383 stroker v.s. 383 chrysler ...the end - Page 4 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 07-31-2012, 04:31 PM
zildjian4life218's Avatar
Listen and Learn
 
Last wiki edit: DIY junkyard electrical fan controller
Last journal entry: SBC 305 Twin Turbo
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: WNY/Rochester, New York
Age: 25
Posts: 1,661
Wiki Edits: 7

Thanks: 44
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Well put DV!

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #47 (permalink)  
Old 07-31-2012, 05:52 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 6,855
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 457 Times in 392 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustedratrod View Post
What a lame *** arguement. I'm pullin it outta the dregs to argue some more. The chebbie sucks big sweatty nasty balls. They have a ghey 1.52 rod to stroke ratio. The 383 has a 1.88 using the SHORT (6.358") rods. Read that and weep chebbie homos. If we use the 6.768 440 rod in the 383 then it has a 2.0 rod to stroke ratio. "But you can change this and that.....blah blah blah" yall are dumbasses. What do you want? To compare two chebbie 383 engines? Sounds like it to me. I tell you what. Instead of that, let's leave the chebbie STOCK bore and stroke and leave it a 350. Since you're not stroking the 383 to make it a stroker, it's not a fair comparison. Want a better comparison? Compare a 350 with a Chrysler 360. You'll get the same result. The Chrysler will walk away from the chebbie everytime.....and with factory heads. I saw no aftermarket heads in the comparison, so the Chrysler stomped ***. Put some aftermarket heads and a stroker kit in the 383 Chrysler. Yeah, I know. You chebbie guys are too pussified to try that. The only reason chebbies are so "******" is because Bill France and Wally Parks loved chebbies so much they sanctioned Mopar out of NASCAR and NHRA. Read the history books. The only competition Mopar ever had that was close was Ford. chebbie only won because of the sanctions dealt in their favor. You wanna talk about how ****** chebbie is? Then face all the facts. chebbie sucks balls. always has and always will. Homos drive chebbies.
Talk about lame, some of us old timers are still here and your take on English, engineering and history is faulty. NASCAR's ban on Hemi engines in 1957 was coincident with Chrysler's need to reduce cost of big block engines, the B and RB being the successors. While using a better rod ratio than almost, if not, everybody else the gain in better geometry is not well reflected in power output. It drives a larger engine (taller with a bigger crankcase) which runs up the weight of the engine while the dimensional increase of the engine drives the vehicle size to provide the installation space providing both a weight and aerodynamic penalty. Given that rod ratios have such a small influence on power output of maybe 1 or 2 percent, the gain in power on the crankshaft was absorbed by the additional weights and higher drag numbers of the assembled vehicle. This is not to mention that the B blockís head had a highly inefficient combustion chamber and the intake port's short side turn is too abrupt reducing the engine's ability to breath at the RPMs it takes to be competitive in NASCAR especially on long tracks where more time is spent running at red line.

Bill France ever cognizant of the need to draw a crowd combined with Chrysler's need to sell cars on Monday were both penalized by the wedge headed B block's inability to consistently show up in the winnerís circle as Chrysler did in the good old days of the Kiekhaefer built hemi's from the early to mid 1950's. Chrysler's first response to this problem was the 413 in 59 which was competitive and then some against the Chevy 348 and Ford's 352 by simply being larger. It really took Chevrolet and Ford another 2 years to punch out the 409 and 390 which closed the competitive gap at least for the 409, Ford had to push another year to get to the 406 to really close their gap. Both the 409 and 406 started to expose design limitations in those engines where the 409's heavy piston and the 406's narrow but large diameter rod big ends were causing bottom end problems for both engines. When everybody pressed the displacement limit in 63 with 426 and 427 size engines the B block just wasn't speed competitive on the long tracks but it stayed together. The Chevy and Ford were fast but couldn't keep their bottom ends together.

Chrysler responded in late 63 with the Max Wedge which improved the combustion chamber and intake porting. Chevy released the Mystery Motor Z33 which was a redesign of the W blockís upper end putting the combustion chamber back into the head and canting the valve angles to the port improving flow. This of course became the RAT motor in 1965, but while NASCAR rules on the surface said these engines had to be available to the public the 1963 Mystery Motor was not.

