When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I really think I might have to go and pick up on of those intake manifolds especially at that price. I really think I should upgrade the carb anyway based on what I have been reading and what is another $50, right?
i'd like some more opinions, but i suspect the 180's will limit it to 400-450 hp.
So sounds like I need to go big or gom home...i.e. replace the carb, heads and intake. Funds are definitely not in line for right now. Maybe either later this winter or in the spring. In the meantime, any issue with simply upgrading the carb right now and going to 750cfm and then saving up for the heads and intake? Will a 750 be too much for my current set-up?
i'd like some more opinions, but i suspect the 180's will limit it to 400-450 hp.
I'd guess that output could be up to 430 HP or so if everything else is ideal... I had 465 HP on my 383 stroker with 215 cc intake runners on my Dart Iron Eagle heads at the time.....
I was figuring to get to 500, I would definitely need to change the heads as well. I was hoping to get there, though, without changing the cam.
I think in the near term, I may start by changing out the carb.
180 cc will not get you anywhere close to 500 HP... You just can't flow enough air/fuel through those little runners.. For 500 HP, you'll need about 230 cc intake runners and 2.08 valves. It's probably doable with 215 cc intake runners with a lot of porting.. Port velocity is another factor but even with great port velocity, 180 cc intake runners will not get you close to 500 HP..
Rule of thumb is about: 180 cc = 430 HP, 200 cc = 450 HP, 215 cc = 475 HP, 230 cc = 500 HP..
That's if the engine is a pump gas engine with a flat tapped cam.. With high compression or significant porting work, more power is possible.. (in the end it comes down to actual flow numbers of the heads) A roller cam with more lift and duration could also raise those numbers.
Last edited by GrandSportC3; Sep 21, 2007 at 08:44 AM.
180 cc will not get you anywhere close to 500 HP... You just can't flow enough air/fuel through those little runners.. For 500 HP, you'll need about 230 cc intake runners and 2.08 valves. It's probably doable with 215 cc intake runners with a lot of porting.. Port velocity is another factor but even with great port velocity, 180 cc intake runners will not get you close to 500 HP..
Rule of thumb is about: 180 cc = 430 HP, 200 cc = 450 HP, 215 cc = 475 HP, 230 cc = 500 HP..
That's if the engine is a pump gas engine with a flat tapped cam.. With high compression or significant porting work, more power is possible.. (in the end it comes down to actual flow numbers of the heads) A roller cam with more lift and duration could also raise those numbers.
So, in the meantime, is there any benefit (or downside) to changing out the carb to a 750cfm?
So, in the meantime, is there any benefit (or downside) to changing out the carb to a 750cfm?
yes, you'll still make better power!
I used to have a '69 Vette with a 383 that had 170 cc intake runner heads and I ran a 4779 Holley (750 cfm - mech. secondaries) and it worked great. Engine made about 430 flywheel HP. The heads had some porting done, so they flowed slightly better than standard 170 cc heads.. That 383 was very similar to what you have.. My cam in that motor was 230/230 degrees @ .050 and .505 lift.
the only downside is poor mpg. if 9-13 mpg doesn't bother you(without o2 sensor tuning)
a 4779 will be a blast. OD gets even worse sometimes
.
oliver
isn't the 80528 set up for better mpg?
i'm not sure.
the only downside is poor mpg. if 9-13 mpg doesn't bother you(without o2 sensor tuning)
a 4779 will be a blast. OD gets even worse sometimes
.
oliver
isn't the 80528 set up for better mpg?
i'm not sure.
the 80528 is the HP series 750 cfm carb. It has the 4-corner idle and the dominator fuel bowls.It has no choke nor choke horn. It's a true performance carb. I loved mine on the 383 (in my '68 before I went to the 406)
So, in the meantime, is there any benefit (or downside) to changing out the carb to a 750cfm?
Carb sizing is a little more complicated than "bigger is better" as most people think. A big "hole" in your intake system at WOT drives down charge velocities and can lead to low torque, ie. you may flow a lot of air but if you flow it slowly you may never fill the cylinder.
Carburetor's should be sized for a given displacement at a maximum speed with the assumption of a volumetric efficiency. Vol.eff. is where things like duration and port flow rates come into effect.
Use the following formula:
CID x max RPM x vol.eff. / 3456 = CFM
So for your 383, assuming a max rpm of 6000, even at 100% vol.eff. your max CFM needed is only 665.
1 word= gross!!!!
A Q-jet is bad enough but then buy a spreadbore Holley that is like a Q-jet
Get a square bore Holley so you can externally adjust your floats
1 word= gross!!!!
A Q-jet is bad enough but then buy a spreadbore Holley that is like a Q-jet
Get a square bore Holley so you can externally adjust your floats
ULTIMATE SLEEPER: 4165 on the TM-1
very easy to win $$$$$$ when ignorant guys tell u it is junk. Thanks for posting Tim
Carb sizing is a little more complicated than "bigger is better" as most people think. A big "hole" in your intake system at WOT drives down charge velocities and can lead to low torque, ie. you may flow a lot of air but if you flow it slowly you may never fill the cylinder.
Carburetor's should be sized for a given displacement at a maximum speed with the assumption of a volumetric efficiency. Vol.eff. is where things like duration and port flow rates come into effect.
Use the following formula:
CID x max RPM x vol.eff. / 3456 = CFM
So for your 383, assuming a max rpm of 6000, even at 100% vol.eff. your max CFM needed is only 665.
The bigger is better mentality is not what I am going for...and I agree. That is why I am wondering what carb options I should be running?
Use the following formula:
CID x max RPM x vol.eff. / 3456 = CFM
So for your 383, assuming a max rpm of 6000, even at 100% vol.eff. your max CFM needed is only 665.
That formula is a bunch of HOO HA!
With that you can't even use a 750 on a 454!!!
If you start thinking too much and start treating it like rocket science you will never figure it out.
If a 383 can't handle just a 750 DP then move the decimal point back one to a 3.83 liter!!!!!
That formula is a bunch of HOO HA!
With that you can't even use a 750 on a 454!!!
Oops.... 454 x 6000 x 1 / 3456 = 788.2
It's a pretty simple flow calculation based on the volume an engine can breathe. I suppose you can call is "HOO HA!" but it's simply not.
Originally Posted by Tim H
If you start thinking too much and start treating it like rocket science you will never figure it out.
If a 383 can't handle just a 750 DP then move the decimal point back one to a 3.83 liter!!!!!
I'm not saying that a 383 can't "handle" a 750 DP. But you're compromising charge velocity for flow area that you just don't need. I suppose if you don't like it then you can keep tuning your engine in your own way.
I'm not saying that a 383 can't "handle" a 750 DP.
But you're compromising charge velocity for flow area
Its just more than the average guy needs to know or add to his decsion.
I do tune my own car, and while others have their slide rule out and barometer, My car is running like a bat out of hell down the road!
You can make a 750 run on a 305 or a 454 with the right tuning parts, but a calculator isn't one of them.