Bighead440
Well-Known Member
Been there as a 17yr old kid with a '66 Coronet 500 with a swapped & modded (by me) '68 440. It took great restraint to survive that, and once I was 18-19 and drinking beer, I really don't know how I made it!!
Nicks Garage 383 build
- Thread starter RAMM
- Start date
-
We aim to please
PRH
Well-Known Member
Nicks got his own fancy new seat and guide machine……seems like if the valve job is a problem……is that something he did?
Does anyone have an accurate account of what the numbers are in the video for this 383?
If it’s like 340hp, that’s about the same hp/ci as a 400hp 446.
Hasn’t there been at least one stock intake single 4bbl, exhaust manifold equipped 446 that made around 400hp at his shop?
Maybe the one a couple years ago out of the purple 70 gtx?
FWIW, I’ve tested a 383 that made 420/420…….with ex manifolds.
But, it didn’t have the stock intake on it, or untouched heads……..or a 600vs carb, or a HFT cam.
Edit, so curiosity got the best of me and I watched part 2.
The original customer complaint was lack of power, and they had the heads off………and didn’t give them a thorough inspection?
That’s just a “shame on them” moment.
There’s also mention that maybe they should have tested it prior to any additional mods……..uuummm, ya think?
If you don’t know what it is to start with, how can you quantify the gains?
I also don’t understand the resistance to installing seats.
I would say I end up installing seats in 95% of the vintage iron heads that end up in my shop.
Oh well………sounds like they’ll have a little more “content” on this build for the channel.
Just to show how people interpret data, and make different decisions based on what they see…….
In my mind, the new bullet cam crushed the(obviously smaller) old Comp cam………yet it sounds like they’re leaning towards sticking with the 25+ less hp Comp.
Does anyone have an accurate account of what the numbers are in the video for this 383?
If it’s like 340hp, that’s about the same hp/ci as a 400hp 446.
Hasn’t there been at least one stock intake single 4bbl, exhaust manifold equipped 446 that made around 400hp at his shop?
Maybe the one a couple years ago out of the purple 70 gtx?
FWIW, I’ve tested a 383 that made 420/420…….with ex manifolds.
But, it didn’t have the stock intake on it, or untouched heads……..or a 600vs carb, or a HFT cam.
Edit, so curiosity got the best of me and I watched part 2.
The original customer complaint was lack of power, and they had the heads off………and didn’t give them a thorough inspection?
That’s just a “shame on them” moment.
There’s also mention that maybe they should have tested it prior to any additional mods……..uuummm, ya think?
If you don’t know what it is to start with, how can you quantify the gains?
I also don’t understand the resistance to installing seats.
I would say I end up installing seats in 95% of the vintage iron heads that end up in my shop.
Oh well………sounds like they’ll have a little more “content” on this build for the channel.
Just to show how people interpret data, and make different decisions based on what they see…….
In my mind, the new bullet cam crushed the(obviously smaller) old Comp cam………yet it sounds like they’re leaning towards sticking with the 25+ less hp Comp.
Last edited:
PRH
Well-Known Member
If they really wanted to milk a bit more content outta that thing, they could do a video on just the before/after situation pertaining to the heads.
He has a flow bench, so some before/after flow data could be included.
He has a flow bench, so some before/after flow data could be included.
PRH
Well-Known Member
We’ll have to see how it all unfolds, but here’s my take on their quest for 425tq……..
Basically I’m wondering……..just how bad would the current 906’s have to be, that by doing a “better” valve job…….and nothing else……..there will be a 40+ gain in TQ?
I’m highly skeptical of that happening.
I could see the number getting into the 400 range with a proper VJ and suitable amount of bowl and SSR work.
Then slide the Bullet cam back in a couple degrees advanced from where they had it before.
Measure the chambers and get the CR to at least an honest 9.5:1.
Basically I’m wondering……..just how bad would the current 906’s have to be, that by doing a “better” valve job…….and nothing else……..there will be a 40+ gain in TQ?
I’m highly skeptical of that happening.
I could see the number getting into the 400 range with a proper VJ and suitable amount of bowl and SSR work.
Then slide the Bullet cam back in a couple degrees advanced from where they had it before.
Measure the chambers and get the CR to at least an honest 9.5:1.
Last edited:
Well, he did mill the heads a whole .020. That should have helped a lot. . . .
With what? Gasket sealing? lol
An early high compression 340 was rated 340 ft. lbs. of torque. Would the extra 43 cubes of a 383 give it an extra 85 ft. lbs. of torque? I think RAMM said it several pages ago: a 383 never made 425 torque to start with. The torque figures Nick got are pretty much what a stock 383 should make, and all his hand wringing is pretty silly.
