Stock 340 dyno tests?

-
273 said:
Here's a low cr 2bbl 318 with headers dyno's 182 hp, even if you add a decent amount of cr you get a 3-4% power increase so 190 hp with headers.

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/mopp-0312-318-long-block-bolt-ons/

Here's a low cr 360 at one point around 3:45 time mark, stock low cr, 1.88 valves, 2bbl cammed with factory 360 4bbl intake and exhaust manifolds and a Qjet makes 264 hp. That's basically the 340's 275 hp power number but without cam cr and 2.02. I know the 360 got 20 cid on a 340 :)

When he added a similar cam as a 340 xe250h and 2.02 heads with a bit of work so maybe on par with x heads but with headers and aftermarket intake but still low cr made 339 hp.

What did a 340 make? Who knows but we do know they were fast.

Click to expand...


I love this simple bolt on stuff.
 
You are an evil person and will be punished, but not by me. I just might do the same thing!
 
toolmanmike said:
THat was about a 500+ horse Poly if I remember. Love to see the underdog do good no matter how many dollars get spent.
Click to expand...
They are very capable even in mild, budget situations. If I had access to one, I'd build it and hold it for a truck.
 
Mean416 said:
I mentioned Nick, because his Dyno seems conservative and realistic. Not puffy bullshit numbers but real.
Click to expand...
He does have the lowest hp dyno I've ever seen and he has trouble hitting up goals for stock engines
 
The latest Hemmings Muscle Machines has a 340 6 Pack rebuild and dyno test. They dropped the compression to 9.5-1, but gave it a little more cam for a restored 'Cuda AAR. They got 375 hp and decent torque, too.
 
teringer said:
He does have the lowest hp dyno I've ever seen and he has trouble hitting up goals for stock engines
Click to expand...
I would much prefer a conservative dyno, than one that tells lies. lol
 
Swinger 340 said:
I like the whole package as a dyno. "Strip, Dyno".
Click to expand...
I agree 100%. The strip is really the only accurate dyno anyway. I mean, dynos are nice and all, but they are really just an expensive toy.
 
RustyRatRod said:
Opinions vary.
Click to expand...

Lets explore the reason(s) why a dyno is far more accurate than a drag strip (or any other track).

1. No driver. If a driver can’t do a burnout the same 3 times in a row, he probably won’t make the same run 3 times in a row.

2. Weather. The dyno room is a controlled environment. Even 5 minutes of cloud cover can change the track. And that changes ET/MPH

3. The track. Track prep, where the driver stages (see reason 1), did the driver stage straight 3 times in a row.

That’s 3 simple reasons the dyno is far more accurate than a track. 99% of the cars out there have never been on a scale so the weight is at best a guess.

Here is a bonus…

4. The car. Bad tires. Crappy shocks. Wrong converter. A car that flexes like gumby. Wrong IC.

So just those 4 things right there make the track a crap shoot at best. Add two or more together and you have a real poop salad.

The dyno gets blamed for things that aren’t its problem.
 
All that is true. However, at a given weight and reasonable car setup, it takes a well understood amount of power to go a certain mph.

And there are plenty of cars out there that run repeatable times. It's quite common actually. So let's not pretend actual track testing is BS.
 
Mean416 said:
All that is true. However, at a given weight and reasonable car setup, it takes a well understood amount of power to go a certain mph.

And there are plenty of cars out there that run repeatable times. It's quite common actually. So let's not pretend actual track testing is BS.
Click to expand...

Let’s not pretend that track testing is the final say in anything.

How easy is it to test say…a set of headers at the track? Near impossible. What about testing two (or more) intake manifolds at the track? Again, near impossible.

What about testing valve lash? Or ICL? Can you do it at the track? Probably. Will it be accurate? Highly doubtful.

What about testing timing loops? See above.

Pretending that the dyno lies is sticking your head in the sand to the reality of what it is and what it does. Anyone can test far more and far more accurately with a dyno than anyone can do at the track.

Spending money on dyno time is the best investment you can make after you build an engine. You can’t possibly accurately test on the track what you can test with the dyno. And you can do it quicker than you can do at the track.

Obviously you have dyno operators who just break in the engine, make a few pulls and send it out the door. The dyno operator is almost as important as the dyno itself. If you have a dyno operator that understands what a typical water brake dyno can do will save you time, money and headaches down the road. Plus, you can find horsepower.

So let’s not pretend that dyno testing is BS. It’s not. It’s far more accurate than any time slip.
 
Dyno's are very helpful for evaluating and tuning an engine's capability to run a number at the track.
 
Your posts are too long. I see all that verbiage and I'm like nah.

I'm not discounting the merits of an engine dyno. But I also know there's plenty of merit in track testing. PLENTY. Actually, more. Since we race vehicles, not dynos.

Think of it this way. Do we dyno engines so we can build faster cars? Or do we build fast cars so we can then test the engines and get a number? We all know the answer to this.

So many things go into building an actual fast car. The base engine tune you get from a dyno is one of MANY ingredients.
 
Mean416 said:
Your posts are too long. I see all that verbiage and I'm like nah.

I'm not discounting the merits of an engine dyno. But I also know there's plenty of merit in track testing. PLENTY. Actually, more. Since we race vehicles, not dynos.

Think of it this way. Do we dyno engines so we can build faster cars? Or do we build fast cars so we can then test the engines and get a number? We all know the answer to this.

So many things go into building an actual fast car. The base engine tune you get from a dyno is one of MANY ingredients.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I’d let a long post (according to you) affect my learning.

It’s clear you speak from zero experience. That’s not my problem.
 
70dart340 said:
The latest Hemmings Muscle Machines has a 340 6 Pack rebuild and dyno test. They dropped the compression to 9.5-1, but gave it a little more cam for a restored 'Cuda AAR. They got 375 hp and decent torque, too.
Click to expand...
Kind of sounds like the same engine Richard Holdener talks about in this video

 
Does anyone know how much horsepower it takes to yank a 20" diameter maple tree root.
 
Newbomb Turk said:
Yeah, I’d let a long post (according to you) affect my learning.

It’s clear you speak from zero experience. That’s not my problem.
Click to expand...

I pick and choose my long reads. I don't read rants from people who get butt hurt when someone puts up information counter to their opinion.

I have enough experience to know I'm right this time.
 
Mean416 said:
I pick and choose my long reads. I don't read rants from people who get butt hurt when someone puts up information counter to their opinion.

I have enough experience to know I'm right this time.
Click to expand...


I‘d laugh but your post is very sad.

And FWIW, that wasnt a rant. I laid out the facts. Sadly, you don’t have enough experience to know how wrong you are.

Carry on
 
I agree that in the end of the day it mainly only matters how well your car performs.

The one thing I don't get with the track tells the true hp, is how can it ever be verified?
If dyno numbers can't be trusted then you have no way measuring the engines hp and verify the tracks calculated results.

To me IDC if mag & video result aren't exact, but it the numbers most of us know and use to compare mods with each other, if 400 dyno hp is only 350 track calculated hp the 400 hp has better usability cause I can compared to all the available info that expressed with those figures.
 
273 said:
I agree that in the end of the day it mainly only matters how well your car performs.

The one thing I don't get with the track tells the true hp, is how can it ever be verified?
If dyno numbers can't be trusted then you have no way measuring the engines hp and verify the tracks results.

To me IDC if mag & video result aren't exact, but it the numbers most of us know and use to compare mods with each other, if 400 dyno hp is only 350 track calculated hp the 400 hp has better usability cause I can compared to all the available info that expressed with those figures.
Click to expand...

And you’d have to explain the difference between corrected and measured torque and horsepower because they are not the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top