Built New Hemi or Built 440?

Author Topic: Built New Hemi or Built 440?  (Read 26468 times)

Offline thedodgeboys

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3633
  • ''Normal’s Overrated''
    • THE DODGE BOYS
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #30 on: March 02, 2012 - 09:25:34 PM »
Thanks for all the inputs, it really helps.

Since I have a 440, 69 year, HP based on what my bro tells me but to me it is just a block. I am looking at some of the rotating assemblies at 440 source . However, I really want fuel injection. Aside from all this, just 'deciding' allows me to move on to suspension selection. I want to stick with the stock design, just upgrade everything.

Looking at:
Lower control arms, beefed up with weld on plates.
Upper tubulars
Upgrade the strut bars ( mine are bent)
All rubber changed to poly
1.18 torsion bars or bigger if I can find them.
Hallow sway bar
Bilstein matched valves shocks

Still researching:
Brakes, I am interested in somehow fitting 13" rotors with brake calipers from an '04 Cobra/Mach1. The work very well and a great selection of pads. Cheap too!
Steering, I hate the steering box on mopars, heavy beasts! Some kind of power rack system is a must.

Anyway, this is my current state of insanity! Thanks again!

Sounds like a good plan enjoy your build  :cheers:
Go Fast & Have Fun...
70 6.1 HEMI 6-speed Drop Top...




Offline HP2

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 4478
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #31 on: March 03, 2012 - 12:21:18 PM »
I want to stick with the stock design, just upgrade everything.

Steering, I hate the steering box on mopars, heavy beasts! Some kind of power rack system is a must.


These two statements are at odds with each other. The stock layout does not lend itself well to the use of a rack and pinion.  There are some bolt on rack kits out there, but they are poorly engineered. As a result, they have bump steer problems and reduced turning radius.

If the use of a rack is important, conversion to an Alterkation will be required to maintain adequate geometry. If use of the stock layout is important, a Firm Feel Stage 2 or 3 box will greatly improve the overassist and road feel situation, but is still a big iron box.

Looking at:
Lower control arms, beefed up with weld on plates.
Upper tubulars
Upgrade the strut bars ( mine are bent)
All rubber changed to poly
1.18 torsion bars or bigger if I can find them.
Hallow sway bar
Bilstein matched valves shocks

Still researching:
Brakes, I am interested in somehow fitting 13" rotors with brake calipers from an '04 Cobra/Mach1. The work very well and a great selection of pads. Cheap too!

All of this looks very good. With that shopping list, you may want to look at a packaged kit offered by Performance Suspension Technology. They offer everything from simple hard part rebuild kits, to full blown suspension upgrades with big t-bars, tubular s-bars, calibrated shocks, and four wheel disc brakes.

Offline TKat13

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 173
  • Work In Progress...
    • Project Cuda
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #32 on: March 04, 2012 - 04:16:26 PM »
These two statements are at odds with each other. The stock layout does not lend itself well to the use of a rack and pinion.  There are some bolt on rack kits out there, but they are poorly engineered. As a result, they have bump steer problems and reduced turning radius.

Interesting, I am surprised that adding a rack has such a hard time with bump steer. Is this because it is a rear-spindle steering setup? I know when I modified the Mach, I had Bump Steer issues but those were easily solved with bolt-in components and proper alignment. (did the alignment myself with string and angle degree tools).

Again, curious why a rack setup has bump steer issues but the stock setup does not. Any ideas or pointers would be a huge help. (btw, I love the suspension tech) This maybe something I tackle as it sounds like a challenge. :)

1974 'Cuda
2005 SRT-10 Ram
2006 Buell Firebolt XB12R (Murdered by person texting & driving)
2004 Mach 1

Offline brads70

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 18747
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #33 on: March 04, 2012 - 07:12:46 PM »
Interesting, I am surprised that adding a rack has such a hard time with bump steer. Is this because it is a rear-spindle steering setup? I know when I modified the Mach, I had Bump Steer issues but those were easily solved with bolt-in components and proper alignment. (did the alignment myself with string and angle degree tools).

Again, curious why a rack setup has bump steer issues but the stock setup does not. Any ideas or pointers would be a huge help. (btw, I love the suspension tech) This maybe something I tackle as it sounds like a challenge. :)


Oh the stock set up does have bumpsteer! Almost an inch! Just for a laugh watch the Vanishing point movie and look at the front wheels toe out when he is going through the desert!  The issue with a rack is the torsion bars are in the way. Not saying it can't be done , but it's not a simple bolt on. You will need to bend the steering arms down or use a Howe quick bump kit, or something similiar.

http://www.howeracing.com/p-7449-howe-quick-bump-tie-rod-ends.aspx
« Last Edit: March 04, 2012 - 07:15:29 PM by brads70 »
Brad
1970 Challenger 451stroker/4L60 auto OD
Barrie,Ontario,Canada
Proud to own one of the best cars ever made!!!!!

