Hey all!

I have someone I know that has a SBC 400 in his garage. But it's a BARE BLOCK.

On the good side though, is that is has already been machined by a reputable shop in the area. Work done includes:

Strip Block
Hot Tanked
Bored .030
Honed w/plates installed
Decked engine block
Main cap alignment checked
Oil holes tapped
Lifter Bores honed
Cam shaft bearings (DUR CHP-8)
Freeze plugs
New main studs

This is most of what is on the paperwork. Bill was 950 bucks, and it's been oiled sitting in a bag for 2 years.

Asking 1000......worth it?? Honest opinions welcome!

I want to build a solid street/strip engine with this. What's a good ballpark figure for crank,rods.pistons, etc. to have a completed short block??

Not sure what heads I'll use - but he said he has the factory heads I wanted them, but they were ran on another 400 that blew at the track. They weren't modified.

I'll most likely go aftermarket. I'm looking to get good HP and plenty of torque. Also hoping to lay out low 12's or better at the track, but be plenty streetable.

I assume my headers and intake would still bolt on, and I could at least initially run the CCC to see how it'll run.

Anyways, this is long enough. Opinions welcome

 

IMO that's too much money. But it depends on the going rate in your area, and who did the work. Never buy machine work from the low bidder. If it was done by a racing shop, it might be worth that; if some production-line rebuilder shop did it, I'd keep looking. 400 blocks aren't rare.

The factory heads are no great loss; in fact, no loss at all. In fact if I were buying a 400 I'd ask to leave the heads behind, just so I wouldn't have to haul them around and then dispose of them somehow at my own expense.

I'd suggest a cam with no more than about 225° of intake duration, if you want it to come anywhere near idling and cruising right with the CCC setup. That system doesn't care too much what's under it at WOT; but if you want anything resembling normal driveability, you need to have plenty of idle and low-speed vacuum. A cam like that will somewhat limit your top RPM range, so you don't need really massive head flow; some heads with intake ports in the 180-200 cc range would be about right.

Something like a set of Dart Iron Eagle 200s and a Comp XE268 should be about right.

I'd suggest a ZZ4 intake instead of the stock one. It will work with your carb and all other devices. You can pick up brand-new ones that people are taking off of their new motors for $100-125. It's far better than the stock one.

 

Thanks RB..

I forgot that you used to have a 400 in your car.

As I mentioned, all machine work was done by a reputable shop. I won't advertise them here, but I do know they build alot of race engines in this area.

Heck, the guy I'm getting this from has a 78 Malibu with a 400 stroked to a 427 (I think) - that runs mid 9's from the same shop, but I'm sure they do "production line rebuilds" also.

Is the ZZ4 intake much better than the Weiand intake I have?? I'd kinda like to keep the Weiand since it's only a month old. But if it'll hold me back, I guess I can sell it and get a ZZ4 intake if I need to.

I'm trying to reuse as much as I can off the L69 for this, since most everything is practically new - so long as it won't hinder a 400's performance.

I also want to limit compression to 10.5:1 so I don't have to run any rocket fuel in this thing.

I've heard of places that sell quality rotating assemblies at a reasonable price....there must be one around that everyone has luck with.....or overall, am I better off passing on this block and looking for a complete engine from the junkyard to begin with??

Thanks, and keep those replies comin!!

 

No, you don't want to be burning kerosene...

 

Sorry, I missed the intake in your sig...

The ZZ4 is probably a little better, but yours would still work OK. It would just knock a couple of percent of peak HP and peak HP RPM off compared to the other, probably less than 2% of each.

If you use iron heads, shoot for a CR in the 9.8-10.2 range.

As far as rotating assemblies, I have no clue who has what; I don't generally buy my stuff that way. But lots of people have decent quality cranks, rods, pistons, bearings, & rings; as well as alot of people putting packages together. I see ones from Northern Auto and PAW and such places all the time, look like they can be put together using decent parts; or you could maybe get a whole package from Lunati or some such. I've used quite a few of thier bottom end parts over the years, since I used to be able to just go down to their place and pick stuff up (them, and Comp, and a whole bunch of others) when I lived in Memphis.

 

Kerosene 5-7???? -LOL!!

Thanks again RB....

Good to hear the Weiand will work OK. I bought my rebuild kit from Northern, so I get there catalog occasionally - I'll check them out.

If I buy a balanced rotating assy as a kit, will I have any other probs when bolting up my stock flywheel? Hope it's not a dumb question, but I've read in the past about balancing issues with these engines. (Something about internal/external balance)

I'm kinda doing searches and gathering info to determine whether this is all feasable, as compared to buying a complete 400 from a junkyard and starting there. But every case is unique, mine included.

If anyone has a PROVEN combo to get where I'm trying to go with this - please post 'em!!!

I have noticed parts availability for the 400 seems limited compared to say, a 350 or 383.

