Still looking for Small block build ups. • The Dodge Challenger Message Board

by **Gerrad Friedline (Gmfried** » 29 Jul 2002 16:25

I really like the idea of the mopar small block going into my 70' chally. I was thinking of a green 360, or an old LA 360 if I can find it. I have seen a few buildups some nearing 500HP! And indy claims they can get their 360-2 heads to turn 650HP from a small block!

But what do you all think? I want a small block, becuase I want a motor that I can do some sustained high RPM running, and can churn some tire frying torque. I would like it to rev in the 7K's at least, and put out around 500HP, but I would also like it to have reasonable streetability, around 1000rpm idle (or less), all this Naturally aspirated on pump gas 92-93. I dont mind a little lope in the idle, in fact I want it. I also might want to shoot a little juice into the equation someday (pesky mitsubishis).
Any ideas suggestions? is this possible with around 5K? or am I looking at one of those 10K engines?

Also, I still havnt heard whether the keisler tremec 5 speed is any good.

by **Tig (Cathtig)** » 01 Aug 2002 0:32

A while back (8 years...jeez!) I managed to get my 318 challenger into the 12's on street tyres/full exhaust with 150 shot of nitrous. Can post specs here if you like.

by **Dave-R (Roppa440)** » 05 Aug 2002 12:05

Like I tell people all the time on here Gerrard, go to;

http://www.hughesengines.com/www/hughesengines/

and check out their prices.

They do a 420hp 340 engine or a 435hp 360 for $7K

They also do a 535hp Street/strip 360 for $8.25K that is the mutts nuts.

by **Gerrad Friedline (Gmfried** » 13 Aug 2002 14:11

Well, I do like the idea of going into the 12s on a 318, but I am not into the juice. I have been to hughes many times, and they offer some great ported heads, and other parts, but they only have a few pump gas buildups. I just found an article on a 360 mopar stroked to 408 that put out 607hp, and 551lb-ft on the dyno, without nitrous on 91 octane. Only thing is it was a little unstreetable, and it had a tunnel ram, to which I must say no, unless I could get it to fit under a glass cowl hood, then it would be nice. Mopar muscle managed to do that buildup for under 10k if I am correct. And it still seemed to rev fairly well.

by **Dave-R (Roppa440)** » 13 Aug 2002 15:08

Just remember that as a rule the more power you make the less torque you have at any usable street rpm. It is fine making 550lb-ft on the dyno but no use at all on the street if it is above 5000rpm for example. As I have found with my car it is very difficult to balance the street performance and drivability with track performance. If I was to do it again I might choose one cam smaller than the one I did use. Yet I have a lot more cubic inches than you have to work with!

The big money in your case is going to be spent on the machining and crank/rods. If you want 7k-8k rpm potential you have to pay big money. But if you stick to around 6500 max rpm you can get away with stock parts and normal quality machining.

These big HP numbers sound impressive but what use are they if the car drives bad and you hate it?

by **LITEMUP (Von)** » 22 Aug 2002 15:42

i am considering pulling my motor to powdercoat it and to re-work my engine bay. i think if i do this i will change my cam and put roller rockers on.
i have a 273 cam. i am not very smart on this subject so i cant tell you much more. it is a hughes engines cam. i have 1.6 ratio cast rockers with adjustable pushrods.
i would have the hydraulic kind wouldn't i? it's not solid.
do i need different components for a roller system. i have heard it called this before. am i sounding totally stupid?
another guy at the nats told me i could run a bigger cam now because i got a 2400 stall. i'm open for suggestions...

by **Dave-R (Roppa440)** » 22 Aug 2002 16:50

I don't know what cam that is. Hughes dont do one with 273 duration and that is nothing like a part number so I have no idea what that 273 refers too. We need to know where you are starting from to see where you are going.

If you have normal stock-type stamped steel rockers then you will need new pushrods to use roller tip rockers. Don't buy Crane roller rockers whatever you do.

A roller system normally refers to a roller cam which is something different (and expensive) that you don't need.

If I remember your engine is built well with ported heads and big valves?

Normally the way to do this is to pick what cam you want and everything else has to match that. Just putting an assortment of 'go faster' bits together never works right.

