.
of course, with the 360, you could run a lil more gear and a tiny bit more stall, and have a whole lotta more fun, versus the 318 which as to streetability, is as good as maxed out.
Now, you might think that from 3180 pounds to 3600, is only 420 pounds, which is correct, but that 420 pounds at WOT represents 42 hp. And to take a 318 from 318 hp to 360hp without killing the bottom-end, normally aspirated, is as good impossible, unless your pockets are very deep indeed.

That’s why you have a transmission and rear gears. More cars are junk to drive because overlap is avoided when it shouldn’t be, no one wants to spend money on a converter and anything over a 3.55 gear is laughed at.

If someone can’t handle some overlap, a converter that isn’t under 3k RPM and some gear, they need to go hot rod a Prius.

It’s impossible to say that a 318 has that much higher RPM than a 318. It might be, maybe 500 RPM. Maybe.

 

[rumblefish360]

Lastly! If you’d looking for help on something, you should get the help and not some guy who thinks he is smart and has his head rammed up automotive calculators as the end all he all to building an engine and telling you “You have a worthless 318…”

I also suggest a larger engine BUT if you WANT to build a smaller engine, be aware there are compromises to be made.

If your a bit strapped for cash and you only have that 273/318 to work with, go for it! Don’t let AJ put a bummer of a dark cloud over you’d head and make you think you HAVE to SPEND MO-money! Or end up a sucker.

 

[rumblefish360]

318 stock or stock rebuild with a 340 cam and some 920 style heads , headers and performer intake/carb is a nice street motor. Especially in a 4 spd car with some gear 3.91/3.73 typical gears.

Does it have the tq of a 340? no.
Does it rev like a 340? Yes.
Is it fun to drive like a 340? Yes.

2 out of 3, good enough for me.

That said, add heads....
Or a 4" crank.
Will a 390 stomp a 360, yes.
It's more often apples to oranges in the real world aka anything can be made to out perform.
So this becomes more of a.. what I'd do vs what they'd do, you'd do etc...

I absolutely agree!
However, AJ is now going to whine about the gear choice and how bad it sucks for a verity of reasons that may or may not apply. OD transmissions solve that issue.

 

[rumblefish360]

It’s impossible to say that a 318 has that much higher RPM than a 318. It might be, maybe 500 RPM. Maybe.

A minor edit to be done my friend. But I get what your saying and agree. Someone assumes to much……

 

[yellow rose]

I disagree.
1st, he starts off by saying he is not a 318 hater but yet proves it over and over again through out his various posts.
2nd, he about never helps a forum member with there 318 be it a from scratch build or a good running engine to hop up. Instead, he instantly goes right to the 360 and suggests he builds it his way. A broken record plays yet again.
3rd, He automatically dismisses the 318 on every level when a member seeks advice and/or help by down playing the engine.
4th, “I tried to keep my bias out of this as best as I could.” but fails. As well as assumes to much.
Like this: “Cuz they all want their engines to have that big cam sound, right. ”
Biased and/or disrespect?
“But of course no sane 318 owner”
And by this description, In his opinion, by the proceeding paragraph, you’ve built a a huge cam er monster with only a cam of two steps larger, which is super vaudeville Vague.
“Pretty soon the car is no longer a DD and no longer a dual-purpose machine. So it sits in the carport 6 days out of seven, with the gas going stale, and the brake rotors rusting, and the tires rotting. Time goes by and you realize that, you almost never drive it any more. But you got 20/30G stuck in it, which you will never get out of it. Then one day you hit the starter, and three valves are stuck in the guides, and that's that.”

He assumes waaaaay to much here!

AND the last sentence is “You should have started with a bigger engine.

For a been there and done that guy who is currently active not only here as a member but routinely does you tube videos, turn to 318WILLRUN.

Now I don’t disagree with AJ on many levels but often call him the 318 hater because he doesn’t help anyone with there 318. But I’ll also say that if you have the coin, a bigger engine is better. I like the 360 very much myself. (Double check the screen name.)

So why does AJ always suggest the 360? Well, for the most part there easy to find. Even more so the Magnum versions. For streeter builds and easy in on street power, IMO, it’s the go to engine even though the smaller 340 is a better bet, but more expensive. But why not suggest a stroker AJ? Bigger is better right?

