My 440 recipe

[73restomod]

I have settled on my motor recipe, finally. I will be using my car for open track days eventually at the Glen.

78 block bored. 055
Forged crank 3.9 stroke w/ 2.2 journal 7.1 inch rod
Billet main caps and studs w/ stud girdle
JE 4032 pistons dished
440 source heads hand ported (currently 288 CFM at .550 lift) w/
welded chambers and reshaped (heart shape) 75 cc goal
10. 5 to 1 compression
PRW stainless 1.6 rockers
Hydraulic Roller Cam (haven't settled on specs yet)
Mopar Wedge Dual Plane ( also ported)
Custom 1 7/8 headers ( engine is set back 1 1/2 and down 1 inch)
850 CFM annular booster carb
Milodon Road race Oil pan with 1/2 inch pickup ans a 3L accusump accumulator.

Looking for a shift point around 6250 with good over rev to 6800. Any advise or room for improvement?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[nqkjw]

When you go for the chev journal size are you offset grinding for more stroke or staying central.
Just curious.

[73restomod]

Its a brand new crank 4340 no grinding and welding here.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[cudabob496]

I've heard 1.5 rockers are the way to go for a build like yours (valve train geometry issue with 1.6)
I would bore less for more strength.
Single plane will make more power.
If shifting at 6000+ rpm, go to 2 inch headers.

[73restomod]

My dual planes been ported quite a bit, it will outflow many stock single planes. The worst runner the #7, is over 337 cfm @ 28 in/hg. I want to have good drive-ability when I go to car shows and cruises.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[cudabob496]

My dual planes been ported quite a bit, it will outflow many stock single planes. The worst runner the #7, is over 337 cfm @ 28 in/hg. I want to have good drive-ability when I go to car shows and cruises.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

My gut tells me a ported dual plane will not outflow (or out perform) a single plane.  You may lose a lot of
low end torque, while an M1 Single plane still has decent low end torque.  But just a guess on my part.
It may outflow a stock single plane, but the path to get to the cylinders may not be very efficient.
If you have a ported dual plane that outperforms a single plane, then I would patent that sucker!!
The advantage of the single plane, besides plenum volume, is the direct shot to the cylinders!

[73restomod]

I can understand the sentiment towards single planes, especially when racing is involved, but the porting is extensive. Its been sonic checked while every runner was re-contoured. Even the Plenums been reworked. I want a lot of mid-range for shooting out of the corners, from as low as 2750 RPM. This is also why I can't seem to settle on a cam..
My machinist builds lots of truck pull motors, I've seen enough dyno sheets to have faith on the dual plane^-^

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[cudabob496]

I can understand the sentiment towards single planes, especially when racing is involved, but the porting is extensive. Its been sonic checked while every runner was re-contoured. Even the Plenums been reworked. I want a lot of mid-range for shooting out of the corners, from as low as 2750 RPM. This is also why I can't seem to settle on a cam..
My machinist builds lots of truck pull motors, I've seen enough dyno sheets to have faith on the dual plane^-^

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Nother thing to consider, is excessive porting of an intake can slow the velocity of the fuel/air mixture into the cylinders, reducing torque/power.
Been reading articles about people getting more power out of ported heads, by porting less, and increasing A/F velocity through the ports
and into the combustion chamber. But, every application is unique to some extent.

[Chryco Psycho]

I tend to agree that the 1.6 rocker may be a mistake , it will require more spring pressure than the lifter may be deisgned for & could collapse the lifter .

[moparmaniac59]

I have a set of stealth aluminum heads with the 1.5 rockers using the comp cams #953-16 valve springs with Comp Cams hydraulic roller lifters. Sounds like a pretty stout build you have going. What do you plan on doing with the car? Street use? Street/strip? Are you running a 4-speed or auto? Tall gears? I also use an Edelbrock Performer RPM intake which is a dual plane square bore and does quite nicely. Keep us posted on the build & good luck!! 


                                                                          Matt B.

             

[moper]

IMO, the rod is too long. If it was me (and assuming you're properly sizing and shaping the chamber) a short rod engine will use the heads better. Chevy rods can be had in all kinds of lengths - I'd go for something like 6.385. It will also allow for a taller piston which will help ring stability.
In terms of the rest - I'd up the compression by half a point, run a quench distance of .035, and I would not use a hydraulic roller - go with either a solid roller or solid flat tappet.
Also - if you're flow testing intakes - don't just flow the intake. Flow it on the head. Preferably with the carburetor in place (and held at WOT). Then you can tell what it's going to do. I think the right dual plane (like the Indy 440-2D) would work very well. A factory intake is a mistake regardless of the model or how it was ported and the MP version is basically a factory design, made slightly bigger and cast of aluminum.

[HP_Cuda]

Have to get springs that can handle it. I got some beehives that go up to .600

I tend to agree that the 1.6 rocker may be a mistake , it will require more spring pressure than the lifter may be deisgned for & could collapse the lifter .

[Bart]

I run the PRW 1.6 with Indy heads.

[drewcrane]

Have to get springs that can handle it. I got some beehives that go up to .600

I AM running 1:6 ,with the springs you you should be fine

[73restomod]

The intake is actually an Edlebrock RPM with the Mopar name, very tall plenum compared to the factory, so tall it was one of the reasons I dropped my motor an inch while I was setting it back. Its not an OEM factory style Dual Plane. I am building the motor for Autocross and street driving. So sustained RPM is the reasoning behind the rod, with the stroke increase it has a 1.81 rod ratio factory rod ratio is 1.8. Cubic inches will be about 470 -ish. Piston comp. height is 1.69. Its also an RB not a B, sorry should've clarified those details earlier. Transmission is a Viper T56, 8 3/4 rear axle 3.73 gear. I want as wide power band as i can get. As far as the porting most of it was done to balance out the flow between runners on the intake. Right out the box some of the runners were pushing low 320s, the #7 was only at 284, not as good as a 2D I'll admit, but not far from it. The flow numbers on the head are its flow numbers after a minor bowl blend, still have yet to port match it


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2