How much power will it make?

-
william

william

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
178
Reaction score
31
Location
Ottawa
It's a .060 over 440 10.7 to 1 with indy ez heads , dual plane intake, and a Lunati hyd roller #60313 243/251@50 .597/.602 lift with 1.6 rockers.
I'll be using 2" tti headers and one of the tbi fuel systems I'm leaning towards the FAST system. The heads and intake are not ported but have been raised to m/w height stock width.

It'll never see a dyno so what does everybody think it will make??
 
Indy dual plane?
Exhaust pipe size?

No guessing here though I do like what I'm reading on the engine.
 
you'd probably be happier with an 850 double pumper. especially if it's manual shift or a track car.

street/auto i'd go with vacuum sec version instead of mechanical.

the fuel injection probably wont gain you anything at all if you are not using direct injection.

http://www.bigsperformance.com/ check them out
 
It's mostly street cruiser that will see track time a couple times a year.
Running a auto with a 3400 stall 4.11 and 31" tall tire .May swap the gear to 4.56 I'll see how it works.
It's in a 76 Duster
 
I'd run EFI in s second if it's in the budget. FAST makes a nice product. I'd expect it to be around 525hp and 480tq depending on the cfm you feed it with. That's a lot of port volume for a 3.75 stroke, the static compression is a little low, and a hydraulic type cam will not bring the really big numbers.
 
my opinion, your milage may vary: being it's a cruiser you learn to hate the 4.11's and will go completely bazzurk when you install the 4.56's. the 4.11's will put highway speeds at 3300 rpm and you'll just make it from station to station but it'll be fine at 20-35mph.
 
560hp 550tq. If you were planning on running the efi from the beginning, I would have widened the LSA to at least 112* and maybe 114*

I have used this cam before and totally disagree with the statements that the heads are to big(not) and the stroke is to short(not) and the compression is to low(not). It will run real strong, have a great BBM in your face sound. These Voodoo cams kick A$$ and you will have a very good running 440.

I used this very same cam in a SBM 416 with 9.2 to 1 and it made 517hp 510tq the 440 will make more power than that.
 
"I used this very same cam in a SBM 416 with 9.2 to 1 and it made 517hp 510tq the 440 will make more power than that."

Mike - As stated your reference has no bearing on the engine or cam in question unless you ignore the basic differences between the two. How many of your engines using this camshaft were big block? What heads were on those and what did they make?

I'll admit, my numbers tend to be on the low (or realistic, depending on how you look at it) side. I'm familiar with dyno testing and numbers and I base mine on what I believe it will do in the chassis. My sim programs (Pipemax and Engine Pro) put crank power around 550hp and 550tq but these are designed to mimick dyno results. I don't think with twisty headers, a full exhaust, running at 190° or more, and an accessory belt driving the water pump and alternator that it will make close to those numbers.
 
MRL Performance said:
560hp 550tq. If you were planning on running the efi from the beginning, I would have widened the LSA to at least 112* and maybe 114*

I have used this cam before and totally disagree with the statements that the heads are to big(not) and the stroke is to short(not) and the compression is to low(not). It will run real strong, have a great BBM in your face sound. These Voodoo cams kick A$$ and you will have a very good running 440.

I used this very same cam in a SBM 416 with 9.2 to 1 and it made 517hp 510tq the 440 will make more power than that.
Click to expand...

moper said:
"I used this very same cam in a SBM 416 with 9.2 to 1 and it made 517hp 510tq the 440 will make more power than that."

Mike - As stated your reference has no bearing on the engine or cam in question unless you ignore the basic differences between the two. How many of your engines using this camshaft were big block? What heads were on those and what did they make?

I'll admit, my numbers tend to be on the low (or realistic, depending on how you look at it) side. I'm familiar with dyno testing and numbers and I base mine on what I believe it will do in the chassis. My sim programs (Pipemax and Engine Pro) put crank power around 550hp and 550tq but these are designed to mimick dyno results. I don't think with twisty headers, a full exhaust, running at 190° or more, and an accessory belt driving the water pump and alternator that it will make close to those numbers.
Click to expand...

Well, I think that with a good set of ported factory iron heads and 9.7:1, it could make 580/580 ON THE DYNO. The problem is with the unported Indy EZ heads. From .100"-.600", they are erratic from port to port and low flowing. Therefore I believe, as both of you have said, the engine will make around 550/550.......on the dyno.
 
moper said:
"I used this very same cam in a SBM 416 with 9.2 to 1 and it made 517hp 510tq the 440 will make more power than that."

Mike - As stated your reference has no bearing on the engine or cam in question unless you ignore the basic differences between the two. How many of your engines using this camshaft were big block? What heads were on those and what did they make?

I'll admit, my numbers tend to be on the low (or realistic, depending on how you look at it) side. I'm familiar with dyno testing and numbers and I base mine on what I believe it will do in the chassis. My sim programs (Pipemax and Engine Pro) put crank power around 550hp and 550tq but these are designed to mimick dyno results. I don't think with twisty headers, a full exhaust, running at 190° or more, and an accessory belt driving the water pump and alternator that it will make close to those numbers.
Click to expand...

Point Taken.

Regardless of what we think or say about this or that, your 440 will run good and the car will be a blast to drive.
 
Thanks for the input .
I was hoping to be in the 520 to 530 range so it should be covered.
The fuel injection isn't set in stone, I thought it would help with drivability not peek power .So would I be better off staying with a carb or going fuel injection with this combination?

As for rpm on the highway the Speed Calculator put it at 2400@50 mph and 2700@60 mph with the 4.11 and 31" tall tires .You maybe right Bob it may drive me nuts I'll have to try it out.
 
EFI is going to help out more with the normal day to day driving. If its in the budget, like mentioned, I would go for it. EFI will make your engine last longer.
 
Never saw that EFI kit, but those are pretty cool. Don't mean to derail this thread, but wouldn't that be a performance hindrance, though, by delivering fuel through the carb inlet, and not somewhere closer to the cylinders? I can't see how it delivers into each port, but I'd be wondering about the atomization collecting on the walls of the intake manifold and not delivering as efficient a mix of a/f. Am I just crazy? The kit has some killer reviews, I don't question that. But might anybody know a difference between a standard EFI kit that utilizes injector ports on the intake manifold?
 
Port injection is a big improvement - but requires the injector bungs be installed or a specific produced manifold. But - carbs do an adequate job of mixing fuel and air. Fuel injection does a much better job anb is much more precise. Plus, injiection adjsuts itself constantly at the speed of light. So things like jetting and power enrichment are all handled much more efficiently. The end result is more torque, usually more power, easier starting, better idle, cleaner plugs, less fuel conatmination of the oil... It's just better all around...lol.
 
Guess us mopar guys have to make due w/the kits we are given or get to making our own stuff. Curse those chevys!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top