RE: IML: More Power from EFI 318 or Big Block Swap ?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: IML: More Power from EFI 318 or Big Block Swap ?
- From: Mrfixit1962@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 11:38:52 +0000
I am realy set on the 400 big block stroker, reasons are more HP and torque than a streetable small block stroker will produce and I know that the 400 stroker is reliable, I built one and installed it into a 1979 ramcharger and beat on it for over 70,000 miles before selling it because my wife kept getting speeding tickets in it. Also another I want ths 400 big block in the 81 Imperial is that it just isn't done too often and will stand out in a car show big time. Cool part about the 400 is they are still cheap to find and no one really wants because they are too busy following the crowd with their 440s and now the Hemi. After all that is why I bought this car, its completely different and totally unique.
Kyle
-------------- Original message --------------
> If you want it to look stock you can hardly beat a stroker small block. A
> 408 is pretty easy and you can get them up in 400-500 range without too much
> trouble. Check moparts there are a ton of recipes on there. When I did my
> '83 I went with a Magnum crate because I had more money than time then.
> Believe me it hops pretty well.. You can keep the 8 1/4 for a while and a
> worked 904 can last to. People are running 9's and 10's with them. My '83
> has a 727 and I believe it soaks up a lot of power. Early b body 8 3/4 are
> basically bolt ins.
>
> Almost any monkey should be able to tell it's a big block. The distributor
> is in the front. With a stroker small block you can have comparable cubes
> and if you adapt the air filter nobody should be the wiser.
>
> Rob
>
> >From: Mr
fixit1962@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: RE: IML: More Power from EFI 318 or Big Block Swap ?
> >Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 02:46:13 +0000
> >
> >Rob, thanks for the reply,
> >I am kinda set on the big block with the idea that after the conversion is
> >done it will look stock to the average joe. I want to keep the AC and other
> >options and ever use a stock air cleaner and Chrysler blue paint on the
> >stock 400 valve covers. I have been told that a truck set of exhaust
> >manifolds will fit keeping the sleeper idea and I would duals back with
> >some very quite mufflers, of course there would be a set of electric cut
> >outs hidden so I could run wide open at the track. Most people today seem
> >not to know the difference beween a big block from a small block and I
> >could leave the hood up and no one would be th
e wiser ;). Most of what I am
> >doing is old school tricks that most have forgotten about. I have built
> >several trucks and hot rods over the years and have done everything from
> >drop a eldo 455 front wheel drive in to a VW bug, to installing 350 chevys
> >in MGBs and Porsche 914. As for Chrysler products I have been driving them
> >long before they became cool again with my first car a 1964 Valiant
> >stationwagon and I have lo
> >st track of all the Mopars I have owned in the last 27 years.
> >Keep the comments coming
> >Thanks
> >Kyle
> >
> >1981 Chrysler Imperial 34,400 miles
> >2002 Chrysler Town & Country Limited 103,000 miles
> >2001 Dodge 3500 Quad Cab 4X4 Cummins, 5 speed
> >22 mpg, 477 RWHP @ 1063 lb feet of torque, 178,000 miles
> >
> >
> >-------------- Original message --------------
> >
> > > Kyle,
> &g
t; >
> > > The Chrysler big blocks ended in '78 in everything, the J-bodies came
> >out in
> > > 80. They never had a (factory) chance.
> > >
> > > Yes 400's & 440's have been stuffed into J-bodies. It's a little more
> > > common in their F-body ancestors. Years ago Mopar Action covered the
> >swap
> > > in a J-body Cordoba. They also had an article on a 440+6 in an M-body
> > > wagon. They articles might be available on their archives.
> > >
> > > For the Cordoba article, B-body headers were used, and the rag joint
> >needed
> > > to be modified. Flaming River offers a piece that has similar function
> >to
> > > the rag joint but it is much narrower in diameter than the rag, plus it
> >is
> > > more secure. I don't remember what they used for motor mounts but today
> >you
> > > can call Schumacher
Creative Services for conversion motor mounts. I
> > > believe there are some F-M-J-Body sites out there that cover the swap.
> > >
> > > Another option that was mentioned was the 360 swap. Reading your
> >original
> > > note, I would suggest taking that a step further with a stroker crank to
> >get
> > > in the neighborhood of 406 inches in a motor that will weigh around the
> >same
> > > as the 318 in there now. If you really want to do this, I would
> >recommend
> > > shelving the original 318 EFI, motor, etc. incase you ever wanted to go
> >back
> > > to stock.
> > >
> > > If you want fuel injection go with an aftermarket unit like one from
> > > Edelbrock. Putting the original EFI air cleaner lid back on top would be
> >a
> > > nice touch...
> > >
> > > Yet another option would be to get a
wrecked late model 2WD Dakota with
> >a
> > > 360 and scavenge the drive train, fuel injection system, etc. A '99-01
> >R/T
> > > would be the ideal one to use. You would get an overdrive transmission
> >in
> > > the deal, and a limited slip 3.92 9 1/4" rear. The axle would be the
> >wrong
> > > wheel bolt pattern (not sure on the width), but I believe an M-body 9
> >1/4
> > > was produced that you could swap in. There is a strong aftermarket for
> >the
> > > Magnum fuel injected motors from the Dakota & Ram. You could combine
> >this
> > > with the stroker kit above and in theory make the same horsepower that
> >the
> > > big block stroker combo would. That would keep some modern performance
> >and
> > > some civility to your sleeper Imperial plan.
> > >
> > > If your Imperial is a clean, running,
33K mile car, I would have a tough
> > > time pulling the motor out. Don't get me wrong, I'm all about modified
> > > cars, and have a stable full to prove it.
> > >
> > > Comparing a modern turbo diesel truck to an early 80's luxury cruiser
> >really
> > > isn't a fair comparison. The early 80's weren't a particularly happy
> >time
> > > when it came to performance cars. Things were different by mid decade.
> >The
> > > EFI system in your Imp is the grandfather to what the later Chrysler
> > > products use. As someone else mentioned, it was a very small production
> >and
> > > most were retrofitted with carbs by dealers. Ma Mopar got a better
> >handle
> > > on it with the turbo 2.2 cars starting in '84, but that 318 EFI system
> >was
> > > pretty revolutionary in its day. It's just that day didn't include 300
> > > h
orsepower out of it.
> > >
> > > Since this is on the edge of Imperial content, if anyone wants to
> >continue
> > > it, I'm willing to carry on over in the Salon. It's been pretty empty in
> > > there ever since I signed on.
> > >
> > > Rob McCall
> > > '67 LeBaron, no rear A/C (I think I'll be keeping it around for a little
> > > while longer)
> > >
> > > And a few hot rods too.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------- 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-SUBSCRI
BE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
> > >
>
>
>
>
> ----------------- 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