(Which is another thing to look at. If you’d going to rebuild a small block, I suggest for a few bucks more, stroke it.)

Many here have said this over and over again. So one more time can’t hurt.
Be careful of your cam choice on a 318 (and smaller engines) since it is easy to install the wrong cam. Bigger cams move there timing events in ways a small engine doesn’t appreciate in the street driving theater.

And above all, be careful of the over all combination of the engine no matter what size engine your building.

I’d add to this that rod to stroke ratio matters. I don’t care what David Reher says, because he isn’t building OE architecture cylinder head stuff. Every single SBM, SBC and SBf or severely induction limited. So R/S ratio matters. A bunch. And that affects cam timing. A bunch.

Disregarding all the nonsense written about rod length and how it doesn’t matter, if you cam grinder isn’t asking how long your rods are, find another grinder. Why anyone would ask? Why should anyone question the really smart dudes?? Because architecture and geometry matter.

No one with any serious desire to understand the ICE can ignore what happens when you change the length of the rod, the length of the stroke or both and how that affects cam timing.

No one, not even David Reher would argue that a higher R/S ratio (lets say 1.848 for a 340 and 1.530 for a 408) doesn’t change piston speed at certain points in the stroke. It certainly does.

A higher R/S ratio has the piston moving around TDC slower and moving around BDC quicker. I don’t think anyone would argue that but I could be wrong.

That also means that around BDC the higher R/S ratio will move around BDC quicker and the lower R/S ratio will move around BDC slower.

IMO, that means that IVO and IVC should be different for two different R/S ratios. I don’t think that could be argued, but I suppose it can be.

Now here is where the lines get blurred. What happens to piston speed after TDC moving to BDC and from BDC to TDC and what happens if we look at what piston speed is doing at say...half way down the stroke from TDC and half way up the stroke from BDC??? And how does that affect cam timing?

I say that the higher R/S ratio, the later IVO should be, because the piston is in the way all around TDC. Any flow occurring at low lifts with the piston hanging around will run right into the piston. So open it a bit later and then have it take off and open quickly. That was one reason why the old Direct Connection cams were so far ahead making power when they came out. They were a fairly aggressive lobe for the day.

What about IVC??? Well, that’s a big deal too because with a higher R/S ratio the piston is moving around BDC quicker than with a lower R/S ratio and if you screw around and close the intake valve too late you get reversion. And that has its own set of issues.

Now let’s divide the stroke into quarters or close to it. And let’s say from about .200 lift on (I used .200 because depending on where the ICl is you are generally past TDC a bit but it could be .150 lift or so too...it’s kind of arbitrary unless we are using hard numbers) to ICL (let’s use 106 because a 110 LSA is pretty much the de facto LSA for most stuff guys are using today) and then from ICL back to about .200 lift on the closing side and how that piston speed affects cam timing.

The piston with the higher R/S ratio is moving quicker around the ICL than a lower R/S ratio. And that means that what happens at higher lifts is just as important (I can argue that it’s more important than what happens at low lifts) as what’s happening at lower lifts.

The piston is moving faster and creating more space faster with the higher R/S ratio and therefore seat shape and angles is a huge issue or you leave power on the table. And drivability. So IMO, opening the intake valve a bit later, getting it open faster and holding it there as long as you can and then shutting the intake valve quicker all need to be addressed when you are using higher R/S ratios.

This is one of the reasons people say it’s easy to over cam and SBM. That high R/S ratio changes what your cam timing should look like. You need quicker lobes with less seat timing and the same or quicker at .050 and .200 numbers with a higher R/S ratio than you do with a lower R/S ratio. Thankfully, the engineers at Chrysler evidently had a handle on this stuff and gave us the .904 lifter.

That means with the lower R/S ratio you can use a slower lobe, open it sooner and leave it around TDC a little longer than you can with a higher R/S ratio be as the piston is moving through TDC quicker and not lose power. And since the piston is moving around BDC slower with the lower R/S ratio, you can make the IVC closing a bit later and not run into reversion as soon as you would with the higher R/S ratio.

Rod to stroke ratio also affects exhaust timing but it’s essentially the same issues. You can’t give up blowdown with the higher R/S ratio by opening the exhaust valve too late because the piston is moving through BDC quicker.

So what does all this have to do with AJ’s arguement about the 318?

