440 stroker VS 400 stroker— what one and why?
- Thread starter Loonytoon
- Start date
I considered both when I was looking to do something different in the charger. First consideration for me was locating a good 440. 400’s were around pretty easy comparatively speaking. 440’s not so much and people were looking to get stupid money for a 440 that one knew nothing about other than maybe a camper motor. The bore size was my 2nd consideration as the standard 440 is 4.32” and the 400 is at 4.34”
The last consideration for me was the car had the HP 383 in it to begin with so the 400 was a easy drop right in. Except for the headers of course.
I also used 440source for the stroker kit and all parts needed. No issues there.
Those were my thoughts. I’m gonna say also, it depends on what you have already and preference. Go with what you want too! Not sure you can go wrong either way!
Good luck
The last consideration for me was the car had the HP 383 in it to begin with so the 400 was a easy drop right in. Except for the headers of course.
I also used 440source for the stroker kit and all parts needed. No issues there.
Those were my thoughts. I’m gonna say also, it depends on what you have already and preference. Go with what you want too! Not sure you can go wrong either way!
Good luck
I went with the 400 based stroker to keep more room under the hood but, I still wound up with a scoop to clear the tall intake/air filter combination I chose.
Mike
Mike
wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
50 more cu in with the 440 but costs more to build with that stroke
neither will work with insane hp and stock block
street torque monster with Engine Masters torque curve is best design target
neither will work with insane hp and stock block
street torque monster with Engine Masters torque curve is best design target
451Mopar
Well-Known Member
If pushing the power limits of the stock blocks, I think the 400 is a better starting point.
Intake manifold selection might be a factor also, as there seems to be a better selection of RB (440) intakes than the B (400) intake manifolds.
The low deck 400 also is slightly shorter and narrower than a similar built 440.
Intake manifold selection might be a factor also, as there seems to be a better selection of RB (440) intakes than the B (400) intake manifolds.
The low deck 400 also is slightly shorter and narrower than a similar built 440.
rumblefish360
Well-Known Member
The 400 is more desirable for a few reasons. More abundant, lighter and a shorter deck that adds a little stiffness. I think it can have displacement limitations due to the shorter deck with piston and rod combos, that is what I gather. The only other issue I can think of is intake manifold selection limitations.
For street and some racing, 500 +/- a few cubes, should be good for what most of us do.
For street and some racing, 500 +/- a few cubes, should be good for what most of us do.
Challenger340
Well-Known Member
Depends on the application ?
But for Mufflered, or very quiet running requirement applications devoid of any Piston noise whatsoever, you may wish to consider the Piston Compression Distance for whatever Stroker combo you are entertaining ?
We tend to like staying up in the 1.8" Piston CD ranges for the longer skirts present in the 2618 Alloy Piston Forgings, no matter 400 or 440 Block, when targeting higher power outputs in "quiet" requirement applications.
We can definitely "fit" the shorter 1.34" CD type Stroker Pistons and make them quiet running, but minimum Piston to wall clearances for the 2618 Alloys are a must with NO extra safety factor clearance, as well as a Torque Plate must be used.
Exceeding the 1.34" CD Pistons 2618 minimum clearances, with any kind of extra Piston to Wall "clearance" safety factor for things like rpm, Heat, Compression and/or Boost/Nitrous.... can be risky to audible Piston "slap" or noise present that many mufflered guys are not fond of ?
just say'in here...
no matter a 400 or 440 based Stroker....
a Piston with 1.8" CD or so... is far more forgiving to an extra .001" Piston to wall clearance as a safety factor for rpm/heat/power etc, and still quiet running
versus,
adding .001" Piston to Wall clearance for safety on a 1.34" CD Piston, wherein you may very well "hear" some audible Piston noise in a mufflered/quiet car application ?
We have NO problem building any Stroker combo with either short or long skirt Pistons, just pointing out that skirt length can be a factor to quieter running depending upon what a Customer wants, and the availability of a good shop with a BB Mopar Torque Plate.
Many Shops without a Torque Plate, will just ADD .001" Piston to Wall Clrc when Honing to compensate... which on a 1.34" CD Piston can result in audible Piston "slap" noise when running.
But for Mufflered, or very quiet running requirement applications devoid of any Piston noise whatsoever, you may wish to consider the Piston Compression Distance for whatever Stroker combo you are entertaining ?
We tend to like staying up in the 1.8" Piston CD ranges for the longer skirts present in the 2618 Alloy Piston Forgings, no matter 400 or 440 Block, when targeting higher power outputs in "quiet" requirement applications.
We can definitely "fit" the shorter 1.34" CD type Stroker Pistons and make them quiet running, but minimum Piston to wall clearances for the 2618 Alloys are a must with NO extra safety factor clearance, as well as a Torque Plate must be used.
Exceeding the 1.34" CD Pistons 2618 minimum clearances, with any kind of extra Piston to Wall "clearance" safety factor for things like rpm, Heat, Compression and/or Boost/Nitrous.... can be risky to audible Piston "slap" or noise present that many mufflered guys are not fond of ?
just say'in here...
no matter a 400 or 440 based Stroker....
a Piston with 1.8" CD or so... is far more forgiving to an extra .001" Piston to wall clearance as a safety factor for rpm/heat/power etc, and still quiet running
versus,
adding .001" Piston to Wall clearance for safety on a 1.34" CD Piston, wherein you may very well "hear" some audible Piston noise in a mufflered/quiet car application ?
