Cat’s Out Of The Bag, ‘65 300L Manual Trans, A/C and More

[fury fan]

Oh, another person who suffers frim my disorder - self-taught typist!! Can't tell you how many times I type hte!

Can't tell you how many times I've had to correct vavle, too. And sometimes downshit slips past me.

Maybe the Chinese read the posts about folks not liking the diaphragm style pressure plates.

I think Rock Auto were out of stock when I looked.

Does it look new or reconditioned?

Looks to be new. All the specks in this photo are static-cling dust on the shrinkwrap. It is professionally packaged, I'll say that.

The pressure plate looks to be an odd combination of cold-rolled steel (smooth) and hot-rolled (textured). But either way, all the surfaces have appearance of metal that's never been rusted.

 

[haywire 440]

Looks to be new. All the specks in this photo are static-cling dust on the shrinkwrap. It is professionally packaged, I'll say that.
View attachment 604971

The pressure plate looks to be an odd combination of cold-rolled steel (smooth) and hot-rolled (textured). But either way, all the surfaces have appearance of metal that's never been rusted.

View attachment 604972
View attachment 604973

Absolutely looks new! Sometime, when it’s installed, you’ll get a chance to rate it and compare the two different styles.

 

[haywire 440]

Oh, another person who suffers frim my disorder - self-taught typist!! Can't tell you how many times I type hte!

It is a challenge to watch the spelling and autocorrect. I don’t know how many times I re-read before posting and still after it’s sent I scratch my head thinking “I didn’t type that word!”

Fun with technology!

Now back to my hammer and grease.

 

[fury fan]

Absolutely looks new! Sometime, when it’s installed, you’ll get a chance to rate it and compare the two different styles.

If you saw my car you would know that's a few years away!

 

[Snotty]

It is a challenge to watch the spelling and autocorrect. I don’t know how many times I re-read before posting and still after it’s sent I scratch my head thinking “I didn’t type that word!”

Fun with technology!

Now back to my hammer and grease.

Did you notice I wrote "frim?" I din't see it until re-reading these posts.

 

[haywire 440]

Late afternoon Friday July 14th I finally saw the 413 short block bolted together. I was pondering, for awhile now, if I should have the machine shop complete the build to a long block.

These are the specifications on the pistons and camshaft that the builder installed. First off the machine work does look nice. The cylinders are as slick looking as I’ve seen but I didn’t see crosshatching. I believe I should see it. Unfortunately I didn’t take any photos this trip. This machine shop doesn’t build many Mopar engines.
Like I said before I hope I’m not in a pickle.

Details: The Pistons are ebay specials with the name RC, Rebuilders Choice. They are aluminum and are flat tops. Advertised as 10-1 compression and .030 over.

As I said the short block is together so I don’t know specifics internally as far as bearing clearance or thrust numbers.

Now the camshaft, after discussing with the “Boss” about the Chrysler Letter cars plus the need to stay as original as possible, and sending him the 300L specifications that I found on the Chrysler 300 International Club website had acquired, from Old Parts Source, is this SPD11. Here are charts I found on it.

On the Summit auto parts website additional cam information was listed.
1. Intake center line (degrees) 110
2. Exhaust center line (degrees) 116

Below is the Letter Cars Camshafts specifications with arrows pointing to the 300L numbers.

My plan, as of right now, is to pickup the short block next week to bring back and disassemble to check clearances. In the meantime reconsider my camshaft options. Using the original cam would take some checking to see if it’s Ok. The lifters may not be good because I checked those and the bases are concave. But they are still in order. I do have a new set of Comp Cam lifters that are 20 years old, that came with a new RV cam, which might be a decent option. Good low end torque I believe.

The 516 heads have the hardened seats installed and a valve job done. Looks good. Lastly the flywheel was glass beaded and surfaced.

Certainty looking for input.

 

[fury fan]

Late afternoon Friday July 14th I finally saw the 413 short block bolted together. I was pondering, for awhile now, if I should have the machine shop complete the build to a long block.