My restoration thread 
http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php?topic=59072.0
 My handling upgrade post
http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php?topic=73985.0

Offline MizzouRT

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 540
Weight savings
« Reply #34 on: March 04, 2012 - 08:57:33 PM »
Here are some estimated weight savings with aluminum parts:

Intake  25
Headers 25
Water pump housing 15
Heads (pair) 50

Total for above: 115 lbs.

Source: http://www.bigblockdart.com/techpages/weight.shtml

Which engine best suits your needs really depends on what is most important to you.  All else equal, the 440 will be cheaper to build but require more upkeep.  Since you already have a 440, that makes it much cheaper on initial costs.  Stock, the 5.7 VVT probably has slightly more low end torque than the 6.1.  Low end torque is good for a modern small block but is not at all comparable to a slightly warmed over 440, let alone a stroked 440.  The Gen III hemi is pretty much dead below 3000 rpm unless you have forced induction.  However, once you get the rpms up they make good power; the tach needle visibly speeds up when you cross 3500 and 4000 rpm and runs great from there to redline.

The Gen III is going to be much smoother.  That is both good and bad.  The downside is you won't have the cam lope and rumble at idle of a 440 with headers & cam.  But if you are driving any distance, don't underestimate the much better fuel economy on the Gen III.  If you are getting 6 - 8 mpg with a stroked 440, then 18 gal. tank x 8 = 144 miles from top off to walking.  Allow a 30 mile reserve and you have to fill up every 114 miles, and that is without any aggressive driving.  My main concern here is not so much the $$$ for gas but the lack of range.  If you have an aggressive cam and get 6 mpg and leave a 30 mile reserve in the tank, you are 18 * 6 =   108 miles to empty, so 78 miles between fillups with a 30 mile reserve.

The lighter weight of the Gen III is another obvious plus.
Daily Driver: 2013 Challenger SRT 6 speed
Toy: 1970 Challenger

Offline TKat13

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 173
  • Work In Progress...
    • Project Cuda
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #35 on: March 06, 2012 - 12:59:43 PM »
Oh the stock set up does have bumpsteer! Almost an inch! Just for a laugh watch the Vanishing point movie and look at the front wheels toe out when he is going through the desert!  The issue with a rack is the torsion bars are in the way. Not saying it can't be done , but it's not a simple bolt on. You will need to bend the steering arms down or use a Howe quick bump kit, or something similiar.

http://www.howeracing.com/p-7449-howe-quick-bump-tie-rod-ends.aspx


Thanks for the link and confirming the stock has bumpsteer because I just could not understand why just adding rack/pinion created the problem. When I dropped my Mach, I had to do a similar thing to fix the bump steer. It is all good now, but on a local highway that I traveled every day at 70+, big dip and it got a little scary. Funny thing, in my truck you could barely feel the dip.
1974 'Cuda
2005 SRT-10 Ram
2006 Buell Firebolt XB12R (Murdered by person texting & driving)
2004 Mach 1

Offline HP2

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 4478
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #36 on: March 06, 2012 - 10:47:27 PM »
Oh yeah, the stock set up has bump steer, but the rack conversion is as bad or worse and coupled with the reduced turning radius just makes it sound like a conversion with more drawbacks than benefits. Like brads70 said, the t-bar location creates an interference point, as does the oil pan. The stock center link sets right up close to the oil pan. The larger diameter of the rack means it has to be set down even further than the stock center link to allow oil pan clearance.

Offline TKat13

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 173
  • Work In Progress...
    • Project Cuda
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #37 on: March 07, 2012 - 11:23:56 AM »
Oh yeah, the stock set up has bump steer, but the rack conversion is as bad or worse and coupled with the reduced turning radius just makes it sound like a conversion with more drawbacks than benefits. Like brads70 said, the t-bar location creates an interference point, as does the oil pan. The stock center link sets right up close to the oil pan. The larger diameter of the rack means it has to be set down even further than the stock center link to allow oil pan clearance.
'Idea only' - Would Dry Sump solution give the clearance needed on the oil pan? Thinking that the oil pan is not as deep, but of course there are 'connections' to the oil pan that are not normally there. Thus, potentially moving the problem around. I have zero experience with these kits but was thinking it could help. Of course, temporarily ignoring the cost of such a kit.
1974 'Cuda
2005 SRT-10 Ram
2006 Buell Firebolt XB12R (Murdered by person texting & driving)
2004 Mach 1

Offline Chryco Psycho

  • Administrator
  • C-C.com Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 36620
  • 70 Challenger R/T SE 70 tube Chassis Cuda now sold
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #38 on: March 07, 2012 - 07:03:08 PM »
dry sump is a great option you need a minimal oil pan to make it wore but you have to mount a tank elsewhere to hold the oil .

