MoparFins

Techical Discussions => Tech- - Engine => Topic started by: Jason Goldsack on August 30, 2009, 12:15:17 PM

Title: 361
Post by: Jason Goldsack on August 30, 2009, 12:15:17 PM
I know on my 1965 361, the drivers side engine mount bolts to the front of the block.

How hard is it to have the front of another block tapped for that mount. or does the 361 have extra metal for the bolt holes?


Title: 361
Post by: Rich on August 30, 2009, 06:55:35 PM
You have to look at each block- some have the bosses cast in (usually older ones like '69 and before- my '68 383 has the bosses) you just have to drill and tap them.

Other blocks don't have them,  I think it's the later models like 70 and up that don't, but I'm not sure.

Title: 361
Post by: Jason Goldsack on September 01, 2009, 01:38:18 PM
So I would have to look for an early block.. grrrr

I'm thinking a 452 stroker would mover the C around pretty nice.. (http://www.moparfins.com/forum/smileys/smiley9.gif)

I just don't think stroking the 361 would be worth the hassle


Title: 361
Post by: Rich on September 01, 2009, 01:54:34 PM


Actually I had it backwards--the '76and newer blocks have the bosses, the older ones are hit and miss.  Follow this link, and on the left side click on  the "original A body B/RB - 65 C body B/RB" tab (it has a nice pic and explanation).   http://www.engine-swaps.com/ (http://www.engine-swaps.com/)

Since the '76 and up blocks have the bosses you need you can find a late model 400 or 440 block to start with.

(http://www.moparfins.com/forum/attachments/171/abosses.gif)
krautmaster2009-09-02 01:09:24
Title: 361
Post by: Jason Goldsack on September 08, 2009, 08:46:12 AM
Another question....

Do the HP 383 manifolds fit in the 65 chassis?  Would going to them make much of a difference over the manifolds I have now?


Title: 361
Post by: Rich on September 08, 2009, 01:04:04 PM


Yes, most of the 65-73 HP manifolds fit the C body, and they are a large improvement over the lo-po logs- they flow about 35% more, and can be used to make up to 450 HP in a 383.
Here is TTI's manifold casting number page and tells you what manifolds will fit your C body.
Apparently, many of the B body manifolds (left and right) can also be used on the C's.

http://www.ttiexhaust.com/PDF/MfdCastingNos.pdf (http://www.ttiexhaust.com/PDF/MfdCastingNos.pdf)
krautmaster2009-09-08 18:08:02
Title: 361
Post by: Jason Goldsack on September 08, 2009, 01:49:54 PM
I had hi-po 440 Magnum manifolds from a charger and they weren't even close to fitting

Title: 361
Post by: Jason Goldsack on September 11, 2009, 04:14:40 PM
Another question.. what material is the crank in the 361 made from.. forged or cast?.. I have heard two different things

Title: 361
Post by: Rich on September 11, 2009, 06:13:55 PM
Mopar used forged cranks through at least '72.

Title: 361
Post by: Guests on February 10, 2010, 02:58:19 PM
Yep, 361 was all forged cranks. Essentially it is a 383 with a 4.125 bore only. It is one heck of a strong block, and if you think about it, it has the same bore as a SBChevy 400, a 413/426Wedge/440 crank turned down would give you a 400 for a stroker. A little fun could be had with a set of rods (I haven't looked at the actual rod/wristpin diameters) and you could have some extra offset grinding to make it even larger than the 400 stroker. I had a 361 in my first 68 Charger and it was great, revved even faster than a 383. Talk about a sleeper, stamped 361 but breathing 400+cubes easy! Talk about needing a longer rod!
Title: 361
Post by: Guests on February 12, 2010, 03:39:21 PM
OK, been doing a little research and they do have a 4.15 stroker crank and 6.76 rods (440 actually) and the 4.155 (.030 overbore) with a deck height of 1.125 that would fit perfectly for a 450 cubic inch 261 sleeper. The rod has to be bushed for the .940 wristpin, but that is no big deal. All the big valve heads, like Edelbrocks or just punched 2.14 intakes will fit the bore no problem, and with closed port heads of the 361 (I think the casting is 915), compression where you want it, make them flow what you want.
 