These are the specifications on the pistons and camshaft that the builder installed. First off the machine work does look nice. The cylinders are as slick looking as I’ve seen but I didn’t see crosshatching. I believe I should see it. Unfortunately I didn’t take any photos this trip. This machine shop doesn’t build many Mopar engines.
Like I said before I hope I’m not in a pickle.
...
My plan, as of right now, is to pickup the short block next week to bring back and disassemble to check clearances. In the meantime reconsider my camshaft options. Using the original cam would take some checking to see if it’s Ok. The lifters may not be good because I checked those and the bases are concave. But they are still in order. I do have a new set of Comp Cam lifters that are 20 years old, that came with a new RV cam, which might be a decent option. Good low end torque I believe.

I'm not an engine builder, but you can't tell machining by its appearance unless it's *really* bad - measurements are needed to verify.
I don't know exactly what you are describing as slick-looking, but cylinder walls should have a wet-sanded-paint look and definitely with visible crosshatching.
No cross-hatching = rings that won't seat properly. (doesn't matter whether they build Mopar engines or not)

As for those pistons - 2.015 vs the 2.085 I posted back earlier - your pistons will be .070" down at TDC. Not terrible, but I doubt that's 10:1, either. And you are using 452 heads, which drops your CR further, as does the .04" compressed head gaskets I suspect your builder will use. Not ideal to original, but far better than a 70's motorhome engine with pistons ~.150 down and similar head volume (~7.5:1 vs 8.2:1 advertised). You could calculate your CR, but you'd need to know how much was decked from the block and how much the heads were shaved. (or calculate with various values and get a CR range)

As for the cam -
I wouldn't put a used cam in a new engine, the cost of a cam isn't worth it.
I wouldn't mix/match cams and lifters of a different brand - if anything goes wrong, you'll lose the warranty.

The 300L specsheet is too small to read so I haven't commented on teh cam.

 

[haywire 440]

I'm not an engine builder, but you can't tell machining by its appearance unless it's *really* bad - measurements are needed to verify.
I don't know exactly what you are describing as slick-looking, but cylinder walls should have a wet-sanded-paint look and definitely with visible crosshatching.
No cross-hatching = rings that won't seat properly. (doesn't matter whether they build Mopar engines or not)

As for those pistons - 2.015 vs the 2.085 I posted back earlier - your pistons will be .070" down at TDC. Not terrible, but I doubt that's 10:1, either. And you are using 452 heads, which drops your CR further, as does the .04" compressed head gaskets I suspect your builder will use. Not ideal to original, but far better than a 70's motorhome engine with pistons ~.150 down and similar head volume (~7.5:1 vs 8.2:1 advertised). You could calculate your CR, but you'd need to know how much was decked from the block and how much the heads were shaved. (or calculate with various values and get a CR range)

As for the cam -
I wouldn't put a used cam in a new engine, the cost of a cam isn't worth it.
I wouldn't mix/match cams and lifters of a different brand - if anything goes wrong, you'll lose the warranty.

The 300L specsheet is too small to read so I haven't commented on teh cam.

I made a mistake, the heads are the closed chamber 516. The above post was edited to reflect that important information.
I’m planning on asking the machinists if he has those measurements.

This week I should get a much better look at the block. The RS pistons were selected for me. I kind of thought that might be the only option BUT today as I posted this topic with the Chrysler 300 International club a member there sent me a link to JE pistons. More money but better quality.
I missed that on my research.

Lord knows if there is a warranty the way this is going so far. Lol

Thanks @fury fan, your details are helping to make sense of this engine rebuild.

 

[fury fan]

I made a mistake, the heads are the closed chamber 516. The above post was edited to reflect that important information.
I’m planning on asking the machinists if he has those measurements.

This week I should get a much better look at the block. The RS pistons were selected for me. I kind of thought that might be the only option BUT today as I posted this topic with the Chrysler 300 International club a member there sent me a link to JE pistons. More money but better quality.
I missed that on my research.

Lord knows if there is a warranty the way this is going so far. Lol

I thought you were planning on the 516s, but I thought maybe plans had changed.
IMO a 'small' bore/large stroke engine like a 413 would like the 516 better, esp in a heavy car. (413 MW use bigger heads but it's a whole different animal, of course)
Post that link for the JE pistons?
I found a catalog but no 413 listed.

Thanks @fury fan, your details are helping to make sense of this engine rebuild.