We have NO problem building any Stroker combo with either short or long skirt Pistons, just pointing out that skirt length can be a factor to quieter running depending upon what a Customer wants, and the availability of a good shop with a BB Mopar Torque Plate.
Many Shops without a Torque Plate, will just ADD .001" Piston to Wall Clrc when Honing to compensate... which on a 1.34" CD Piston can result in audible Piston "slap" noise when running.
gkent
Well-Known Member
You can make similar cubes with either block. Roughly the same bore, use the same stroker crank but a shorter rod in the 400. That's where the problem arises with the shorter deck - a severe rod angle. In the end I think the 440 based motor has the capability to make more torque.
wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
I'll admit to liking the taller deck of the 440 and do not recommend pushing the limits of either
I've always used LY rods or better in 400 or 383 builds
I have some sample pistons from long time ago I'll see if I can post up Monday
great post Challanger, well everybody
One sample piston is a 2310 (66> 4bbl early 6 pack) with a 2.031 compression height- could not get that to work (except once on a block that needed a lot of decking) used late 6 pack pistons for most builds with the 915 heads 2.06x CH
Another piston is a Ross prototype for the 383 Superbird project with stock heads and 440 rods
I forget what the third one is- all are at least 30 years old
WE took these to John Erb, then chief engineer at KB, when working on the KB reverse deflector piston designs
Thought quench was important back then too unless you are running alky or race gas and still better with those
I've always used LY rods or better in 400 or 383 builds
I have some sample pistons from long time ago I'll see if I can post up Monday
great post Challanger, well everybody
One sample piston is a 2310 (66> 4bbl early 6 pack) with a 2.031 compression height- could not get that to work (except once on a block that needed a lot of decking) used late 6 pack pistons for most builds with the 915 heads 2.06x CH
Another piston is a Ross prototype for the 383 Superbird project with stock heads and 440 rods
I forget what the third one is- all are at least 30 years old
WE took these to John Erb, then chief engineer at KB, when working on the KB reverse deflector piston designs
Thought quench was important back then too unless you are running alky or race gas and still better with those
Last edited:
1967coronet440
Well-Known Member
Went with 440 for mine, eagle 505 stroker kit. I believe if you’re talking about pushing limits you need to be looking at aftermarket blocks.
wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
good point 5.7
Depends on the piston/pin and small end of the rod weight
where you see the fast revs is with the short skirt light piston 400's
you could put those same pistons in a 440 with a long rod and they do using chevy rods
otherwise they are the same
I'll take the cubic inches, especially with an AT
now a 4 speed car I'd have to think about it
does sound fun
Depends on the piston/pin and small end of the rod weight
where you see the fast revs is with the short skirt light piston 400's
you could put those same pistons in a 440 with a long rod and they do using chevy rods
otherwise they are the same
I'll take the cubic inches, especially with an AT
now a 4 speed car I'd have to think about it
does sound fun
My dads 440/505 auto doesn’t rev nearly as fast as my 400/470 4 speed. But he’s an old fart, lol, and probably shouldn’t drive a car that’s faster than his brain can think (love ya dad).
rumblefish360
Well-Known Member
Good points. What are we doing with it and how do you want to get it done?
Loonytoon
Member
Thanks for the replies everyone,
I have a virgin bore 440 block - (1976 if I remember correctly) and I’m looking at pulling the matching numbers 383 from my roadrunner and putting in a 500-700hp motor in it - (383 is 450hp) - roadrunner is a 727 -8 3/4 car.
Being in Australia information is limited aswell as parts. 440 source seems to be the number one pick for everyone in regards to stroker kits. But the price near on doubles when you factor in exchange rate, shipping and import duty tax. From what I have figured I won’t get much change out of 20k for a build.
I have been offered a ‘fresh’ 700hp ( I’m not sure if that’s an accurate horspower figure or he is just thinking it’s around the 700hp mark) 400 stroked 451 combo - he has not come up with a price he said he will have to work it out.
It has 11:1 comp ration wich is more than I wanted so I’m not sure if I’m overly keen on it but if the price is rite then maybe I just buy it m, drop it in and be done with it?
I have a virgin bore 440 block - (1976 if I remember correctly) and I’m looking at pulling the matching numbers 383 from my roadrunner and putting in a 500-700hp motor in it - (383 is 450hp) - roadrunner is a 727 -8 3/4 car.
Being in Australia information is limited aswell as parts. 440 source seems to be the number one pick for everyone in regards to stroker kits. But the price near on doubles when you factor in exchange rate, shipping and import duty tax. From what I have figured I won’t get much change out of 20k for a build.
I have been offered a ‘fresh’ 700hp ( I’m not sure if that’s an accurate horspower figure or he is just thinking it’s around the 700hp mark) 400 stroked 451 combo - he has not come up with a price he said he will have to work it out.