It’s because guys tend to use weenie cams with the 318. They use low lift, slow lobes that generally have way too much seat timing and not nearly enough at .050 timing. And that just kills power, especially at low engine speeds. It makes the engine sluggish and piggy. A lower R/S ratio can cover that up.

Like I said earlier, cam selection, converter selection and gear ratio will kill a high R/S ratio, induction limited combination so fast your head will spin.

A 318 can make the same power as a 340 or 360. It will take about 200 RPM compared to the 340 and 350 or so more RPM to the 360.

You just can’t slap a bunch of junk off the shelf parts that are designed with GM R/S ratios into a SBM MoPar and expect it to run like it should.

 

[rumblefish360]

And there ya have it! The reason it is easy to over cam an engine. It just gets worse when it is smaller and the effect gets bigger.

 

[318willrun]

I’d add to this that rod to stroke ratio matters. I don’t care what David Reher says, because he isn’t building OE architecture cylinder head stuff. Every single SBM, SBC and SBf or severely induction limited. So R/S ratio matters. A bunch. And that affects cam timing. A bunch.

Disregarding all the nonsense written about rod length and how it doesn’t matter, if you cam grinder isn’t asking how long your rods are, find another grinder. Why anyone would ask? Why should anyone question the really smart dudes?? Because architecture and geometry matter.

No one with any serious desire to understand the ICE can ignore what happens when you change the length of the rod, the length of the stroke or both and how that affects cam timing.

No one, not even David Reher would argue that a higher R/S ratio (lets say 1.848 for a 340 and 1.530 for a 408) doesn’t change piston speed at certain points in the stroke. It certainly does.

A higher R/S ratio has the piston moving around TDC slower and moving around BDC quicker. I don’t think anyone would argue that but I could be wrong.

That also means that around BDC the higher R/S ratio will move around BDC quicker and the lower R/S ratio will move around BDC slower.

IMO, that means that IVO and IVC should be different for two different R/S ratios. I don’t think that could be argued, but I suppose it can be.

Now here is where the lines get blurred. What happens to piston speed after TDC moving to BDC and from BDC to TDC and what happens if we look at what piston speed is doing at say...half way down the stroke from TDC and half way up the stroke from BDC??? And how does that affect cam timing?

I say that the higher R/S ratio, the later IVO should be, because the piston is in the way all around TDC. Any flow occurring at low lifts with the piston hanging around will run right into the piston. So open it a bit later and then have it take off and open quickly. That was one reason why the old Direct Connection cams were so far ahead making power when they came out. They were a fairly aggressive lobe for the day.

What about IVC??? Well, that’s a big deal too because with a higher R/S ratio the piston is moving around BDC quicker than with a lower R/S ratio and if you screw around and close the intake valve too late you get reversion. And that has its own set of issues.

Now let’s divide the stroke into quarters or close to it. And let’s say from about .200 lift on (I used .200 because depending on where the ICl is you are generally past TDC a bit but it could be .150 lift or so too...it’s kind of arbitrary unless we are using hard numbers) to ICL (let’s use 106 because a 110 LSA is pretty much the de facto LSA for most stuff guys are using today) and then from ICL back to about .200 lift on the closing side and how that piston speed affects cam timing.

The piston with the higher R/S ratio is moving quicker around the ICL than a lower R/S ratio. And that means that what happens at higher lifts is just as important (I can argue that it’s more important than what happens at low lifts) as what’s happening at lower lifts.

The piston is moving faster and creating more space faster with the higher R/S ratio and therefore seat shape and angles is a huge issue or you leave power on the table. And drivability. So IMO, opening the intake valve a bit later, getting it open faster and holding it there as long as you can and then shutting the intake valve quicker all need to be addressed when you are using higher R/S ratios.

This is one of the reasons people say it’s easy to over cam and SBM. That high R/S ratio changes what your cam timing should look like. You need quicker lobes with less seat timing and the same or quicker at .050 and .200 numbers with a higher R/S ratio than you do with a lower R/S ratio. Thankfully, the engineers at Chrysler evidently had a handle on this stuff and gave us the .904 lifter.