Chrysler got to reintroduce the hemi head in 1964 in spite of the ban on hemi heads and of course hemi head engines were not sold to the public in 64. Ford protested both Chrysler and Chevy on the grounds that the average person couldnít go to their dealer and buy any of this stuff but was told to sit down and shut up by NASCAR. Their response to the Hemi was the SOHC engine which was also shot down by NASCAR. So they went to the High Riser head which took NASCAR a little longer to shoot down but lasted into early 65 before NASCAR banned them because it was a dealer option that you couldn't stuff under a stock hood without adding a blister. The medium riser was the next step, not as competitive but NASCAR accepted it and it performed pretty well while fitting the hood profile. The last hurrah for the FE was the Tunnel Port, never available in production as required by NASCAR rules; it was an over the counter kit like the high riser had been. Unlike the High Riser it fit under a stock hood, the surprise didnít happen till you lifted that hood. By now NASCAR's rules were being made up as Bill France went along. If corporate resources hadnít been diverted into emissions control and the energy crisis not happened in 72/73 the 1970ís would have been one wild ride. Can you say Ford and Shotgun Hemi, the gauntlet for the next generation of engines had been thrown down.

Over the last 50 some years I've built on everybody's engines, there are no best, that's a moving concept. Every engine has compromises; you can't get to perfect because in the engineering world every design element has constraints from cost, to dimensions and weight, to physics, to company politics (the latter came as a surprise to me, something about the real world they didnít teach young engineering students at Cal Poly). Everything has to be traded out. I pointed out that Chrysler's long rods add dimension and weight for very small performance gains, looks better on paper and in the dyno room than on the track. They had to go to the hemi head to be competitive. Ford went for a narrow but large diameter rod bearing made a shorter thus lighter engine and stiffer crankshaft but it couldn't keep an oil wedge between the bearing and journal. They went through a long and painful process of cross bolts, end to end crank oiling, side oiler to give priority to the mains, and finally a wider bearing (rather out of Chryslers play book) with the NASCAR crank and rod set. Chevy thought that making a head machined off flat across the valves then putting the combustion chamber into the block and piston would breath better, it did, but the piston weight to carry the combustion chamber shape got out of hand when you took it racing such that better breathing became an incidental consideration to keeping the crank assembly inside the motor.

All these guys are doing is the best they can with the constraints given them, which usually start with the finance organization rather than engineering. Most of these guys come from the same place (University of Michigan School of Engineering) so one company's group really doesn't know anything the other company's engineers don't. Schools taught that the support area of a bearing was the only consideration for the loads it could carry, boy did Ford find out differently. They taught that main bearings could be fully grooved to improve oiling to the rod bearings back then; everybody discovered that this isn't such a good idea. This then went to cross drilling the crankshaft, but that also turned out to have limits. They all belong to the Society of Automotive engineers. They all attend monthly meetings, they read the same trade magazines, they submit articles to the SAE, they sit on committees that write common specifications for materials and processes, etcetera.

It's all a learning process to which I'd suggest you get into some English classes and take some automotive history while youíre there. I think you might even want to investigate the Gay community to see if their favorite vehicle is the Chevrolet.

Bogie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #48 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 05:17 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yall sure do fall for the oldest trick in the book. chebbie guys are so gullible. I have read the history books. I have friends that were there when it all happened.

If you want to see the worth of any engine, look at the rods. Mopar small blocks all had 6.123" rods. Damn near big as a big block chebbie. They're 6.125". A long rod motor reduces side loading on the cylinder walls and piston skirts, slows piston speeds down and produces more dwell time at TDC for more power. Mopar's "small" big blocks had the "short" 6.538" rod. Want to see a really big difference? Compare the 440 Six Pack rods with anything that ever came in a big chebbie. lol With short rods, an engine produces much more side loading. Smokey Yunick himself said that chebbie should have designed longer rods into the equation. He felt like that was the limiting factor. Fact is, the 383 Chrysler has it all over ANY factory chebbie motor. The stock castings are capable of flowing 600 HP ported. You'd have to port to the outside on a production chebbie head to do that.

Lastly, I'll leave you with my biggest gripe. Why on earth would any bozo in their right mind build an otherwise absolutely georgeous rod and then........put chebbie power in it. A big block....yeah, that gets a pass......just like the old W series. But a small block? Those have been done so much, I bet a chick somewhere in the world has a small block powered vibrator. You can almost buy parts for them at wal mart. Any dolt with half a brain can build one. They require ZERO imagination.