You have to decide how much power you want to make and how rough and 'hot rod' sounding do you want your car to be. As you drive this car a lot I would use a Hughes HE3038AL at the most but I don't think you have enough stall speed for this.
I don't even know what rear gear you have and that is a factor too. Read the guidlines on the Hughes website and you should pick up what you need to know.

by **Hans (72challenger)** » 22 Aug 2002 17:29

You're right about the cam Dave, Hughes doesn't have a 273 cam. BTW, why not the crane roller rockers? (good to know cause I need a pair to0)

Don't go for a roller cam Von, these cams has no low end power which makes it not fun on the streets from my opinion.

If you want maximum power gains go for a solid cam, like the 'mildest' solid cam from hughes. But beware, then you must have the valve guide cut for a positive type seal. Or pick one from mopar performance (sorry Dave) which I will do this winter, the 0.528" lift solid from MP so I don't have to cut the valve guide.

Your stall speed wouldn't be perfect for the wilder cams but everything is possible (I drive a 244@050 / 510" lift cam with a stock convertor) although you will be faster with the right convertor.

Concerning the rear ratio, the higher the ratio, the wilder the cam may be.

by **LITEMUP (Von)** » 23 Aug 2002 16:12

alright i got my car book at school today, heres my specs:

HE1423AL is my cam w/1.6 ratio iron rockers
i have a 2400 stall, sure-grip w/ 3.23 gears

I want HE2430AL (i think)

my heads are shaved, ported, pollished, stainless one piece 2.02 and 1.60 valves(We sent my heads to Hughes engines and they did them Stage one, if that helps.)

the point of me doing all this stuff is getting a little bit more power. i want to get this other cam. and my question is what else would help.

i dont think i want a solid cam.
keep talking to me; im still ignorant...

by **LITEMUP (Von)** » 23 Aug 2002 16:37

a HE2430AL has a stall of 1600 - 5700. is that alright for a 2400 converter.
from what their site says everything else can stay the same if i want it to.
what problems am i going to run into with getting a bigger cam.

by **Dave-R (Roppa440)** » 23 Aug 2002 17:56

If your heads are Hughes Stage One that makes a lot of difference. It means that the heads will flow the extra air/fuel that a higher cam lift will give you.

The 2430 cam is a nice all round cam without getting too serious. At this level a solid lifter cam is no advantage to you. It should work OK with the converter you have. However you would get a great benifit to loosing the 3.23 gears and fitting 3.55s in your axle instead.

Check with Hughes if the valve springs you have are ok with this cam or not. Use the 1.6:1 rockers for sure and you will have plenty of power.

by **LITEMUP (Von)** » 23 Aug 2002 19:42

Hughes fitted the race springs to the heads and put the 1.6:1 rockers on my heads also.

would you put the 2430 cam or the next one higher. if you still wanted to drive the car, ya know...

yes, i will be putting 3:55 gears in sometime also. i drove my car to the Nats (1500 miles)yes drove, so i didn't put them in. i will find another posi unit and make me a whole other 3rd member to change in and out.

why did you say the 2430 cam would work OK. is there something better to do?

by **Dave-R (Roppa440)** » 23 Aug 2002 22:48

A bigger cam like the HE3038 will require 3:91 gears and a higher stall convertor. you will get more power but at the expense of low end torque.

by **LITEMUP (Von)** » 26 Aug 2002 16:31

finially back at school w/ a computer...
what was your finial answer for the aluminum roller rockers?
waist of good money or valuable investment?(is the cost worth the power increase)

by **Dave-R (Roppa440)** » 26 Aug 2002 21:35

I like ally roller rockers. They do free up a little horsepower and with a 1.6:1 ratio (or more) generate a lot more power as long as your heads can flow enough. Not everyone has the budget for them though.

Crane have had a problem with their ally roller rockers breaking. They may well have fixed this but last year we had quite a few people in my car club that were breaking them even though Crane were insisting the problem had been sorted.

Also never use rockers that have a spring (Crane again) keeping them apart on the rocker shaft. You do not want ANY sideways movement. Use solid spacers.