It has 11:1 comp ration wich is more than I wanted so I’m not sure if I’m overly keen on it but if the price is rite then maybe I just buy it m, drop it in and be done with it?
1967coronet440
Well-Known Member
700 hp and you better start looking t beefing up that trans and upgrading to a Dana 60 rearend
wyrmrider
Well-Known Member
Get all the info on the subject 400
long rod or short rod
whose crank
what kind of cam I'd be skeptical if Hyd FT
Big question- what heads
who built it
you can DIY the trans beef up
converter will depend on the cam and gears and usage
rear end will be fine with AT and no slicks
long rod or short rod
whose crank
what kind of cam I'd be skeptical if Hyd FT
Big question- what heads
who built it
you can DIY the trans beef up
converter will depend on the cam and gears and usage
rear end will be fine with AT and no slicks
Loonytoon
Member
1967coronet440
Well-Known Member
Ok just making sure, I was oblivious when I built my stroker and ended up spending big bucks on the trans and rearend
451Mopar
Well-Known Member
The 4.25" stroke crank in either block is fairly common. It allows the use of the internal oil pickup tube, and there is a wider selection of shelf pistons with various dish volumes to get a compression ratio you might want depending on the cylinder heads you use.
The taller 440 kit uses a longer 7.1" rod (1.67:1 rod/stroke ratio.) I have this combination in the '69 Coronet 0.030" over is 505". I used the -17cc dish pistons with 84cc ported stealth heads, and the block zero decked, so compression is about 10.3:1. I used a mild hydraulic roller cam (I think 238 duration @ 0.050") in this and it is pretty tame engine with loads of low end torque. I have the rev-limiter set at 6,000 RPM. Never dynoed it, but likely in the 530-550 HP range?
A new combination I am putting together is another 440 stroked to 505" as above, but with the -27cc Dish pistons and the Trick Flow 240 heads (78cc chamber), so about 10:1 compression for junk gas. Using a small solid roller cam, 243/251 @ 0.050". I think this should be close to 600 HP in a mild mannered engine?
I think with these 500+ CID engines if you want bigger cams and power closer to 700 HP, it is better to start with a larger max wedge port size head like the Trick Flow 270.
The '71 Charger is using a 400 block, with the shorter 4.15" stroke crank (6.76" rods) and the really light 1.122 CH pistons. This has ported Max Wedge Victor heads, 12.4:1 compression, and a large 272/278 @ 0.050" solid roller cam, spins to 7,000 RPM with ease. Likely makes 700+ HP, but pretty rough idle, and is pretty hard on valve train parts.
I haven't built a 4.25" stroke low deck engine. They look like a nice street setup that should make good low end torque, but the short rod ratio may limit upper RPM power?
Waiting to see how "Colorado Mopar" 383 / 496" stroker works once he gets it back from the builder.
The 3.91" stroke low deck engines are 470 cid and make a nice combination. Andy F has several build articles on this combination.
My first stroker engine was the 400/451" using stock 440 crank and rods and custom ROSS dished pistons. 11:1 compression with Brodix B1 BS heads (65cc chamber), solid roller 251/251@ 0.050", and made right around 580-600 HP.
The taller 440 kit uses a longer 7.1" rod (1.67:1 rod/stroke ratio.) I have this combination in the '69 Coronet 0.030" over is 505". I used the -17cc dish pistons with 84cc ported stealth heads, and the block zero decked, so compression is about 10.3:1. I used a mild hydraulic roller cam (I think 238 duration @ 0.050") in this and it is pretty tame engine with loads of low end torque. I have the rev-limiter set at 6,000 RPM. Never dynoed it, but likely in the 530-550 HP range?
A new combination I am putting together is another 440 stroked to 505" as above, but with the -27cc Dish pistons and the Trick Flow 240 heads (78cc chamber), so about 10:1 compression for junk gas. Using a small solid roller cam, 243/251 @ 0.050". I think this should be close to 600 HP in a mild mannered engine?
I think with these 500+ CID engines if you want bigger cams and power closer to 700 HP, it is better to start with a larger max wedge port size head like the Trick Flow 270.
The '71 Charger is using a 400 block, with the shorter 4.15" stroke crank (6.76" rods) and the really light 1.122 CH pistons. This has ported Max Wedge Victor heads, 12.4:1 compression, and a large 272/278 @ 0.050" solid roller cam, spins to 7,000 RPM with ease. Likely makes 700+ HP, but pretty rough idle, and is pretty hard on valve train parts.
I haven't built a 4.25" stroke low deck engine. They look like a nice street setup that should make good low end torque, but the short rod ratio may limit upper RPM power?
Waiting to see how "Colorado Mopar" 383 / 496" stroker works once he gets it back from the builder.
The 3.91" stroke low deck engines are 470 cid and make a nice combination. Andy F has several build articles on this combination.
My first stroker engine was the 400/451" using stock 440 crank and rods and custom ROSS dished pistons. 11:1 compression with Brodix B1 BS heads (65cc chamber), solid roller 251/251@ 0.050", and made right around 580-600 HP.
Similar threads