That means with the lower R/S ratio you can use a slower lobe, open it sooner and leave it around TDC a little longer than you can with a higher R/S ratio be as the piston is moving through TDC quicker and not lose power. And since the piston is moving around BDC slower with the lower R/S ratio, you can make the IVC closing a bit later and not run into reversion as soon as you would with the higher R/S ratio.

Rod to stroke ratio also affects exhaust timing but it’s essentially the same issues. You can’t give up blowdown with the higher R/S ratio by opening the exhaust valve too late because the piston is moving through BDC quicker.

So what does all this have to do with AJ’s arguement about the 318?

It’s because guys tend to use weenie cams with the 318. They use low lift, slow lobes that generally have way too much seat timing and not nearly enough at .050 timing. And that just kills power, especially at low engine speeds. It makes the engine sluggish and piggy. A lower R/S ratio can cover that up.

Like I said earlier, cam selection, converter selection and gear ratio will kill a high R/S ratio, induction limited combination so fast your head will spin.

A 318 can make the same power as a 340 or 360. It will take about 200 RPM compared to the 340 and 350 or so more RPM to the 360.

You just can’t slap a bunch of junk off the shelf parts that are designed with GM R/S ratios into a SBM MoPar and expect it to run like it should.

I'll throw on this quote "heads too". For whatever reason, folks don't like to put flowing heads on a 318. It's assumed the larger runners will kill velocity which will kill low end torque. I don't know of anyone that's bolted X heads on their 318 and lost performance.

 

[ChargedDart75]

I'll add something else that most of us faced when building our first engine: funding. Some people have the 318, it's there and it's ready to be rebuilt, most of the time somebody will give them away. Already factoring in a rebuild cost, machining (if necessary), induction system, exhaust, etc., the budget may not allow for the purchase of a larger engine (360, 340, or a stroker kit), especially when you won't be able to sell your rebuild needed teen because most people perceive them as junk.

 

[rumblefish360]

I'll throw on this quote "heads too". For whatever reason, folks don't like to put flowing heads on a 318. It's assumed the larger runners will kill velocity which will kill low end torque. I don't know of anyone that's bolted X heads on their 318 and lost performance.

This seems to be an issue often said by those that have not been there and done that. I threw 360 heads on my low compression 318 and gained performance at the strip. Even though the new ratio was 7.5-1 or lower. It went faster. Why? Head flow over compression every time is a winner. This has been proven many times over and even @IQ52 has shown this.

Is it a great thing to do? Not really.
Is it a win, yes.
Would you have won more if you kept the compression the same or greater, absolutely!

The 340/360 head acts very much like a mildly ported 318 head. A mildly ported 340 head acts like a well ported 340 head, and so on up the scale. With this in mind, when does a head become to good for an engine?
That is a very good question and a bit hard to answer for any given size engine unless you are super specific on all the parts being used.

I think a good, but not definitive answer can be seen on engine masters (motortrend.com) where Freiburger tries to test this idea on a small block stroker (*I Think*) Ford between 3 different heads. The results may surprise you.

Here is another. The modern 5.7 HEMI. (What’s the actual CID of this engine? Anybody? My Brian is farting here!) The current head flows 300 (or so) cfm. But yet makes great power with Relatively low compression and a small cam size through exhaust manifolds.

THINK ABOUT YOUR COMBINATION !!!!

 

[rumblefish360]

I'll add something else that most of us faced when building our first engine: funding. Some people have the 318, it's there and it's ready to be rebuilt, most of the time somebody will give them away. Already factoring in a rebuild cost, machining (if necessary), induction system, exhaust, etc., the budget may not allow for the purchase of a larger engine (360, 340, or a stroker kit), especially when you won't be able to sell your rebuild needed teen because most people perceive them as junk.

318 (plus overbore) + a 4.00 stroke = 390 cubes.

As another warning…. Price out hour options!!!!
Rebuilding an engine? Stock or stroked?
Price check! Isle 3 please!
Reciprocating assemblies, small black MoPar!

Build what you wanna build. Your not getting crap from me. Enjoy!

