Nicks Garage 383 build

-
Even this stock ish 383 made stock hp but only 395 lbs-ft wasn't until they added headers and more carb did it hit 425 lbs-ft.

https://www.motortrend.com/articles/mopp-0209-upgrading-the-383-magnum-avs-carb/

Torque
RPMSTKHDRSCARBINTKECAM
3000382.7406.3427.1405.5394.2
3200388.1406.6422.6410.9400.0
3400388.3412.6431.9421.2414.7
3600394.6411.2433.7426.1431.5
3800392.4408.3430.8430.0435.5
4000387.2401.3424.6433.0446.5
4200377.8396.2416.4430.1451.5
4400371.4390.2409.7430.1451.8
4600367.8384.6402.0427.8454.2
4800361.6379.5398.5424.3456.6
5000355.1373.4385.6421.3450.3
5200337.2357.8368.1407.7449.1
5400322.8348.5351.4395.1435.8
5600417.0
5800407.6
6000398.2
Horsepower
RPMSTKHDRSCARBINTKECAM
3000218.6232.1244.0231.6225.2
3200236.5247.7257.5250.3243.7
3400251.4267.1279.6272.7268.5
3600270.5281.9297.3292.1295.8
3800283.9295.4311.7311.1315.1
4000294.9305.6323.4329.8340.0
4200302.1316.8333.0343.9361.1
4400311.1326.9343.2360.4378.5
4600322.2336.8352.1374.7397.8
4800330.5346.8364.2387.8417.3
5000338.0355.5367.1401.1428.7
5200333.9354.2364.5403.7444.6
5400331.9358.3361.3406.3448.1
 
fishmens67 said:
They can piss on it all they want, in all reality the 383 has more potential than a 340. The mighty 340 I might add. lol
Click to expand...
I cannot disagree. But then, we're just a couple of bumpkins, I guess. lol
 
You know,,,,I don’t get it,,,,,,why do Mopar people bad mouth our products ?

That 383 Nick is showing needs some help,,,,,,I’m guessing the bores are not completely true .
Even a stock 383 should show more torque than that,,,,a brand new stock that is .
Yes,,,,,it was rebuilt by someone,,,,,but who knows what all was done,,,or how well it was done !
True bores,,,and compression,,,,will lead the way .
And a good sealing valve job !

How many people do an air test of the seats before they fire it up ?
I do it before I ever put on the rockers .

If the valves are not sealing against the seats,,,,,it only gets worse after the flame etches the seats .
After that,,,they never seal right,,,,,,and any stock type engine will be weak from then on !

It’s always the little stuff that gets most people .

Tommy
 
fishmens67 said:
They can piss on it all they want, in all reality the 383 has more potential than a 340. The mighty 340 I might add. lol
Click to expand...
I never said the 383 didn't have potential because of course it can be built into an admirable performer as @PRH has shown us. I said a 383 in true stock form is a D-U-D, and thats what this whole thread is about. As convoluted as this thread is, I'll refocus and say again--the missing torque Nick is after aint missing, IT NEVER EXISTED. J.Rob
 
RAMM said:
I never said the 383 didn't have potential because of course it can be built into an admirable performer as @PRH has shown us. I said a 383 in true stock form is a D-U-D, and thats what this whole thread is about. As convoluted as this thread is, I'll refocus and say again--the missing torque Nick is after aint missing, IT NEVER EXISTED. J.Rob
Click to expand...
I know what you can do, I know what I can do with a 383.
 
PRH said:
Stock 440 with ch4b & headers = no big numbers

Click to expand...


Thanks for posting that. It makes me feel better about my mild 400 build, with a 444/466 lift cam. It made the same horsepower and only 25 lb/ft less torque.
 
Those stock type builds just “are what they are”.

A bit more cam and some bowl work can really make a noticeable difference on a build like that.

But not every combo is built to be a hero on the dyno.

I wonder exactly what he used for a cam?
None of the factory replacements I know of are “.444” lift.
The std cam is .434, and the HP cam is usually listed as .449 or .450.

One other thought……
The headers looked to me like they may have been 2” hookers.
If they were 2”, then something smaller would have probably picked the peak TQ numbers a bit.
 
Last edited:
RAMM said:
I never said the 383 didn't have potential because of course it can be built into an admirable performer as @PRH has shown us. I said a 383 in true stock form is a D-U-D, and thats what this whole thread is about. As convoluted as this thread is, I'll refocus and say again--the missing torque Nick is after aint missing, IT NEVER EXISTED. J.Rob
Click to expand...
You left all that out of the first couple of pages. You never said anything about "potential". Nuthin.
 
PRH said:
Those stock type builds just “are what they are”.

A bit more cam and some bowl work can really make a noticeable difference on a build like that.

But not every combo is built to be a hero on the dyno.

I wonder exactly what he used for a cam?
None of the factory replacements I know of are “.444” lift.
The std cam is .434, and the HP cam is usually listed as .449 or .450.

One other thought……
The headers looked to me like they may have been 2” hookers.
If they were 2”, then something smaller would have probably picked the peak TQ numbers a bit.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it was the same Summit 6400 cam I used? 214/224 duration and 444/466 lift.
 
Maybe someone could ask for a part number in the comments?

Edit- not quite 24hrs since the video was posted and there’s already close to 300 comments……….so it seems like a question there would just get lost.
 
Last edited:
Not a power house but it's basically making peak torque a soon as you step on the gas (3000 rpm), make a nice driver.
 
Here's what to do to a mild 440 8 psi of boost for 527 hp and 650 tq.

 
fishmens67 said:
That is good grind for a mild 383
Click to expand...
There was a mild 440 here a few years ago that used that same cam(well, the Melling equivalent, same grind).
Cast flat tops down the hole .110”, ootb Stealths(8.75cr), stock iron intake, 3310 Holley, 1-7/8 headers.
460tq/379hp.
 
Nick's Garage 383 Build Monday evening on YouTube Part 4.

Screenshot_20240707-124343_Gallery.jpg


Screenshot_20240707-124414_Gallery.jpg


Screenshot_20240707-124309_Gallery.jpg



☆☆☆☆☆
 
I doubt it will make 425tq, but I’ll tune in and find out!!

I’m a little puzzled as to why the “no frills” 440, making under 350hp with headers is okay, but the 383 making similar hp with ex manifolds is unacceptable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top