You are welcome. If any questions arise at your builder, make sure to tell him somebody on the internet is giving you advice.

 

[haywire 440]

Here is a picture and a link to pistons I believe are for a .030 over 413 because it’s listed as 4.28 bore. But I see it says “call for availability”.

Link:

SRP - Chrysler, Big Block, 4.280 in. Bore, Piston Kit

 

[haywire 440]

Specifications of the new, currently installed camshaft.

Part no. SPD 11

Specs @.050 cam lift: Intake/Exhaust
Opens. -7BTC. 40BBC

Closes. 33ABC. -11ATC

Duration. 206. 209.
———-————————————————
SAE Specs @ (0.06). Intake/Exhaust
Rocker Arm Ratio
Cam lift.
Opens 22BTC. 74BBC
Closes. 74BBC. 39ATC
Duration. 284. 293
-———————————————————
Cam lift. 289. 287
Gross Valve Lift. 434. 431
Centerline C/L. 110. 116.

I hope this stays separated and orderly when it’s posted.

The ‘65 300L camshaft specs are next for comparison (That was probably cruel and unusual punishment posting those charts with the TINY print)

BTC. 24
ABC. 64
Duration. 268
BBC. 64
ATC. 24
Duration 268
Overlap. 48
Lift Int. .430
Lift Exh. .430

This is the best I can do at the moment. Hopefully it’s readable.

Edit: Posting condensed it but seems ok to me.

 

[MoparapoM]

A comment on Compression verification... If you take an Original Piston from the tear down and precisely measure the distance from the Piston Pin Bore to the Top Face of the Replacement Piston, you can deduce if the Compression is going to be Lower or Higher, all other things being equal. I would 'assume' that stock replacement pistons would have the EXACT same measurement.

That will not give you the compression of course, figuring that will require Combustion Chamber volume, Head Gasket compressed thickness and Piston Top to Block Deck distance if they are recessed. To get REALLY exact, you even have to figure the volume between the Piston Top and the top of the Compression Ring along with the Piston to Bore Clearance, but that is insignificant in a non competition application.

 

[fury fan]

For those '413' pistons:
413's bore is 4.188, so that 4.28" piston is a +.030 for either a 383 and/or a 426 wedge (if those share the same CH)

 

[Ripinator]

Specifications of the new, currently installed camshaft.

Part no. SPD 11

Specs @.050 cam lift: Intake/Exhaust
Opens. -7BTC. 40BBC

Closes. 33ABC. -11ATC

Duration. 206. 209.
———-————————————————
SAE Specs @ (0.06). Intake/Exhaust
Rocker Arm Ratio
Cam lift.
Opens 22BTC. 74BBC
Closes. 74BBC. 39ATC
Duration. 284. 293
-———————————————————
Cam lift. 289. 287
Gross Valve Lift. 434. 431
Centerline C/L. 110. 116.

I hope this stays separated and orderly when it’s posted.

The ‘65 300L camshaft specs are next for comparison (That was probably cruel and unusual punishment posting those charts with the TINY print)

BTC. 24
ABC. 64
Duration. 268
BBC. 64
ATC. 24
Duration 268
Overlap. 48
Lift Int. .430
Lift Exh. .430

This is the best I can do at the moment. Hopefully it’s readable.

Edit: Posting condensed it but seems ok to me.

I think your cam is what is known as a "dual-pattern" cam. The exhaust lift and duration is slightly more than the intake. I think that "feature" helps the breathing characteristics of the 516 heads with their smaller 1.60 exhaust valves. Not sure if the valve job that was done incorporated 1.74 exhaust valves. If so, that is even better.

 

[haywire 440]

I think your cam is what is known as a "dual-pattern" cam. The exhaust lift and duration is slightly more than the intake. I think that "feature" helps the breathing characteristics of the 516 heads with their smaller 1.60 exhaust valves. Not sure if the valve job that was done incorporated 1.74 exhaust valves. If so, that is even better.

@Ripinator, I like your thinking on the currently installed camshaft. The exhaust valve size was not increased so they are stock 1.60
I also read that if you increase the timing using a timing wheel that would lower the torque curve in the rpm range. Maybe that would be helpful but I’m not doing that yet.