Not when they're engines like the flatty Ford, 394 Oldsmobile, Buick Nailhead, Chrysler Polysphere and don't get me started on the early Hemi. The chebbie just has no cool points.....hell, it might even take some away. Lots of engines had proven street creedo before the cookie cutter arrived on the scene. Why in the world would somebody with one eye and half sense want one of those?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 07:31 AM
31 five window
 

Last journal entry: Master cylinder
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: louisiana
Age: 57
Posts: 1,577
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustedratrod View Post
What a lame *** arguement. I'm pullin it outta the dregs to argue some more. The chebbie sucks big sweatty nasty balls. They have a ghey 1.52 rod to stroke ratio. The 383 has a 1.88 using the SHORT (6.358") rods. Read that and weep chebbie homos. If we use the 6.768 440 rod in the 383 then it has a 2.0 rod to stroke ratio. "But you can change this and that.....blah blah blah" yall are dumbasses. What do you want? To compare two chebbie 383 engines? Sounds like it to me. I tell you what. Instead of that, let's leave the chebbie STOCK bore and stroke and leave it a 350. Since you're not stroking the 383 to make it a stroker, it's not a fair comparison. Want a better comparison? Compare a 350 with a Chrysler 360. You'll get the same result. The Chrysler will walk away from the chebbie everytime.....and with factory heads. I saw no aftermarket heads in the comparison, so the Chrysler stomped ***. Put some aftermarket heads and a stroker kit in the 383 Chrysler. Yeah, I know. You chebbie guys are too pussified to try that. The only reason chebbies are so "******" is because Bill France and Wally Parks loved chebbies so much they sanctioned Mopar out of NASCAR and NHRA. Read the history books. The only competition Mopar ever had that was close was Ford. chebbie only won because of the sanctions dealt in their favor. You wanna talk about how ****** chebbie is? Then face all the facts. chebbie sucks balls. always has and always will. Homos drive chebbies.
Chevy vs. Mopar aside. You are not intelligent enough to be in on the discussion.Engines have nothing to do with sexual orientation.You are a moron and you are not fit to be on this site.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #50 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 07:40 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedydeedy View Post
Engines have nothing to do with sexual orientation.
Everybody has an opinion. That was mine, like it or not. Don't like it? Build a bridge and get over it. It's not my fault chebbie won't pull a greasy string outta a cat's *** compared to MOPAR. Reduce the gayness. Throw the chebbie in the ditch.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 07:54 AM
zildjian4life218's Avatar
Listen and Learn
 
Last wiki edit: DIY junkyard electrical fan controller
Last journal entry: SBC 305 Twin Turbo
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: WNY/Rochester, New York
Age: 25
Posts: 1,661
Wiki Edits: 7

Thanks: 44
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustedratrod View Post
Everybody has an opinion. That was mine, like it or not. Don't like it? Build a bridge and get over it. It's not my fault chebbie won't pull a greasy string outta a cat's *** compared to MOPAR. Reduce the gayness. Throw the chebbie in the ditch.
Your funny. I am glad you started this back up I like laughing at your stupidity and narrowed mindedness.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 07:54 AM
31 five window
 

Last journal entry: Master cylinder
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: louisiana
Age: 57
Posts: 1,577
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustedratrod View Post
Everybody has an opinion. That was mine, like it or not. Don't like it? Build a bridge and get over it. It's not my fault chebbie won't pull a greasy string outta a cat's *** compared to MOPAR. Reduce the gayness. Throw the chebbie in the ditch.
I have no problem with your opinion. It is the manner in which you chose to express it that is the problem. I am not Queer or Hispanic.I like Mopars as well as Chevys.Liking Chevys does not have anything to do with sex and a Chevy is not a Chebbie in America.You may have friends but Old Bogie was there and is one of the most knowledgable people on this site.I believe his first hand account before your second or third hand account.Face it you are a moron and not because you prefer Mopars,you just are.Intelligent Mopar lovers like Centerline would probably rather you become a Chevy lover so you don't make them look bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 07:58 AM
zildjian4life218's Avatar
Listen and Learn
 
Last wiki edit: DIY junkyard electrical fan controller
Last journal entry: SBC 305 Twin Turbo
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: WNY/Rochester, New York
Age: 25
Posts: 1,661
Wiki Edits: 7

Thanks: 44
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedydeedy View Post
I have no problem with your opinion. It is the manner in which you chose to express it that is the problem. I am not Queer or Hispanic.I like Mopars as well as Chevys.Liking Chevys does not have anything to do with sex and a Chevy is not a Chebbie in America.You may have friends but Old Bogie was there and is one of the most knowledgable people on this site.I believe his first hand account before your second or third hand account.Face it you are a moron and not because you prefer Mopars,you just are.Intelligent Mopar lovers like Centerline would probably rather you become a Chevy lover so you don't make them look bad.
Hey I'm sure his buddie's uncle's friend has a pretty fast car that will blow the doors off of everything anyone else owns lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 08:04 AM
31 five window
 

