Best ET for a steetable 440 auto

[69 GTX]

I am willing to change the 73's in the rear but they were in the Dana when I bought it so thought I'd leave them in to test the combo. I'm going to run disc brakes with a manual master cylinder (try too anyway) I als0 plan on 3" exhaust with cuttouts. My goal is a 11.50 car that I can have 200-250 cruising range on a tank of gas @ 70-75 on the interstate. I also want a car I can put a lot of miles on without major upkeep. I'm willing to go the custom grind on the cams and spend a little more to get that. Was wanting to go with a vac sec carb if possible. If I need to start fresh with the shortblock so be it. I'll throw my old combo in till I can get my goal motor built. Was hoping to be on the road next summer. Thanks everyone for showing your combos and thoughts!

- - - Updated - - -

My adjusted altitude in the summer is usually 2-4000 feet except for spring and fall where it can get to sub 1000. The car is a shell right now but I expect it to be maybe a little heavy. With the Dana and extra metal for stiffnes. Hoping alum heads, intake, water pump, and mono leaf cal tracks help offset that. Going to be a AC car also. I know I'm asking for my cake and eat it too. I having a racing background so I'm sure it can be done, just been out of the car seen for 20 plus years so behind on the current trends. Was going to have IQ 52 do my top end.

 

[HT413]

Bobtile has a great thread covering everything he's been doing to get his car into the 11's with a pretty reasonable package. Std stroke 440.

http://www.forbbodiesonly.com/moparforum/showthread.php?70443-Waking-up-the-beast

 

[69 GTX]

I was under the impression that with todays hyd roller lifters that 6500-7 was obtainable

- - - Updated - - -

I have been watching that thread. I'm thinking dual quads will ruin my MPG goal. He's also had a lower air density than I'll typically have. My real altitude at the track is about 900 before correction.

 

[68 HEMI GTS]

I'm curious...what valves, rockers, pushrods, and springs/pressures were you using?

stock indy valves, trend 5/16 pushrods, think they were .080 wall but i would have to look. titanium retainers. trick flow 928 spirngs set up at 1.880. 160# seat, 380# over the nose. wasn't really into putting solid roller spring pressures on it trying to get it to rev, to hard on the lifters and i was going for durability. Personally i don't think the spring pressures were the issue anyway. i had it over 6500 a few times, no ill effects. you could just tell it wasn't making any more power over six, and should be shifted around there. i actually pulled .050 out of the installed height and run the same springs on my solid set up a 1.930. it pulls rpm like crazy.

hyd rollers will run 7 grand, i use to use them in small block fords and chevys all the time and turn big rpm. IMO the BB chrysler stuff is just to heavy and im not real sure that the lifter designs are as good as they could be. sure you could probably squeak some more weight out of the valve train, but im not into spending oodles of dollars for a bullshit street 440 just to gain a couple hundred rpm. thats what solid lifters are for!

 

[bobtile]

I was under the impression that with todays hyd roller lifters that 6500-7 was obtainable

- - - Updated - - -

I have been watching that thread. I'm thinking dual quads will ruin my MPG goal. He's also had a lower air density than I'll typically have. My real altitude at the track is about 900 before correction.

Dual quads on an old offenhauser manifold will neither help you with power or fuel economy. They do however help you look cool.

- - - Updated - - -

Bobtile has a great thread covering everything he's been doing to get his car into the 11's with a pretty reasonable package. Std stroke 440.

http://www.forbbodiesonly.com/moparforum/showthread.php?70443-Waking-up-the-beast

I'll have to check that thread out one of these days.

 

[67 B-body]

stock indy valves, trend 5/16 pushrods, think they were .080 wall but i would have to look. titanium retainers. trick flow 928 spirngs set up at 1.880. 160# seat, 380# over the nose. wasn't really into putting solid roller spring pressures on it trying to get it to rev, to hard on the lifters and i was going for durability. Personally i don't think the spring pressures were the issue anyway. i had it over 6500 a few times, no ill effects. you could just tell it wasn't making any more power over six, and should be shifted around there. i actually pulled .050 out of the installed height and run the same springs on my solid set up a 1.930. it pulls rpm like crazy.

hyd rollers will run 7 grand, i use to use them in small block fords and chevys all the time and turn big rpm. IMO the BB chrysler stuff is just to heavy and im not real sure that the lifter designs are as good as they could be. sure you could probably squeak some more weight out of the valve train, but im not into spending oodles of dollars for a bullshit street 440 just to gain a couple hundred rpm. thats what solid lifters are for!

Even a solid flat tappet works better than a Hyd Roller for RPM in my opinion!

 

[bobtile]

Even a solid flat tappet works better than a Hyd Roller for RPM in my opinion!