 

OK - I've mastered the "Search" button and there are slight differences between a 350 and 400, but nothing major I can see.

As for the bottom end, I'm looking at the following:

Cast Crank (Internal Balance)
5.7 Rods
Forged Speed-Pro pistons (In case I want a small shot later on)
H. Balancer (undecided)

I assume that since I would get a internal balanced crank and rods, I won't have any issues bolting up the T-5 flywheel.

Many of the past posts on this leaves me confuzed!! Pun intended.

There must have been like six different combos I read about, along with a bunch of conflicting info. Some setups too radical for me to consider in a car that is driven 90% on the street.

As far as heads, I'll take RB's advice, and go with the Dart Iron Eagles. It seems that if I use a 76CC head I'll end up with around 10.5:1. Too much for iron heads? I can look at other pistons too - some will bump it down to 9.8:1. I may decide to not get forged pistons, and get hypeuretics instead, since 100 shot is all I'd go anyway w/ cast crank.

How's it sound so far??

RB - Judging by the posts I've seen, you know more about these than you're letting on!

Maybe I can pick your brain and PM you for any details you may know??

 

Right, if you go with a longer rod than the stock 5.565" 400 rod, you can get an internally balanced setup, and you can then run 305/350 harmonic balancer and flywheel. With the stock 400 rods, there isn't enough room between the bottom of the piston and the center of the crank at BDC for enough counterweight to internally balance the motor.

I'd use smaller chamber heads and dished pistons if possible, rather than flat-tops and large-chamber heads. You'll get higher thermal efficiency (lower BSFC) and less tendency to run hot.

I would definitely recommend something better than a cast crank if spray is in your plans.

You'll almost certainly have to get the inner starter bolt hole drilled into any 400 block you get, as very few (if any) of them came from the factory with the "feature from the future" of the 153-tooth ring gear starter accomodation. This is painless and cheap if done at the beginning of the project while the block is otherwise getting prepped, but extremely painful and expensive if you believe the BS about how this or that starter "ought to fit" from people who have never done it, and you wait until the motor is completely built and installed in the car, and you're laying on your back with this starter in your hand and no way to bolt it up. That's a very bad feeling.

Alot of the posts on this subject are by people who have never built a stock 400, let alone a modified one; and so have no clue what they're talking about, except for occasionally mis-quoting some magazine articles or repeating the same old tired urban legends. Unfortunately it's not always easy to pick those out for special ignoring, since they typically tend to tell people what they'd like to hear, rather than what really is.

Feel free (or at least real cheap) to PM or e-mail me with any specific questions you might have.

 

It's been longer since I touched a 400 SBC than it has that I've dealt with rocket fuel, so I'll limit my comments on this thread to that...

 

You actually weren't among the type I was referring to...

 

Ya just can't let that "rocket fuel" comment go, can ya
5-7???

Great! Glad to find out that my H. balancer will work with the 400 crank. I was told once that the 400 crank snouts were different (bigger diam.) !! So of course, I listened to them. I'd rather not waste money on something that won't gain me squat!

I'll check out the Summit and Jeg's catalog for diff pistons then. Should I go with the 64CC Darts then, with dished pistons?

I read something in a previous posts- If I read it right, a stock crank and rods are good to around 500 HP. If you think a 100 shot would be too much, then I'll have to consider a forged crank and better rods - an expensive proposition. Think a Jeg's steel crank would hold up??

RB - I'll let you know more specifics when I get down to exactly what parts I'm thinkin about. I just need less work and more play time!

 

destroke it to a 377 and kick ***

 

Sounds like another "urban legend" metioned above.

 

how is a 377 an "urban legend"? I'd really like to see you tell me a 383 or 406 is better, I really would. and no you don't get to use the "it has more cubes" excuse.

 

Wrong.

The only 377 I've built was not better than a 400; it was better than a 350, but not really as strong as a 400 would have been. I don't think the customer would have done it over, if he had known when he started what he knew when it was all done with. A perfectly adequate motor on its own, but not superior to a 400 for the application at hand. I think of a 377 as a .155" overbore to a 350: that most nearly describes how it acts.

And no, you don't get to use the "rev to the moon" excuse. That's one of the exact "urban legends" I was referring to, typically advanced by those who have never actually built any of the motors in question, but rather have only read magazine articles.

In reality, a motor's operating RPM range is affected far more by its induction system - heads, cam, intake, & exhaust - than it is by bore-to-stroke ratio. That ratio is one of the things one does to get the last little bit of RPM capability out of a motor when one is displacement limited and after one has already done everything possible to the induction system, since it reduces the reciprocating losses within the engine; and the example usually used is NASCAR motors, which are rules-limited to 358 CID, and use a 4.155" bore and a 3.31" stroke. And yes, that will have a slightly higher rev capacity than a stock 350; once you give it SB2 heads, and a solid roller cam, and valve springs that only last 500 miles (well, 550 or so now, under the new "one engine" rule) before they have to be replaced.