A comment on Compression verification... If you take an Original Piston from the tear down and precisely measure the distance from the Piston Pin Bore to the Top Face of the Replacement Piston, you can deduce if the Compression is going to be Lower or Higher, all other things being equal. I would 'assume' that stock replacement pistons would have the EXACT same measurement.

That will not give you the compression of course, figuring that will require Combustion Chamber volume, Head Gasket compressed thickness and Piston Top to Block Deck distance if they are recessed. To get REALLY exact, you even have to figure the volume between the Piston Top and the top of the Compression Ring along with the Piston to Bore Clearance, but that is insignificant in a non competition application.

I measured the compression height of two of the old used pistons and came up with a number 2.022
That is surprising as to it’s nowhere near the 2.085 stock number. Below is the way I calculated it.

1858670 is the piston part #, I didn’t look it up but assume it’s stock 413.

For those '413' pistons:
413's bore is 4.188, so that 4.28" piston is a +.030 for either a 383 and/or a 426 wedge (if those share the same CH)

@fury fan
I did read some discussion on using oversized 383 pistons in the 413. I thought someone was getting creative.

I’ve been spending time cleaning nuts and bolts to continue with the motor. In the meantime also brought the fine looking ‘65 radiator to a shop to test again (the other fellow said he had it done) and paint for $65. Welp they found 4 small holes and are thinking the rust has thinned out the metal enough to screw up any repairs. So on to re-core faze.

 

[Ripinator]

@Ripinator, I like your thinking on the currently installed camshaft. The exhaust valve size was not increased so they are stock 1.60
I also read that if you increase the timing using a timing wheel that would lower the torque curve in the rpm range. Maybe that would be helpful but I’m not doing that yet.
View attachment 607242


I measured the compression height of two of the old used pistons and came up with a number 2.022
That is surprising as to it’s nowhere near the 2.085 stock number. Below is the way I calculated it.

View attachment 607243
1858670 is the piston part #, I didn’t look it up but assume it’s stock 413.


@fury fan
I did read some discussion on using oversized 383 pistons in the 413. I thought someone was getting creative.

I’ve been spending time cleaning nuts and bolts to continue with the motor. In the meantime also brought the fine looking ‘65 radiator to a shop to test again (the other fellow said he had it done) and paint for $65. Welp they found 4 small holes and are thinking the rust has thinned out the metal enough to screw up any repairs. So on to re-core faze.

Here are the specs for the Comp Cam (21-222-4) I'm running in my rebuilt 440. I'm also running 1.60 exhaust valves:

Engine Family:Chrysler 383-440 c.i. 8 Cylinder (1959-1980)
RPM Operating Range:1,300-5,600
Grind Number:XE262H
Cam Type:Hydraulic Flat Tappet
Lifter Style:Hydraulic Flat Tappet
Camshaft Series:Xtreme Energy
Usage:Street/Performance
California Proposition 65:WARNING: Cancer and Reproductive Harm P65Warnings.ca.gov
Advertised Intake Duration:262
Advertised Exhaust Duration:270
Intake Duration at .050 Inch Lift:218
Exhaust Duration at .050 Inch Lift:224
Intake Valve Lift:0.462
Exhaust Valve Lift:0.47
Lobe Separation:110
Exhaust Close ATDC:21
Intake Open BTDC:25
Exhaust Open BBDC:69
Intake Close ABDC:57
Camshaft Gear Attachment:1-Bolt

The throttle response with this cam is amazing. . .

 

[Ross Wooldridge]

How's the low end off the line grunt, Rip?

 

[Ripinator]

How's the low end off the line grunt, Rip?

Well. . . I swapped out the peg leg 3.23 gear for a 2.94 sure grip. Although it doesn't spin the tires now (235-75/15s), it really lights up when you mash it above twenty-five MPH. Also, I have some more tuning to do; I think there is more grunt hiding in the motor somewhere. . .

 

[haywire 440]

I have this RV Comp Cam sitting on my shelf.

Also I talked to CamCrafters who the Chrysler 300 club said makes an original grind for the 300L and here is their specifications. This cam was @ $259 plus shipping. The hyd. lifters were expensive, like $700 unless you went to the bell style (I think) but then new push rods are needed too.

 

[Ross Wooldridge]

Interested in your choice.