I agree with that, however, with a hydraulic roller being used on the street has the advantage of not needing to be adjusted as often as a solid.

 

[IQ52]

I was under the impression that with todays hyd roller lifters that 6500-7 was obtainable

When you just plop in hydraulic roller lifters you can get them to wind to 7000 rpm. But when you look at the dyno sheets and the power drop off you will change your mind.

If you are willing to spend the bucks for machining, bushing and honing the lifter bores and the lifters that will hold the oil internally and not pump up or bleed off and you use the proper weight oils, you can get them to stabilize somewhat. Hydraulic roller lifters in the Chryslers are not made for high rpm's and horsepower..........that is what solid lifters are for. With todays good roller rocker arms and solid roller lifters, if you set the valve train up for the street with proper pressures, clearances, locks, retainers, pushrods and oil, then constant valve lash adjustments are a thing of the past. You have to be smarter than the chunks of iron you are working with.

Some modern cars with solid lifters recommend checking the valve lash every 100,000 miles......and they are using .004-.007" lash to start with.

 

[67 B-body]

When you just plop in hydraulic roller lifters you can get them to wind to 7000 rpm. But when you look at the dyno sheets and the power drop off you will change your mind.

If you are willing to spend the bucks for machining, bushing and honing the lifter bores and the lifters that will hold the oil internally and not pump up or bleed off and you use the proper weight oils, you can get them to stabilize somewhat. Hydraulic roller lifters in the Chryslers are not made for high rpm's and horsepower..........that is what solid lifters are for. With todays good roller rocker arms and solid roller lifters, if you set the valve train up for the street with proper pressures, clearances, locks, retainers, pushrods and oil, then constant valve lash adjustments are a thing of the past. You have to be smarter than the chunks of iron you are working with.

Some modern cars with solid lifters recommend checking the valve lash every 100,000 miles......and they are using .004-.007" lash to start with.

Agreed,,,,
This whole "having to constantly adjust" thought is simply not true... If I were to have adjustments continually being made on my valve lash,,, I would be asking myself,, "where the heck is the lash coming from, and what is wearing out?"
It's simple,,, solids (roller or flat tappet) will not have the lifter fall off at RPM and higher lifts.....

 

[69 GTX]

Thanks for the insight guys! That's why I'm asking. Hope you don't think I'm a idiot. That's why I'm asking the guys in the know!!!!

 

[MikeyT]

I see your back suspension mods look awesome, but to make thr caltracs work properly, you need 5" of lift in the front, so that is why I would use a set of 90/10 upfront and undo the sway bar... If you really want to plant that *** in the back... I would throw a set of small block torsion bars up front a and adjustable Heim joints

Mikey

Ps fun discussion

 

[383man]

Agreed,,,,
This whole "having to constantly adjust" thought is simply not true... If I were to have adjustments continually being made on my valve lash,,, I would be asking myself,, "where the heck is the lash coming from, and what is wearing out?"
It's simple,,, solids (roller or flat tappet) will not have the lifter fall off at RPM and higher lifts.....

That is true. I only adjust my solid flat tappet once a year and most of the time most are still right on.

As for your 3.73's I would try them if I were you. I can tell you my old 440 that ran 11.49 and had the MP solid flat tappet .557 cam ran its best when I shifted about 6000. I did not have to twist it very high but I did have 906 heads on it. But you have the 3.73's so try them and if the car runs good with them then you will have a lower cruising rpm then say 4.10's. Ron

 

[69 GTX]

So in order to get the lift I need up front I'll use small block Tbars. And get some good front shocks. I'll leave the sway bar off.

 

[rumblefish360]

The small block bars are good, the drag race bars are better and you'll find there is little difference between them as far as handling is concerned. Drag shocks help the front rise but you may not like them on the street. This is a tasters choice.

Also lightening up the front will help along with good traction from the rear.

 

[69 GTX]

Where would I find the drag race bars?

 

[MikeyT]

I got a set of a small block torsion bars, you could have for like 50 bucks, plus shipping

 

[69 GTX]

Did the math and a 4.10 would put me real close to 2600 @ 70. If I read right GV is .78 4.10 x .78- 3.19 4.30 would be 3:35 But I think 4:30s would be to hard to hook up on street radials.

 

[383man]

I noticed in the new Mopar Muscle there is a bigblock (451) build with ProComp heads and a hydraulic roller cam and they are some good heads. But it made peak hp at 6200 rpm and it made 676 ! It also made peak torque at 5000 rpm and I think it was 645 ft lbs. And it is a hydraulic roller. Ron

 

[69 GTX]

I read that.

 

[IQ52]

Interesting readiing. Did you notice where he set the pre-load on the lifters? And we worry about setting the lash on solids...........pooh.