Nicks Garage 383 build

-
Bighead440 said:
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!!
Click to expand...
What did you swap to? J Rob
 
RAMM said:
You are always on my case..not sure why. Maybe I'm just that Lil Ole bee in your bonnet. J.Rob
Click to expand...
Naw man. I'm just funnin with you here. I have much respect.
 
George Jets said:
Here are the factory 1970 383 cam specs:

View attachment 1716258429

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:

View attachment 1716258443

View attachment 1716258445


☆☆☆☆☆
Click to expand...
That's awesome, I calculated from the event timing & lift split, the duration/overlap,.... & came up with 256°/260°......but My books for a '66 showed .390"/.395" lift????? 2bbl. 383.
I wanted to put up an iteration of the 383 I put in the Popo Dippy adding a RR intake & 750 3310 Holley into DesktopDyno..
 
Killer6 said:
That's awesome, I calculated from the event timing & lift split, the duration/overlap,.... & came up with 256°/260°......but My books for a '66 showed .390"/.395" lift????? 2bbl. 383.
I wanted to put up an iteration of the 383 I put in the Popo Dippy adding a RR intake & 750 3310 Holley into DesktopDyno..
Click to expand...
Early sixties, there were basically two big block cams (not counting the rammed 413s): The two barrel cam was 252 duration, .390/.395 lift, and the four barrel was 268 duration, .430 lift. The latter was used in the Chrysler 300 non-ram 413s (single four barrel or dual fours inline), the 383 four barrel and the 426 wedge four barrel.

Then the above two cams were dropped, and (through 1970) two and four barrel 383 and standard 440 all used a 256/260 duration, .425/.437 lift cam. This cam was also used in A body 383s in 67 and 68. The 440 hi-po, Road Runner and Super Bee 383s had a 268/274 duration, .450/.465 lift cam. This cam was also used in 69 A body 383s and 440s.

Some late sixties ads showed the hi-po motors having a (if I remember correctly) a 284/292 cam, but I am 100% sure this was the same as the 268/284 cam measured more like a GM cam.
 
PRH said:
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.
Click to expand...
Your post compelled me to go watch it--Damn you Dwayne-lol. Yes Nick has a VERY nice looking Rottler-SGM but I have only seen it in his videos once or maybe twice.

After watching it-Nick seems to be thinking the seats are sunk, but I cant imagine resurfacing .020" off the decks and not doing the rest--guides/machine for positive seals/seats/bowl blend/etc..... It truly is a "shame on them" moment, however I do give kudos to their honesty. Again I see in the video his regret for not dyno testing it beforehand especially if the customer was complaining about poor performance. Like you said Dwayne--"Umm ya think?"

The resistance to installing seats is probably because as you know its not an "easy" job to do right. I'm sure its very daunting and maybe he doesn't possess the tooling. Either way a set of O.S. stainless valves would have taken care of the sunken seat problem and the need for hardened exhaust seats problem. I noticed 'ole Tony didn't say a word in any of the footage I saw--wonder why?

From what I saw the Comp cam should be a slightly better driving cam due to the significant under 3000rpm increase in TQ but yes the Bullet cam would be faster in the 1/4.

Nick was down right frustrated stating he wanted to "smash it" and even echoed my experience that basically the 383 in stock form is a potato. J.Rob
 
RustyRatRod said:
SO wait. What are you trying to say? You mean it's NOT the the POS 383's fault? And here I thought the resident guru said they were all POS.
Click to expand...
Oh it is the POS 383 engine designs fault--it will just take a bit more time for Nick to arrive at that conclusion. Oh and if youre referring to me as the "resident guru" that said they were all Pieces Of ****--I stand by that statement and emphasize a stock 383/400 is a POS. Next time I'm at the shop I will print out the latest 383 I've dyno'd because I truly don't remember what it made for TQ. All I remember is it was poor and I used my dyno headers with a collector reducer to try and help. J.Rob
 
RAMM said:
Oh it is the POS 383 engine designs fault--it will just take a bit more time for Nick to arrive at that conclusion. Oh and if youre referring to me as the "resident guru" that said they were all Pieces Of ****--I stand by that statement and emphasize a stock 383/400 is a POS. Next time I'm at the shop I will print out the latest 383 I've dyno'd because I truly don't remember what it made for TQ. All I remember is it was poor and I used my dyno headers with a collector reducer to try and help. J.Rob
Click to expand...
I know. ...and I know what you're saying and you're right. It's like I told you man. I'm just yankin your chain. But that's not to say that a 383 cannot make power in any condition or state of tune, because they can.
 
I'm starting to think these Youtubers don't know jack...it's entertainment yes... words of wisdom eh....I dunno about that...

