Nicks Garage 383 build

-
PRH said:
The trick would be coming up with a cam that’s big enough to not hold it back too much, but not be so big it’s miserable to live with on the street.
Click to expand...

Here they compare these 3 cams in a 383 and the small HR gave the power of the larger FT while keeping the duration of the smaller FT

214/ 224FT		231/ 237FT214/ 224HR


https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/camshaft-comparison-testing/

Dyno Results

383 Cam Test SuperFlow 902 Engine Dyno

Torque

RPM214/ 224FT231/ 237FT214/ 224HR
2,800413381425
3,000417405430
3,200427422438
3,400436432446
3,600441437451
3,800441445453
4,000440448452
4,200439448453
4,400438447453
4,600435446452
4,800429443447
5,000420434439
5,200406425426
5,400390417416
5,600375407404
5,800360391389
6,000344375372
6,200316361NR
Horsepower

RPM214/ 224FT231/ 237FT214/ 224HR
2,800220203227
3,000238232245
3,200260257267
3,400282279289
3,600302300309
3,800319322328
4,000335341344
4,200351358362
4,400367374380
4,600381391396
4,800392405409
5,000399413418
5,200402421423
5,400401429428
5,600400434431
5,800398432430
6,000392428424
6,200373426NR
Power Averages 2,800-6,000 rpm

214/ 224FT231/ 237FT214/ 224HR
Avg. TQ415.9425.2433.4
Avg. HP344.8355.3360.8
 
Icetech said:
He also said that line boring a block moves the crank closer to the cam... and i am not joking..
Click to expand...
So how do you align hone or bore without taking meat of the block saddle? Same with resizing con rods, may be a little, may be a lot, you always grind the flat of the cap then hone for your new id. Cat 3208 for example are gear driven and have different gears to give the proper clearance. Maybe not a deal breaker on this motor but have never seen anything bored or honed that did not move the crank and cam closer.
 
.010” bearing is for grinding the crank journal .010”, no way to do it that I know of, not an excuse for this engine’s lackluster performance though.
 
JunkyJimmy said:
.010” bearing is for grinding the crank journal .010”, no way to do it that I know of, not an excuse for this engine’s lackluster performance though.
Click to expand...
ahhh you are right... my brain just sucks

For some reason i was thinking you could just bore it and use oversize bearings, didn't realize it's usually shave the cap and then bore round which would move it up... Had to go look it up. my bad
 
Icetech said:
ahhh you are right... my brain just sucks

For some reason i was thinking you could just bore it and use oversize bearings, didn't realize it's usually shave the cap and then bore round which would move it up... Had to go look it up. my bad
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure they mill some off the main cap parting line to shrink the hole slightly then bore/hone back to original size, I think honing moves it more than boring if I remember right.
 
JunkyJimmy said:
So how do you align hone or bore without taking meat of the block saddle? Same with resizing con rods, may be a little, may be a lot, you always grind the flat of the cap then hone for your new id. Cat 3208 for example are gear driven and have different gears to give the proper clearance. Maybe not a deal breaker on this motor but have never seen anything bored or honed that did not move the crank and cam closer.
Click to expand...


You can do it. It happens all the time. If done correctly it won’t move the crank .001 if that.
 
Where the block is out of wack determines what’s taken out , boring or honing, getting off track, I best shut up! Carry on folks!
 
PRH said:
If one is trying for more power, and is on a somewhat tight budget, and isn’t willing to use an aftermarket manifold and headers, along with a little mild porting on the heads…….then imo, “making more power” isn’t really that high of a priority.

If you want it to look stock, and have a noticeable improvement in power over stock(improved seat of the pants feel)……..then add cubes.

Just to reiterate RAMMs initial thoughts on the TQ output…….
The factory rating of 425ft/lbs is a unicorn.
A 100% stock 383, run with factory exhaust, isn’t going to make that.

That being said, I haven’t found the 383 to be an unwilling foundation for respectable power output after receiving the usual hot rod treatments.

This one is pump gas, streetable solid cam, rpm intake, 750 carb, ported factory heads, headers:

View attachment 1716264089
Click to expand...
That's impressive and it's relatively mild.
 
JunkyJimmy said:
So how do you align hone or bore without taking meat of the block saddle? Same with resizing con rods, may be a little, may be a lot, you always grind the flat of the cap then hone for your new id. Cat 3208 for example are gear driven and have different gears to give the proper clearance. Maybe not a deal breaker on this motor but have never seen anything bored or honed that did not move the crank and cam closer.
Click to expand...
You remove the main caps and machine some off the faces where they meet the block, essentially making the crank bore egg shaped. Then, the block is set up in the line bore and positioned so that when the bar makes the cut, it removes the majority from the caps and barely, barely skims the block.
 
RustyRatRod said:
That's impressive and it's relatively mild.
Click to expand...
“Relatively”

It was quite a bit mellower than my 383.

The cam was a Comp XS282S running with 1.6 rockers.

One step down on the cam would have mellowed it out a little more, and probably only cost it 15hp or so.
 
PRH said:
“Relatively”

It was quite a bit mellower than my 383.

The cam was a Comp XS282S running with 1.6 rockers.

One step down on the cam would have mellowed it out a little more, and probably only cost it 15hp or so.
Click to expand...
....but possibly given it more torque down low.
 
JunkyJimmy said:
If your saddles are all good why would you machine it? Only the caps deform?
Click to expand...
To adjust main bearing clearance for one, and to straighten all 5 housing bores. They are often out of line slightly after 50+ years and millions of heat cycles
 
Exactly, if 1 saddle is .003” low the rest have to be cut to match, can’t just take alittle off a cap. I’ve even seen an oil starved motor that didn’t even spin the bearing but was close to it, move the block from just heat. The whole main web gets out of wack.
 
Zero deck, ported 915 head milled to 75cc and .035 quench.
 
Mopar 528 solid or comparable cam, street dominator or RPM intake topped with a Holley 750 and headers.
4500 stall and 4.56 gear. Hang on.
 
BSB67 said:
There has not been a true replacement piston for the 383 hp for 40 years. The 2315 is close, but short on compression height.
Click to expand...
The numbers put it .014" in the hole. I'd say that's dang close.
 
BSB67 said:
Yep. Close. But not it.
Click to expand...
Zero deck is easily attainable. Splittin hairs. I'm really not familiar with the HP engines. only enough to know they had tighter deck clearance than the passenger car engines. Were they positive deck height like the 340? That'd be cuttin it close with no valve reliefs.
 
RustyRatRod said:
Zero deck is easily attainable. Splittin hairs. I'm really not familiar with the HP engines. only enough to know they had tighter deck clearance than the passenger car engines. Were they positive deck height like the 340? That'd be cuttin it close with no valve reliefs.
Click to expand...
I believe the 69 ones were positive deck if my memory serves me correctly
 
replicaracer43 said:
I believe the 69 ones were positive deck if my memory serves me correctly
Click to expand...
It seems somewhere in the toilet of my mind I remember that being so. But like I said, I'm just not familiar enough with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top