Last journal entry: Master cylinder
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: louisiana
Age: 57
Posts: 1,577
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
I really hate guys that have probably never built their own car or engine but have read and listened to others and think they know it all.Old Bogie told the truth.And he knows what the truth is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 09:10 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedydeedy View Post
I really hate guys that have probably never built their own car or engine but have read and listened to others and think they know it all.Old Bogie told the truth.And he knows what the truth is.
You're a real piece of work. I came on here to stir the pot with a little fun. Now you babies get your panties all wadded up...and now you're talkin hate. You guys wouldn't know a real car if it ran over your stupid heads.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 10:14 AM
31 five window
 

Last journal entry: Master cylinder
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: louisiana
Age: 57
Posts: 1,577
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustedratrod View Post
You're a real piece of work. I came on here to stir the pot with a little fun. Now you babies get your panties all wadded up...and now you're talkin hate. You guys wouldn't know a real car if it ran over your stupid heads.
Show me a pic of a real car that you built from the ground up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 10:25 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Syracuse, NY
Posts: 2,238
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 535
Thanked 228 Times in 204 Posts
This kid is why its embarrassing to be 30 and in hotrodding. I get phonecalls from guys in their 60s and 70s all day long; and give them all kinds of help on their geartrain, and some of them still want to talk to my boss because Im 'just a kid.' Nevermind that my boss is not a hotrodder by any stretch and drives a '58 landrover. Its because of rat rodding jerkasses like this guy who live on Ol Skool Rodz and the HAMB and insist that pompadours, cuffed jeans and full sleeve tattoos is how it was done 'back in the day.'

Personally Im not brand conscious; if I get a good deal on a model A and I have a SB chevy; you better believe I won't think twice. If I had an AMC 289, I'd use that, or maybe a 2.0L Pinto engine.

My college degree is in History, and theres a lot to be said for people who scour the earth to find a picture of an overly channeled, beat up rusted POS with a guy standing next to it with a spiderweb tatt on his elbow. That doesn't mean it was common practice.

To the guys who were there, did that and survived:
THANK YOU

Thank you for the education, thank you for being here and sharing your stories, wisdom and experience. For every illiterate jackhole like him; there's a guy like me who spent his entire life asking questions and WANTING to learn. I'm lucky; my great grandfather worked for Franklin Motors, Franklin Aircooled and several other local companies, and was involved in the Tucker project. My Grandfather was a career farmer and welder for Carrier, and my Dad was an industrial arts teacher and Mechanic. They always encouraged my questions and showed me along the way.

Sorry for the rant
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2012, 11:00 AM
31 five window
 

Last journal entry: Master cylinder
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: louisiana
Age: 57
Posts: 1,577
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Autogear,No problem. I went through the same thing when I was young.Starting at 14 I was an outboard mechanic and people always wanted to talk to the older guy. After a few years they realized he did not know any more than me.I have been working on old cars since I was 14 also and I will build what is at the right price so I am with you.Thanks for being intelligent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 12-07-2012, 08:16 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi View Post
I can answer this one the Chevy is a small block and the other is a big block, according to some. But one pair of cars and a few runs, although useful info. Really can not be considered the final answer, I am thinking.

One thing I see is that the Chevy drivers are not afraid to drive their cars, while on the other hand the other brand tells all of us how powerful the iron is but are to afraid to drive cause they break all the time and cost a lot to repair and cry about it, so who IS having the most fun here???
If not obvious it is the Chevy crowd, by the way.
I happen to own a 1970 Challenger RT with a 383 magnum, and I am not afraid to drive it...and it doesn't break down. I drive my car as much as possible when the weather isn't ****ty. Whether a car breaks down alot or not usually has nothing to do with the make of the car, its the quality of the build that went into it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
a budget 383 stroker build using a stock 400 GM Crank Mustangsaly Engine 8 10-15-2007 12:57 PM
383 Stroker Question thebellman Engine 3 02-01-2007 02:56 PM
hp of a 383 stroker mathjew Hotrodding Basics 5 11-02-2004 10:14 PM
383 stroker markiemyster Engine 10 02-13-2004 06:36 AM
target master 350 to 383 stroker 85CHEVY Engine 1 10-24-2003 08:32 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.