|
To very briefly sum it up, I think the 413 just plain runs
better then the 440. You can make all the improvements you want, but if it
doesn't run as good, its all for nothing.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 7:12
AM
Subject: IML: Off line response, was: 413
vs 440!
At 10:12 PM 7/10/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>I think we've
had a failure to communicate here. It's the exhaust valve
>sizes
that I quoted as smaller. If there is a difference in intake ports,
I
>have not noticed it.
Actually, I thought that these two
conversions went together (ie, when the
intake ports were enlarged, the
exhaust valves were also changed at the
same time). However, you and
Mike both say that your 67 heads are measured
similar to the 66.
What might be happening here is that Chrysler came up
with the new head
design in the 67 model year (explaining the automotive
press reports), but
there were several old 915 heads left over. Also,
(based on 67 road
test of a GTX) it appears that the HP engines got
priority to the new head
design, and the regular 440s got all the old heads
till they ran out of
915's. This is just a speculation on my part, but I
think it
explains the conflict of information.
As for off-line response, here is
an interesting note. Both my 68's have
cam upgrades. The
LeBaron seems to have an equivalent to an HP cam (strong
low end, but it
peaks a bit higher than standard at about 3300-3500 rpm)
but the sedan has
an even bigger cam and a CH4B Ederblock manifold (peaks
about 4000-4200
rpm). My 68 Sedan has a lot less torque than the LeBaron
in the
2000-3500 range, but it also has quite a bit better off-line
response than
the LeBaron! Confusing? When wet for example, I can get
both
tires loose with the sedan (has limited slip) but with the LeBaron,
you
can barely get one tire loose (regular differential). This is done
without revving the engine with brakes on, just hit the gas. My
guess is
that the LeBaron would soon catch up due to its better torque,
and then the
Sedan might pull away again due to its considerably stronger
upper end!
I think the explanation may be in the carburetors, but it
gets confusing
there too. Both have spread bores. The LeBaron
has an unusual Rochester
(with fairly small primaries) and the sedan has a
"standard" (a bit bigger
primaries) Carter. It is likely that the
accelerator pump on the LeBaron
is not properly set, and causes the
lag. Also, there is a spacer to et the
Rochester to fit, and may be
the spacer kills the low end. Also, the two
cars have different
torque converters. The LeBaron has a lock up converter
from the late
seventies, which seems to be slipping a bit more. So, the
LeBaron
should have had the edge during the initial take off, but it
doesn't!
The difference in displacement between the 413 and the 440 is
due entirely
>to a bore change, they are both 3.75" stroke engines, thus
the low speed
>torque is probably not much affected by the displacement
change as it would
>be if it were due to a longer stroke in the larger
engine.
Dick, very often people claim that a longer stroke will give you
more off
line torque. I am not sure if this is directly true.
A longer stroke
engine will usually have smaller intake ports and valves
than a short
stroke engine of similar displacement, and that might give
you good low end
response, but its not the longer stroke that provides
directly this
"advantage". So, a 66 440 with the same intake
manifold and ports as the
413 should have a stronger off line response
almost proportional to the
displacement
difference...
D^2
----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com
-----------------
This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing
List. Please
reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
and your response will be
shared with everyone. Private messages (and
attachments) for the
Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network