 

[AJ/FormS]

Since YR opened the door to overlap;
But I am talking about a well-rounded streeter,
One of the single-most, best-pay-back things you can do for performance, is increasing the overlap. But it requires you to have both headers and a free-flowing exhaust.
Almost all cams have at least some overlap. Performance cams have more and race cams yet more.
At the advertised durations, the Factory 318 cam has 20*, the 340/360-4bbl had 44*. The 360 2bbl had about 30 (IIRC). So we know that 20* is nothing, and things are heating up by 44*. But the big performance gains are up past 76*, like the 292/292/108 cam has.
However, in the quest for overlap, the compression duration suffers, and so the Scr has to be pumped up in compensation. That is why you see dragrace engines sporting big number Scrs.
Obviously, on the street, we cannot normally run the Scr up into the hi twelves or more, and still expect to run pumpgas. So, that sorta limits the amount of overlap we can run.
By experience;
the 76* on that 292 cam was not for me. Yeah it made a lot of power over the top, but, it didn't like 3.55s at all. Because it was on a tight 108LSA, the cylinder pressure was still reasonably high enough at low-rpm, but you know, winding it way up to prove she had the power was not for 3.55s. I mean 6500 was 55 in first gear... and 7000 was ~60. I once put 4 big guys in the car,and it was embarrassing to get it moving. Not for me.
>My next cam had only 53*of overlap, (270/276/110 advertised), but with the more compression degrees, this baby made a chitload of bottom end power. Perfect for those 3.55s. In fact, I ran it with 3.23s and 2.76s as well, because it didn't complain all that much. I was very sad when that cam began to drop lobes.
>My last cam has 61* of overlap (276/286/110 advertised), and let me tell you how disappointed I was with the loss of bottom-end power. I worked on the timing and carburetion all summer and couldn't get it back. I finally called Passon Performance, and ordered up a set of Commando gears with the 3.09 low.... and that took care of First gear with the 3.55s.
So, in my thinking, I'm not interested in a bigger cam.
However, I would be, if the bottom-end power could at the least, stay the same. .
And
this is where VP comes back into play.
Knowing the VPs that I have had, I know where the lower limit for me is, with 3.55s. See I could run a bigger rear gear, but I'm not going to. With the Gvod, and 3.55s, the cruise rpm is a very pleasant 65=2240; so that has to stay.
My lowest VP has been about 135 with that 292 cam, and I never liked that bottom-end. My highest was 157, which was killer. And the current combo has 153, and as mentioned, I was disappointed coming from 157.
Having gotten 15 or more years older now, I could do without the VP of 153, and I don't travel much any more, and have a second car for that now ......... so, I guess I could sacrifice some of that VP, trading it for gears. I already tried 4.30s and that was too deep for the 3.09 low, but I guess I could go 3.91s. Which is 10% bigger than 3.55s. And so I could sacrifice 10% VP, dropping from 153 to 138; criminy that's low. I ain't going under 140, there is just no way.
Ok so now I have a new VP target of 140 and she's a 367 at 10.95Scr; lets see where this goes. Ok I get an Ica of 68* for a VP of 142; I'm good with that. From my current cam that is about 1 cam size bigger, but I'm gonna punch the Lsa to 106 for my tight-split 4-speed using the GVod as a splitter, so lets see where that goes....
Ok got it; I get 284/292/106 in straight up. This gets an Ica of 68* badaboom, with an overlap of 76 degrees. So that will do several things.
The overlap jump, from 61 to 76 is huge, so I can expect a real nice power bulge on the curve. The VP drops from a very high 153 to a tolerably low, (for me) 140, but the 3.91s will get the bottom-end back. Of course this cam will drink gas, but she's not a DD anymore. You should not run this type of cam in a 318 with an automatic...... because you cannot easily get the Scr up to 10.95! And the powerband is not at all suited to the auto. The A904/A727 have ratios of 2.45-1.45-1.00 and splits of 59%/69% which means on a shift at 6500, the Rs would drop to 3840 and 4485. Making your 1-2 powerband 2660 and your 2-3 powerband 2015.
But with my GVod splitting gears, the ratios are 3.09-2.41-1.92-1.50...... with splits of .78-.80-.78 So my combo can get away with thischit. I could get away with shifting say 6100 for a powerband of 1340rpm.
Now, from 276*( the current cam) intake duration to 284* ( the proposed cam) is 8*, so just a lil more than One cam size. But the overlap from 61* to 76* being 15* is two cam sizes. So I can expect the power to move up 200 rpm, but the power increase due to overlap will be significantly higher.
Is it worth it to me?
Well considering the total cost, no.

I just wanted you guys to see how important it is to match your engine to the rest of your combo.

