if you want something that revs high and doesnt make alot of torque and is small...you can build a civic and rev it to 10,000 rpms..

 

Something else just occured to me. Taking 1/4" stroke out of a 350 will not dramatically (maybe not even measurably) increase the rpm range.

My latest set of mod's on my car included adding in 1/4" stroke (going from 363 to 388 cid) and advancing the cam 4 deg. Everyone should agree that both of these changes should decrease the rpm range. Boost the low-end, it definitely did, as my 60' dropped from 1.9x down to 1.6x. However, it is interesting to note that the engine speed at peak hp only dropped by 100 rpm, while hp increased as indicated by a 3 mph gain in the quarter.

Another good example was my old 3rd gen. It was an 8.5/1 355 that I converted to a 11/1 383, everything else staying the same. Granted the compression ratio increased, but the gains were phenomenal. It went from a best of 12.10 at 114 all the way down to 11.33 at 120 mph. I doubt you can attribute all those gains to the compression ratio alone. I don't think the .270" extra stroke hurt the power one bit. . .

Mike

 

The only reason I would see to build a small cube motor it to fit within the rules. a few months ago I saw an s-10 super stock with a 2.8L and power glide. The guy said he shifted ay 14k and went thru at 16k

 

the '70 cuda I referenced ran high twelves consistently with the stock engine. Mods were headers, slightly bigger gear and slicks. Im not just going on the guys word, he has it well documented in video. While that may not be THAT impressive in comparison to todays stuff, those small motors ran RIGHT up there with the big cubed motors of the day.

 

What are the full line of specifications on one of them? I really would like to know.

 

wow, my 96 impala SS runs consistant low 13s and has hit the high 12s with a much smaller stock engine. Bolt-ons only.

The larger engine has the ability to have higher compression than a smaller engine.

How much RPM do you think 500cid NHRA Prostock motors turn? Over 10k on every shift.

And don't forget the old saying, RPM = Ruins Peoples Motors

 

I love these threads. As an older guy that actually owned 333 (.40 over 327) with Camel humped 2.02/ 1.6), I'd go for displacement.

I built up a 327 IAW the hotrod practices of the late 70s early 80s (forge TRW pistons, mild porting stainless valves ETC) According to commonly quoted HP figures; my 327 in a 64 chevelle with turbo 350(I removed the PG) should have rocked.

However, my little brothers stock 69 chevelle with a 325HP 396 kicked the crap out of the SBC so bad that I yanked the 327, installed a 454 and never looked back.

I don't see what you hope to gain with the 330 vice 355 or even a forged stroker.


As for your 302 Z/28 analogy I don't remember any small block F-body owner showing up to race the '70 454 SS that my brother and I shared for the weekend street racing. (Lots of smack talk at school and then excuses on Monday)

The only small block powered cars I remember that showed class on the street was a Maverick with a Boss 351 and a couple of SBC Vegas.


I know that these were old style carburated engines; but if displacement wasn't key to street power, why did GM make the LS7, a 427 vice a 2.0 liter?
Mike

 

Hey, wasn't the Boss 351 actually a big block (cleveland)? Or is it the Boss 302 I'm thinking about?

 

Here is my 355 http://videos.streetfire.net/video/8...a70173bc34.htm

 

In my book the 351s 400Ms etc were/are small blocks the FE series (352-460 etc) are were the Big blocks.

 

the car consisently did high 12s, meaning he almost never ran 13s and ran 12.5s on a really good run. sorry i wasnt clear there, but if youre barely into the twelves thats a solid .5 second difference id say. I also said its nothing special in comparison to most of todays fuel injected stuff. my point was how well it performed in comparison to big cubed motors of its day. high 12s were what most of the mildy modded big blocks ran.

i cant find much about the 340, but the six pack 340 found in AAR cudas was definitely a hot one. different heads, stronger crank, 6-pack intake, and maybe even a different cam... im not sure. Just like the 69 Z28, they were severly underrated at 290hp.

http://216.120.237.3/mopar/mopar340.html

 

A high school friend of mine had a 6 pack 340 Challenger and it was a pig until we were at above legal speeds, even 350 F-bodies would kick its Azz during weekend night speed events He always wanted to race from a roll (just like the current ricers) I will admit it cruised nice above 100 mph IE it was a well handling car.


I guess I'm showing my age but back then big blocks ruled, 440s seemed to do better than the street hemis (At least at the unsanctioned sporting events I'd go to ) Our 454SS even whupped up on a 428SCJ that some old guy kept talking smack about and had the stones to roll out one night. Got to love the old LS6.

Mike

 

lol what in the world kind of gear did he have??? my uncles AAR absolutely RIPS in first and Im not sure it can even go much more than 100... I think he is nearing the end of his gear when he finishes the quarter. but anyway, launching is the cars specialty when the slicks are on it (which is never anymore, car is worth too much). it annihilates street tires with ease.

I can see where you are coming from though in the sense that when i raced him with my bone stock LT1, he did most of the pulling on me above 55 mph

 

How, exactly, is a 290 hp car running high 14's "underrated"?

Also, the stat's on the 1970 Challenger TA, 340, 290 hp was 14.3 at 99 mph.

Once again, people seem to remember these things running way better than they did.

 

my da used to always talk crap to me about his 440 mopars.....then when I took him for a ride and yank the front tires he told me I was crazy and he wanted to go home.......He said himself things have come along ways in 30 years, most old guys don't want to admit that