johnnycuda
JohnnyCuda's 68
Difference between 340 manifolds and 273 they look awful identical
These are supposed to be 273’s
These are supposed to be 273’s
Manifolds
- Thread starter johnnycuda
- Start date
-
Port sizes are DRASTICALLY different. Top one LOOKS similar, bottom one is different.
I'm going thru the 273-340 changeover now. It snowballed real quick lol.
I'm going thru the 273-340 changeover now. It snowballed real quick lol.
I can't read the numbers clearly but if you can list them I will look them up for you.
Last edited:
Turn it over. 
340 manifolds have a divider between 3/5 cyl & 4/6 cyl. 273s' are open
340 manifolds have a divider between 3/5 cyl & 4/6 cyl. 273s' are open
johnnycuda
JohnnyCuda's 68
it’s just the one 2780945 other don’t know it
johnnycuda
JohnnyCuda's 68
Not mine somebody sellingTurn it over.
View attachment 1716274126View attachment 1716274127
johnnycuda
JohnnyCuda's 68
Ok cool, are they they same otherwise?
Or bigger?
67-69 A body 273 and 318LA The 64-66 have a different angle of outlet.
273, if you're plan is to install on 340...don't! Either go the hipo manifolds (correct for your car) #'s 2863549 and 2863553 or go headers. Those 273 manifolds are worth $50 tops.
Professor Fate
Push the button, Max...
340s have individual ports, as previously stated- and MUCH larger ports. The outlets are also much bigger, and of a flat flange design. 273/318 manifolds have a cone/bell outlet that is smaller diameter.
Short answer: No. They are very different.
Short answer: No. They are very different.
AJ/FormS
68 Formua-S fastback clone 367/A833/GVod/3.55s
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2014
- Messages
- 25,825
- Reaction score
- 13,128
273 manifolds work on the 2bbl, small valve heads, and they choke about the same time or a lil before the 2bbl cam does.
The 340 logs work with the big-port heads and the 4bbls, but they kill the overlap on the 340 cam. They say, that headers allow the 340 cam to come alive, which can add quite a bit of top-end power to them, perhaps more than is typically expected.
But, you know;
with 3.23 gears and an automatic, you'll probably never notice the missing power cuz 5500 in 1.45Second gear is like 94 mph...... with 27s, and just how often are you gonna be at 94 mph...........
But I gotta say;
Oro Valley AZ is at about 2600 ft elevation, and
the 273, if that is what you have, is gonna be wheezing as it is, so the 273 logs will be just fine on it. Not so with a factory-cammed 340. Well, maybe a low-compression one, lol.
And
if your car has to operate at multiple elevations, I hope you have a high-compression model, and a longer stroke will help it get moving. Notta chance would I use a 273 at 2600ft. Well, to tell the truth, notta chance would I build anything less than a hi-compression 318 for 2600ft, for a car was under 3000 pounds with driver. By 3600, pounds I want a 360. But that's just my opinion.
Science says that an engine will lose about 3% power for every 1000 ft elevation change. from sealevel to 2600ft is about the same power loss as a full point of compression. thus, an 8/1 engine becomes like a 7/1. and the 6% power-loss of a 2bbl 273 is like 11hp. or, close to it, about the same as one cam size. So it's a double whammy.
But if you never floor it, I guess a 273 would be ok., lol.
The 340 logs work with the big-port heads and the 4bbls, but they kill the overlap on the 340 cam. They say, that headers allow the 340 cam to come alive, which can add quite a bit of top-end power to them, perhaps more than is typically expected.
But, you know;
with 3.23 gears and an automatic, you'll probably never notice the missing power cuz 5500 in 1.45Second gear is like 94 mph...... with 27s, and just how often are you gonna be at 94 mph...........
But I gotta say;
Oro Valley AZ is at about 2600 ft elevation, and
the 273, if that is what you have, is gonna be wheezing as it is, so the 273 logs will be just fine on it. Not so with a factory-cammed 340. Well, maybe a low-compression one, lol.
And
if your car has to operate at multiple elevations, I hope you have a high-compression model, and a longer stroke will help it get moving. Notta chance would I use a 273 at 2600ft. Well, to tell the truth, notta chance would I build anything less than a hi-compression 318 for 2600ft, for a car was under 3000 pounds with driver. By 3600, pounds I want a 360. But that's just my opinion.
Science says that an engine will lose about 3% power for every 1000 ft elevation change. from sealevel to 2600ft is about the same power loss as a full point of compression. thus, an 8/1 engine becomes like a 7/1. and the 6% power-loss of a 2bbl 273 is like 11hp. or, close to it, about the same as one cam size. So it's a double whammy.
But if you never floor it, I guess a 273 would be ok., lol.
Last edited:
-