 

[Ricks70Duster340]

The epistle of AJ, well done sir! Thanks for putting things into proper perspective!

 

[AJ/FormS]

I'll throw on this quote "heads too". For whatever reason, folks don't like to put flowing heads on a 318. It's assumed the larger runners will kill velocity which will kill low end torque. I don't know of anyone that's bolted X heads on their 318 and lost performance.

I'll give you that, but the big port heads don't do much for you either until the rpm gets up, and then the stock cam chokes up.
So then to take advantage of those heads, you gotta jump the cam up. If you choose the 268/276/114, 340 cam, with no other changes, that is an instant recipe for a weak bottom end. With no rear gear change either, the power LOSS at low rpms will offset the subtle power increase over the top, and with a speed limit of 65mph, I lost performance every time I did it, cuz when she hit second gear the engine was way off the cam; hopelessly drowning in sucked out territory.
But yeah with 4.30s and a 2800, things picked up some. But 4.30s were lousy on the hiway.

I got way more performance by bolting all the 318 stuff including the cam, onto a 340.

 

[AJ/FormS]

However, AJ is now going to whine about the gear choice and how bad it sucks for a verity of reasons that may or may not apply. OD transmissions solve that issue.

I think we've lost sight of; how I opened this thread.

I am not a 318 hater.
I'm gonna tell you how it is, and you decide for yourselves.
On the street,
hi-rpm power means almost nothing because on the way to 60/65 mph,you only pass thru the power-peak once.
But, the vast majority of the time, a streeter is between idle and less than 4000rpm, and usually at Part Throttle.

I could not care less about dragracing.
I could not care less about third gear.
Since I live in a world where the speed limit is, for the most part 100kph/62mph, I am talking about a streeter. And, since I live an average of 20 miles from anywhere, my definition of streeter includes touring.
Now as to overdrive, few people can afford an overdrive, for one thing. And the only reason to have one is why? Hyup, cuz the cruise rpm is so high. And why is that? cuz to get low rpm performance with your big cam small engine, you had to gear it up. And this cost you IDK say $4000 at least. So waitaminute; why wouldn't you just start with a bigger engine that already comes with a boatload of lo-rpm power? to keep the street gears, and spend that $4000 on something that makes a lot more sense?

So check this out;
Say you have a lo-C 318 with a modest cam, say a 262/270/110, The pressure at 8/1 is predicted to be 126psi at 800ft, and the VP comes to 99. I mean this is what guys are building.
So now, to get your 3600 pound car moving, briskly, even 3.23s won't cut it. So in goes a 3000 stall and away you go. But hang on, that 262 cam might power-peak around 4800, and with an auto, you will shift it at ~5500. Which is ~48 mph in first gear with 3.23s........ and so, on the 1-2 shift, the rpm plummets to 3245. Now, the 126psi cylinder pressure comes into play. My lawnmower makes more than that.To get to 65mph@4200 is a 955 rpm climb with the engine in the doggy-zone.
So out come the 3.23s, which cruised at 65= 2750, and in go the 3.91s; now cruising at 3320, yeah IDK..... ok so now, the engine hits 5500 at 40 mph, and on the shift the rpm plummets back to 3245, and 65 will be 5100 in Second about perfect, but the engine still got stuck in the doggy-zone beginning at 3245 for a fair ways.
With the TorqueFlite automatic, this is a fact of life, on the 1-2 shift..
The cure for this is more cylinder pressure or a very much higher than 3000 stall, Ima thinking a 3800.
Ok but wait the whole reason for the dogginess is the small cylinder volume when the intake closes, combined with the very low Effective Dcr.
I mean at 8/1Scr, the Effective swept volume is just 535cc and the Effective Dcr is just 6.58/1

To give you an idea of what 535cc is, this is 32.65 cubes, times 8= 261 cubes of engine size.. that is where you are getting your performance from. And compressing it to just 6.58, instead of perhaps 8.0/8.2, well that is the death knell for low-rpm power right there.
You decide.

 

[rumblefish360]

I think we've lost sight of; how I opened this thread.

Not really but it is off the main road us of your 318 hating. But a street(‘er) engine is what pops up with you. My OD statement still holds true. Possibly, More on that later.
I’m going to answer your post in Red.
Way to much work writing quote with tags over and over.

