440 heads

Ironram

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
14
Location
fairfield. Ca
I have a all stock 1977 440 casting# 4006630 really low mile and runs great in my 67 polara but its time too pep it up a touch. Im looking at ordering a set of eddie heads but unsure which to go with. I belive the factory heads are 452 open chamber. With head swap id like to bump the compression up to 10-1.can i go with a set of closed chambers or do i need too stick with open. Eddie has 5 diff models the E streets 1 with 77 cc and 2nd with 84cc and then the Performer rpm's with 75cc, 84cc and 88cc. I am also thinking of running the performer rpm intake and still debating cams. I have on hand a summit 6401 but i would like a lil more lope so you can hear the cam. This is going to be a cruiser thats able too open a can of whoop *** when needed. TIA looking forward to the ideas.
 
Funny. I was just ready the specs on this 440 from MRL Performance, aFCBO sponsor, last night.
I was impressed.
510 hp with a small cam and without stroking it.

cuut1.jpg
 
I like the specs, not the bling.
Summit and Jegs should be banned from selling that crap.
CHROME fuel pump? Really??
 
I would go with the smaller versions of the closed chambered heads. Either the 77cc or the 75cc head will give you a substantial increase in compression. I've found some of the later engines to have the pistons as much as .160" below the deck. If for some reason it may have what were considered the "high performance" replacement cast pistons they may be only .080" below the deck. With the .160 pistons you would have about 8.3:1 compression with the 75cc head and with the .080 piston, maybe 9.6:1. Most likely the compression would still be in the 8's unless you get new pistons.

The RPM is of course a good intake to use.

If you already have on hand the 6401 cam, its not too bad. Here is what we did with the smaller 6400 cam in a 7.5:1 compression 400ci engine using 2bbl and 4bbl carburetors.

http://www.forbbodiesonly.com/mopar...3-The-slug-400-on-the-dyno&highlight=400+2bbl
 
I must agree will heyoldguy/IQ52 compression is kind of overated. My stock 383 in my Challenger with a small cam and ~9.25:1 was a pinging 93 octane pain in my a$$. To get it not to rattle and ping at3000-3400 rpm /55-70 mph I had to take at least 5 degrees out of it which probably killed any advantage in compression over high 8 or 9 to one. The new 400 I built using way down in the hole stock pistons and some previously milled #516 castings at 73cc gave me 8.46:1 that I set the timing and forget it runs on mid grade gas. hoping that it will get me down into the 13s with 3.23 rear. The car is way more fun not sweating that 3/4 of a point that I lost.
 
That's good to hear, a real world experience. I've been laboring over what pistons to buy to make a little compression with a set of milled 84 cc 906s. Sounds like 9.1 really is the limit on a street mill to run full advance with pump piss.

I'm passing on building a 431 due to the cost of pistons.
 
Any thoughts or opinions on the 6401 cam vs the Vodoo roller 231/239 cam, used in an application like mine? A 72 Fury, 3.23?
 
Anyone use the Whiplash cam by Hughes?

I used a early version of them I never cared for it and they are for exactly what they say stock engine, will make vacuum and have a rough idle (which I liked) but it completely runs out of steam at 4500 rpm, I mean like a wall. If you want a cam that sounds cool in your 2 bbl 383 to cruise through the DQ parking lot sure. The heads and intake you listed in OP would be completely wasted with one of those cams. BTW they told me it would nose over about 4500 when I bought it so I can't say anything bad about it.
 
Any thoughts or opinions on the 6401 cam vs the Vodoo roller 231/239 cam, used in an application like mine? A 72 Fury, 3.23?

Kind of a apples and caviar comparison. A summit flat tappet to a brand name retrofit hydraulic roller. If you have the money a hydraulic roller is a damn good cam for the street. A flat tappet with proper oil is waaaaaay cheaper, and I am cheap. Not to mention the lift is quite different on each, I would not be afraid of either with your combo but I would also be looking at a converter.
 
I must agree will heyoldguy/IQ52 compression is kind of overated. My stock 383 in my Challenger with a small cam and ~9.25:1 was a pinging 93 octane pain in my a$$. To get it not to rattle and ping at3000-3400 rpm /55-70 mph I had to take at least 5 degrees out of it which probably killed any advantage in compression over high 8 or 9 to one. The new 400 I built using way down in the hole stock pistons and some previously milled #516 castings at 73cc gave me 8.46:1 that I set the timing and forget it runs on mid grade gas. hoping that it will get me down into the 13s with 3.23 rear. The car is way more fun not sweating that 3/4 of a point that I lost.
Iron heads? Aluminum will pull more heat away from the combustion chamber. You should be able to get away with up to ~10/1 if using aluminum heads..
..but I digress..


- dad
 
Can someone explain stage 1 to me? I think it's a stupid term. Either the heads are ported or they're not. Why would one pay to have heads ported not to the fullest extent possible?

I mean it's not a very descriptive term in the least. I could see it described as a street porting job vs a race port, ok maybe I can see that. How many stages are there? Who defined the stages? Is there some vast staging authority or governing body?

It's like calling someone a captain when the guy is really a pilot, meaningless.

Stoopid FNF movies...
 
How's about a "full 3/4 race" cam? 3/4 what? Lift? Where? What ratio rockers?

Here I go digressing again!
 
One from The Bureau of Redundancy:
"Three speed TorqueFlite"...

WTF else would it be besides three speeds.
 
Someone on one of the many engine threads posted a link to a Hot Rod article that debunked this aluminum vs. iron heat and detonation/compression ratio theory. I sounds plausible to me but I will never be able to compare because if I make the jump to aluminum heads it will be for a BIG engine, 12+:1, 500+", 6-7000 rpm not something you would put in a formal.
The 1/2, 3/4, full race cam I have heard goes waaaay back to early circle track days and relates to the size of the track 1/2=1/2mi, 3/4=3/4mi and for 1mi the full race cam, the biggest cam for a long high rpm track with big sweeping turns not needing low rpm grunt.
The stages of porting I have no idea, your idea of street porting to full race porting makes more sense.
 
The 1/2, 3/4, full race cam I have heard goes waaaay back to early circle track days and relates to the size of the track 1/2=1/2mi, 3/4=3/4mi and for 1mi the full race cam, the biggest cam for a long high rpm track with big sweeping turns not needing low rpm grunt.

That makes sense.
 
Back
Top