Thread: 377 destrker?

Tweet

heard about the destroked 302 chevy, and wondered if anyones built a destroker out of a 400 block, and a 350 crank. would it get better gas mileage down the turnpike, and would it it be a better racer, than building a strong 383 with the same performance parts? just some curiousity, but any info would help.

makes great hi rpm engine as for gas mileage because you need to turn more rpm to get same net power mileage would be worse.
if you have the 400 already build it use taller gears and a overdrive. I did this with my big block and I get better mileage with it than my smaller truck with a 350

A good friend has a roller cammed 377 with reworked Canfield alluminum heads just about ready to go in an early 90's S10 extra cab.He hates hydraulic cams so with a solid roller this thing should turn some pretty high RPMs.He does all his own machine work and most of mine. With the lite tail end of the S10 he does not want the torque of the 383 or the 406. Many stock car guys that are not limited to 355 or 358 c.i. prefer the 377 over the 383. For a street car I like the 383 better,for a light drag car I'll take the 377 every time. Personally, for my car weighting 3600-3700lbs Id rather have a long rod 406 than either one. Having said that I may end up with my 355 simply because is a good motor,built well and its already paid for. I can apply what money I have to finishing the car. I am subject to change my mind at anytime even to include my first big block. Having built many, many small blocks maybe I should stick to what I know best.I also have never had a blown motor, sounds interesting , but if my blower education cost as much as my buddy's on this forum I would end up in a soup line somewhere.

riverhorse quote-I also have never had a blown motor, sounds interesting , but if my blower education cost as much as my buddy's on this forum I would end up in a soup line somewhere.

you to ashamed to be seen in a soup line with me? shame on you

I'd go for the 400ci to....bigger is always better when it comes to displacement....

I recently did an 86 Elcomino with a 400 and a 700r4 with 373 rear gears

The engine made 425 hp and 485ft tq and still knocks down 22-24mpg when your not in it.....

this was with a 216 dur@.050 comp cam and Edelbrock 2x4 intake and 2 600cfm edelbrock carbs rejetted 1 step leaner...

1st, 2nd and most of 3rd are useless but if I could get it to hook i'd bet 11's wouldn't be out of reach...

Thats the problem with the 400 in the Elcamino. Dont get me wrong, I love 400 small blocks.But ,it has so much torque how are you going to hook it up without spending a bunch of money. with the elcamino in stock form while you're spinning a 327---or 350 is long gone. Now lets say You want to put a motor in a 4000 pound 72 Monte carlo,I'll go for the 400 every time. If I had a short rod 400 in a stock chassis 78 on el camino ,as light as they are in the rearend I would want a cam with good mid range torque, take some away from the bottom end and take all the gear out of it ; Then I'd be at the other end quicker

I know this is a little off topic, but what about a 403? Set up a high set of gears and this will also pull 20Mpg. And you can build them on the cheap. Just dont rev it past 7000R and the bottom end should hold together

Actually, Scat Crankshafts makes a rotating assembly kit for this exact application....