I could not care less about dragracing.
That’s fine
I could not care less about third gear.
In a manual trans? I’m missing something here besides my nap… LOL
Since I live in a world where the speed limit is, for the most part 100kph/62mph,
55 in LINY but up to if not more elsewhere to 75.
I am talking about a streeter. And, since I live an average of 20 miles from anywhere, my definition of streeter includes touring.
Now who is blurring the lines? That would be mostly a suspension issue.
Now as to overdrive, few people can afford an overdrive, for one thing.
I call BS on that.
And the only reason to have one is why? Hyup, cuz the cruise rpm is so high. And why is that? cuz to get low rpm performance with your big cam small engine, you had to gear it up. Assumption!
And this cost you IDK say $4000 at least.
Really?!?! I just paid $500 for a perfect running A-500.
So waitaminute; why wouldn't you just start with a bigger engine that already comes with a boatload of lo-rpm power? to keep the street gears, and spend that $4000 on something that makes a lot more sense?
Because those that are wanting to use a 318 are asking for help on there 318. I’m not saying a bigger engine is t better. I’ve always said it was. I just don’t stomp on other peoples choices when they state they don’t have money or just the simple want to do a smaller engine.
Unlike yourself.
So check this out;
Say you have a lo-C 318 with a modest cam, say a 262/270/110, The pressure at 8/1 is predicted to be 126psi at 800ft, and the VP comes to 99. I mean this is what guys are building.
So now, to get your 3600 pound car moving, briskly, even 3.23s won't cut it. So in goes a 3000 stall and away you go. But hang on, that 262 cam might power-peak around 4800, and with an auto, you will shift it at ~5500. Which is ~48 mph in first gear with 3.23s........ and so, on the 1-2 shift, the rpm plummets to 3245. Now, the 126psi cylinder pressure comes into play. My lawnmower makes more than that.To get to 65mph@4200 is a 955 rpm climb with the engine in the doggy-zone.
So out come the 3.23s, which cruised at 65= 2750, and in go the 3.91s; now cruising at 3320, yeah IDK..... ok so now, the engine hits 5500 at 40 mph, and on the shift the rpm plummets back to 3245, and 65 will be 5100 in Second about perfect, but the engine still got stuck in the doggy-zone beginning at 3245 for a fair ways.
With the TorqueFlite automatic, this is a fact of life, on the 1-2 shift..
The cure for this is more cylinder pressure or a very much higher than 3000 stall, Ima thinking a 3800.
Ok but wait the whole reason for the dogginess is the small cylinder volume when the intake closes, combined with the very low Effective Dcr.
I mean at 8/1Scr, the Effective swept volume is just 535cc and the Effective Dcr is just 6.58/1

To give you an idea of what 535cc is, this is 32.65 cubes, times 8= 261 cubes of engine size.. that is where you are getting your performance from. And compressing it to just 6.58, instead of perhaps 8.0/8.2, well that is the death knell for low-rpm power right there.
You decide.

Thank you for the narrow view of engine building for streetable performance. Yet again, you miss the mark.
What amazes me is that you are in the calculators so much that you miss most everything else going on around you. I would have bet a bengi on your reply being so much better. Glad I didn’t bet. I would have lost.
You disappoint.

And yet again, you showed why you hate 318’s.
Again.

 

[rumblefish360]

Just a quick mention in why and how good a purchase of a OD trans is a good thing no matter what kind of engine you build is the gear spread and final drive ratio you get when you multiply the rear end gear by the OD ratio. Once you find the cruise rpm at what ever speed you want it to be at, you can work the engine cam question in reverse with the above numbers. In an example, instead of being stuck as you would say with 4.30’s as a final drive ratio, you could re-cam the engine for the final drive ratio and so very well. With or without the big cam.

The purchase of a Chrysler OD trans w/converter will knit require a shortening of the driveshaft and ether purchasing a trans Mount or fabbing one up yourself.
The cost of wires and a OD on/off switch is peanuts.

 

[AJ/FormS]

yada yada yada, my thread, my opinion, and go start your own thread, yur plugging mine up.

 

[replicaracer43]

Interesting stuff....it made me think of the a video UTG did about a year ago called "the myth of displacement" or some such. Anyone know how to post a link? It ties right into this discussion