Challenger - You`ll wish You Hadn`t

Offline brads70

  • C-C.com Expert
  • ********
  • Posts: 18747
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #39 on: March 07, 2012 - 07:53:11 PM »
dry sump is a great option you need a minimal oil pan to make it wore but you have to mount a tank elsewhere to hold the oil .

Mounting the oil pump could be tricky too?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2012 - 08:09:45 AM by brads70 »
Brad
1970 Challenger 451stroker/4L60 auto OD
Barrie,Ontario,Canada
Proud to own one of the best cars ever made!!!!!

My restoration thread 
http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php?topic=59072.0
 My handling upgrade post
http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php?topic=73985.0

Offline ragtopdodge

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 4065
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #40 on: April 13, 2012 - 02:12:27 PM »
Dry sump is $$$.

Overkill IMHO.

W/the money you saved from not getting a 5.7/6.1 EFI setup, bite the bullet and get an RMS Alterkation for better road feel, steering, and an extra 100lb off the front.

'70 318-auto Chally 'vert
'71 383-auto 'Cuda 'vert (sold)
06 300c SRT8
04 2500 QCLB 4x4 HO

Offline HP2

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 4478
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #41 on: April 14, 2012 - 09:48:32 AM »
Yeah, a dry sump would reduce oil pan interference, but won't address the lack of steering angle possible. I agree that for the money to do a dry sump, simply swapping to an Alterkation would solve all the problems.

Offline Cooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1207
  • There goes the lone Challenger............
    • christinecarclub.com
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #42 on: April 14, 2012 - 10:39:45 AM »
the physicaL size of the engine has no bearing on the horsepower it produces.




Wrong. You can only put so much crank in a small block before oil pan rails get in the way and nessesitate an aftermarket block. Just because that 5.5" stroke crank fits inside that new 6.1 HEMI block doesn't mean it's gonna make power with a Rod to piston ratio of 2.6. Ever heard of frictional HP loss?Therefore a 540 C.I., Stock block 360 Small block is all but impossible. But is entirely possible with a 440 block. Yes, HP is hard to come by without sacrificing drivability, but HP isn't king on the street, TORQUE is king. The small block will only make so much torque before it is done. Same thing with imports. Yes, Blowers/turbos/Nitrous will increase things a bit, but what's done to one engine has to be done to the other. the old Proverb still holds true to this day..
"Yee that starts with a big engine, ends up with the biggest engine".
« Last Edit: April 14, 2012 - 10:42:19 AM by Cooter »
1958 plymouth Belvedere 2dr hd top "Christine" [OO)====V====(OO]
1969 dodge Charger "General Lee"         [___|______I______|___]                        
1968 Dodge Dart 2dr sedan 505" Stroker    (O]=0==========0=[O)                
1970 Challenger R/T Clone "Kowalski Special"   (OO) [___________] (OO)

Offline QuartermileCuda

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 124
  • Shot of it in its Final Assembly
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #43 on: May 15, 2012 - 12:03:20 AM »
Well here`s another curve ball, what about a Gen 3 426 or 440 Hemi, they put out 600 plus horsepower(natually aspirated) and It`s a small block; the physicaL size of the engine has no bearing on the horsepower it produces. Even a stroked 440(eg. 505, 512 etc.) has a difficult time achieving those kind of numbers.

I agree. The hemi I have in my truck has a cable driven TB, headers and fan delete. And as far as power goes I made 303 wheel through a 904. In my opinion thats pretty good for mostly stock. Not to mention that the 5.7 is alot more reliable than my refreshed 360 ever was.
71 340-6 AAR 'Cuda Concept.
(Was a 73 Barracuda)
69 Dodge Charger 383 4 speed. T5 Copper Needing Resto!

340/416 Stroker, 904 w/ Gearvendors gear splitter, 3:91 Posi.
Cant wait to see how fast she'll move. ;)

Offline GreenFish

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Built New Hemi or Built 440?
« Reply #44 on: May 25, 2012 - 09:00:52 PM »
Get a 6.1 crate motor and slap a super charger on it. I THINK they have a forged bottom end. You should be able to drop CR with thick head gaskets and run 10psi + with no problem. Stock is 425 hp, so at 10 psi you should be creeping up on 600 ponies.

From Mancini
This cast iron 6.1L Hemi engines deliver horsepower and torque right out of the crate. P5155437 includes factory wire harness and throttle body.
$6,250.00
MOP-P5155437
70 cuda, 440, KB pistons, 10.5:1 compression, edlebrock heads,RacerBrown cam, 5-Speed Tremec, Megasquirt EFI