Here are the factory 1970 383 cam specs:
The "Roadrunner Cam"
383/330 horsepower
Would be interesting to see the cam specs on the 2 cams they are swapping back and forth on Nick's Dyno tests, to see how they compare to the factory grind numbers?
_______________
I had an original 1967 383 4 barrel engine that factory rated out at:
10:1 cr, 325 horsepower, 516 closed chamber heads. Factory cast iron 4 bbl intake manifold. Split grind factory cam, with more lift and duration on the exhaust to work with the smaller 516 exhaust valves. Flat top factory pistons.
We put in new exhaust seats and new valves springs. The new valves stood up nice on the new valve job with the new hardened exhaust seats.
Kept the factory cam, lifters and rocker assembly.
1967 383 4 bbl. cam specs:
☆☆☆☆☆
The "Roadrunner Cam"
383/330 horsepower
Would be interesting to see the cam specs on the 2 cams they are swapping back and forth on Nick's Dyno tests, to see how they compare to the factory grind numbers?
_______________
I had an original 1967 383 4 barrel engine that factory rated out at:
10:1 cr, 325 horsepower, 516 closed chamber heads. Factory cast iron 4 bbl intake manifold. Split grind factory cam, with more lift and duration on the exhaust to work with the smaller 516 exhaust valves. Flat top factory pistons.
We put in new exhaust seats and new valves springs. The new valves stood up nice on the new valve job with the new hardened exhaust seats.
Kept the factory cam, lifters and rocker assembly.
1967 383 4 bbl. cam specs:
☆☆☆☆☆
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
None of the numbers you posted mean zero without the checking heights and way more information.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
That and it would seem he thinks if he sees a top cut the valve is sunk.
It’s hard to follow what he’s doing.
I mean if the torque number is down before I blamed the heads I’d be looking at his tuning.
He’s an all in guy without much of a curve.
Plus I’ve never seen him actually do anything other than change a main jet. Or read a plug.
PRH
Well-Known Member
I will add this……..
While I have built/tested a few 383’s that easily surpassed the factory TQ rating of 425ft/lbs, I’ll admit that I’ve never tested a completely stock one……or one that’s built to a “less than” OE HP configuration.
So, I don’t have any first hand knowledge of what that looks like on a dyno sheet.
But I know from helping out a few FAST guys, it’s a challenge to make power with the stock intake & exhaust manifold.
However, I can say that my experience has been that they respond as they should to typical hot rodding strategies.
While I have built/tested a few 383’s that easily surpassed the factory TQ rating of 425ft/lbs, I’ll admit that I’ve never tested a completely stock one……or one that’s built to a “less than” OE HP configuration.
So, I don’t have any first hand knowledge of what that looks like on a dyno sheet.
But I know from helping out a few FAST guys, it’s a challenge to make power with the stock intake & exhaust manifold.
However, I can say that my experience has been that they respond as they should to typical hot rodding strategies.
Come up with the 2 camshaft cam specs they are using on Nick's Dyno tests. Surely you should be able to do that.
☆☆☆☆☆
The Road Runner engine was rated at 335 HP, and supposedly got the 440/375 cam
The 330 HP was the Super Commando and was used in Sport Satellites, etc...
The 330 HP was the Super Commando and was used in Sport Satellites, etc...
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
I don’t have 2 ***** to give about what cam he’s using. He doesn’t have a cam issue, he has a tuning issue.
Again, post all the numbers you want but unless you know the checking heights and at least an at .200 number and then have a good guess how compare two cams.
Last edited:
That's the 383 that Hot Rod Magazine dyno tested back in its October 1967 issue. Stock, they got 278 horsepower. On an engine dyno. Torque not reported.
(With cam, intake, carb and headers, it made 437 hp)
That's not correct for the 383HP engine. The 383HP and 440HP used the same grind and it was a split pattern.
The 1968 383/335 HP 'Road Runner' and 440/375 'Super Commando'
utilized the same Camshaft.
Lift............. 450"/.458"
Duration..... 268*/284*
Overlap....... 46*
Valve Spring Load-Rate....... #129 lbs. Valve-Closed / #250 lbs. Valve-Open
RAMM
Well-Known Member
You are always on my case..not sure why. Maybe I'm just that Lil Ole bee in your bonnet. J.Rob
RAMM
Well-Known Member
This might be thee most wishy-washy response I've ever seen. J.Rob
-