(http://www.moparfins.com/forum/smileys/smiley4.gif) Want a sleeper big block? Here you go!
Title: 361
Post by: Jason Goldsack on February 12, 2010, 03:41:50 PM
You can build my 361 and let me try it out to make sure it all works.. LOL

Title: 361
Post by: Guests on February 12, 2010, 03:41:52 PM
Supposed to be a 361 stroker, not a 261 stroker (fat fingers, amazed I can type sometimes).
Title: 361
Post by: Guests on February 12, 2010, 04:10:28 PM
Here's the formula.
 
440 stroker crank of 4.15 vice 3.75.
Many of the kits come with rods, 6.760 rods with 2.20 big block Chevy helps with the swing volume and clearance, several companies carry them, Skat, Eagle, etc. The other end of the rods have .990 wristpins in them, need to have them shrunk or rebushed to .940 wristpins, should be a reasonable price for them to either make the rods or rebush them, it's a special rod at a reasonable price to begin with.
Pistons are 4.155, .030 overbore Chevy 400 (aftermarket pistons don't know what engine they are going into, I got over it a long time ago, it isn't difficult with new parts, deck height of 1.125), just like rings are for bore size and thickness, not engine itself, go moly rings.
Bolt it together with a any open chambered head (906, 452, etc.) and you have a solid 9.5:1 compression, use closed chamber heads (78cc I believe) and you have a solid 10.27:1 compression ratio.  If you calculate this out, remember, the rod bushing installed would cut .025 off the deck height.
 
450 cubic inches in a smaller package, and even with a nice small cam of .475 lift and 268duration and stock manifolds would be a torque monster from hell, guessing 500hp/500lb-ft if ported heads and intake. Not too bad for an engine most folks use for boat anchors, I'll take one any day.
 
And if that isn't enough, go .060 overbore instead of .030 and you have 457.
Title: 361
Post by: Stitcherbob on February 12, 2010, 04:23:20 PM
hopefully the forged crank is cut to 361 main bearing size instead of weakening the block with an oversize align bore..... the cranks can take it, the blocks can't

Title: 361
Post by: Steve on February 12, 2010, 04:39:03 PM
Not true Bob. . . .  That's not a Chevy there
Title: 361
Post by: Guests on February 12, 2010, 06:37:16 PM
Yes and no, you are right it is not a Chevy which has a weaker core, but on the other side, as I admittedly forgot, yet figured everyone was smart enough to realize, the B main bearing journal size vice the RB main bearing journal size would need to be redone automatically. That was a pretty good catch, just making sure you were actually reading the garbage I am putting out instead of just jumping to conclusions. It also means you know a little more than you sometimes let on.
 
 
Title: 361
Post by: Steve on February 13, 2010, 05:24:49 AM
You're kidding right?
 
I can see you reinforcing the bottom end for the Indy 500, but not for street purposes. . .
 
Those caps are down in there pretty good.  The skirts on the big blocks are higher than the small blocks. . .
 
Work on the punctuation and paragraphing.  Easier to take in.(http://www.moparfins.com/forum/smileys/smiley4.gif)
Title: 361
Post by: Guests on February 13, 2010, 06:24:34 PM
Quote from: POLARACO
You're kidding right?
 
I can see you reinforcing the bottom end for the Indy 500, but not for street purposes. . .
 
Those caps are down in there pretty good.  The skirts on the big blocks are higher than the small blocks. . .
 
Small blocks have NO side skirts past the main bearings like a big block, B or RB or Hemi, and of all the blocks out there, you don't have to worry about core shift until you get into 1973ish and above. Still tougher than the other Big Three domestics, closest I would want is a Cleveland, and all the new stuff  (2005+) is too expensive to even consider.