Uncle Tony can sit there and hog out the ports on a junk 318 head (the Lunar build) then run it with no actual proof of concept or results does that mean everyone should do it? I say no that just means

alot of junk 318 heads will get ground up by the idiots who watch Youtube...:)
 
RustyRatRod said:
I know. ...and I know what you're saying and you're right. It's like I told you man. I'm just yankin your chain. But that's not to say that a 383 cannot make power in any condition or state of tune, because they can.
Click to expand...
Define power and then we can narrow this down. J.Rob

p.s. Don't care about any chain yankin, I live in Onterrible where my chain is yanked more than the NY Yankees, im also married.:lol:
 
Dartswinger70 said:
I'm starting to think these Youtubers don't know jack...it's entertainment yes... words of wisdom eh....I dunno about that...

Uncle Tony can sit there and hog out the ports on a junk 318 head (the Lunar build) then run it with no actual proof of concept or results does that mean everyone should do it? I say no that just means

alot of junk 318 heads will get ground up by the idiots who watch Youtube...:)
Click to expand...
All Junkle Tony is after is clicks, the content is meaningless unless it's used as a guide for what not to do.
 
Look at all that torque. This was one of those customers that just wanted to cruise and said he didnt care about performance at all because he had a new Challenger 392 that he played with at the strip. Last I heard he sold the R.R. that this 383 powered. It must've been so impressive he decided to get rid of it. J.Rob

p.s. I'd say Nicks 383 is working as designed.

383sheet.jpg
 
RAMM said:
p.s. I'd say Nicks 383 is working as designed.
Click to expand...
That's what I don't get about the whole Nick video, didn't it even cross his mind the factory might of fudged on the numbers.
 
well remember the '335" horse 383 was exclusive to road runner wasnt it 335 hp 425 Lb Ft of torque? I mean I'd agree a smog 383 from the 70s is a dog... also back in its day it was impresive but so were high 13 sec 1/4 mile times...
 
Here is the Comp Cam Specs, about....030 more lift than the stock 1970 383 cam specs:

Screenshot_20240605-141947_Gallery.jpg


Comments from Nick's #2 383 video:

Screenshot_20240605-144149_Gallery.jpg


Screenshot_20240605-143918_Gallery.jpg



☆☆☆☆☆
 
Here’s my side of the argument……..
I wasn’t looking for a “stock” engine……. So I hotrodded one a bit.

This is the same short block I bracket raced for 3 years that made over 480hp.
I replaced the unported 906’s with some bowl blended later model castings(1-346, 1-452…… I used up some orphans)that flowed like mid-250’s, milled to achieve 9.8cr with a .040 gasket.
Same RPM intake as before, Holley 750(4779) carb, new smaller exhaust manifold friendly SFT cam, and running on pump 93 with exhaust manifolds that had a few feet of 2.5” pipe on them, no mufflers.
This is the only sheet I have handy, and this test was with a 14x4 air filter installed.

Afterward, I felt the cam was a bit too long, and too wide…… which is partially why the tq peaks as high up as it did.
Idled like a pussy cat though.
Cranking pressure was only 155psi(same as what my old 448 was that ran 10’s).
The 480hp configuration of this engine cranked almost 200.

IMG_3602.png
 
PRH said:
Here’s my side of the argument……..
I wasn’t looking for a “stock” engine……. So I hotrodded one a bit.

This is the same short block I bracket raced for 3 years that made over 480hp.
I replaced the unported 906’s with some bowl blended later model castings(1-346, 1-452…… I used up some orphans)that flowed like mid-250’s, milled to achieve 9.8cr with a .040 gasket.
Same RPM intake as before, Holley 750(4779) carb, new smaller exhaust manifold friendly SFT cam, and running on pump 93 with exhaust manifolds that had a few feet of 2.5” pipe on them, no mufflers.
This is the only sheet I have handy, and this test was with a 14x4 air filter installed.

Afterward, I felt the cam was a bit too long, and too wide…… which is partially why the tq peaks as high up as it did.
Idled like a pussy cat though.
Cranking pressure was only 155psi(same as what my old 448 was that ran 10’s).
The 480hp configuration of this engine cranked almost 200.

View attachment 1716258938
Click to expand...
No argument at all Dwayne thats a nicely hotrodded 383 and it still barely generated the 425 ft/lbs Nick is still searching for. My original post stated stock 383's/400's are giant P'sOS. J.Rob
 
Is the sheet you posted a run with manifolds or headers?

How much difference did they make?

Are those corrected numbers with or without inertia correction?
 
RAMM said:
Define power and then we can narrow this down. J.Rob

p.s. Don't care about any chain yankin, I live in Onterrible where my chain is yanked more than the NY Yankees, im also married.:lol:
Click to expand...
I don't know. I don't run a dyno for a living, so all I can do is guess. BUT, I'd say a good stout 383 with some good worked heads would be capable of 5 bills. I'm sure there are some guys here who've had some fast 383 cars and some still may.
 
PRH said:
Is the sheet you posted a run with manifolds or headers?

How much difference did they make?

Are those corrected numbers with or without inertia correction?
Click to expand...
No manifolds, that's with an admittedly large dyno header. J.Rob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top