But none of that applies in this case, or in most street motor builds for that matter. Few people are interested in subtracting cubic inches from their motor just so they can get back the power they lost by using a bigger cam, bigger heads, more gear, and taking more chances of breaking things from the higher RPM required to get the lost power back.

There is no sense in advising somebody to spend extra money to downgrade his motor from one displacement to a smaller one. Or, leave it a 400, and kick even more.

 

RB, I couldn't have said better myself.
Just cause Lingenfelter builds a 377 Pro Truck motor & kicks *** with it everybody thinks they can do the same with basically stock components.

 

right, let's listen to prof. theoretical racer cause he actually makes sense. you're an idiot. yes you can rev it to the moon, provided you build your engine to handle those RPMs. Regardless, where it makes POWER is dictated by the induction and exhaust, it's physical capabilities to rev are more so a product of the bore and stroke, short stroke = less energy required to overcome and reverse its direction. Sorry I don't magazine race (most of them are like you going "big cid SBC, check it out, roast your tires off and lose to modded LS1s all day"), the whole purpose I've got a 363 in my car right now is because of the mid range and top end coupled with gearing, I found out it's better for racing to have mid range and top end pull than a lot of low end and a bit of top end to prevent you from ever hooking. If you've ever owned or driven an LS1 you'd know this, ever wonder why LS1s are so damned fast despite only being 346 cid? mid range and top end power. My piece is streetable enough for me, I haven't lost to a single 383 motor to motor in any car, 3rd gen, LT1 or whatnot. But whatever, what do I know, I've only got a buddy running 9s all motor with a 377 in his 3400 lb chevelle and hitting 8s on nitrous. And he drives to the track with it. I'm sure he'd be running that with a 400. I'm planning on building a 377 myself hope to be a lot faster than the low 11s I'm doing this season, which I should be. Might I add the 302 SBC was better than any other motor, 327, 350 of its time and was faster than them. No one said anything about using stock parts geniuses. the whole purpose of a BUILT motor is to use aftermarket parts. go pedal your somewhere else, if you're going to whine about "streetabilty" then don't bother racing. If you want ultimate streetability throw TPI on a 406 and keep it lame at 4000 rpm peak, can't get much more streetable than that.

 

You don't even know the most basic facts about motors evidently. Are you aware that the LS1 bore is smaller than a 350 and the stroke is longer? It's not like a 377, it's alot more like a 383. So much for your theory. You just contradicted yourself, just like the rest of the people who make this same tired argument always seem to do in one way or another.

The gentleman in the post didn't ask about 8 second cars with nitrous. He's asking for "streetable".

Your comment about the 302 is another one of those "urban legends" that just won't die. Evidently you weren't there at the time; I was. I seem to recall that the factory's "rating" of the 302 was 290 HP; and the "rating" of the early LT-1 350, which was absolutely identical to the 302 in every way except for the stroke - heads, cam, intake, carb, exhaust - was 375 HP. Now, I'll grant you that the 302 was under-rated, and the LT-1 was over-rated; but I clearly recall how the 70 cars waxed the 69 cars. I was there. Were you?

In any case, that wasn't what the original post was about. It was about how to build a street/strip 400. It's much easier and cheaper to get a given level of power out of a larger motor than a smaller motor; I guess that's such a blinding flash of the obvious that it's easy for some people to overlook. And on top of that, you don't have to wind it up as far to get the power you want. This is all so basic and obvious that it's hard to believe anybody could start an argument over it.

So when you get all done "planning", and you have your own results to come back and show us, let us know how it turned out.

 

not really, I am aware that the LS1 is a small bore, larger stroke motor, my motor has a 4.030" bore, and a 3.562" stroke, it's a stroker, not a de-stroker. my whole point is it's easier to make mid range and high RPM power with a shorter stroke, I will be faster with a 377, hence using the 302 as an example. it's also easier on the internals. a 302 car will always be faster than an LT1 car anyways, rpms friend. if you've been racing half as long as you say you have been you'd realize that power is only a small part of what wins the race, especially if it's very close matched. the fact that you can spin that 302 out longer than you can that 350 is what's gonna give it the edge. it's what gave the 5.0 mustang the edge over our 305s (and 350s) same with a 377 over a 406. Thanks for completely ignoring the rest of what I said. If you have a monster amount of torque at 1500 rpm it's not going to do anything but roast your tires to smoke. who wants that? no one. maybe if you're pulling stumps or someone who thinks burnouts are cool. I say it's a waste to build a 500 HP 406, when you can build a 600 HP 377 for similar costs if your intention is RACING. But whatever, shame on me for not reading about him wanting a super streetable build. I have a different train of thought, streetable is anything I can drive on the street, I don't care about comfort or anything of that nature. "manners" mean little to me. he wants something "tame" then a TPI 406 is right up his alley, hell he could use one of those compucrap cams designed for "F.I. builds" from Crane or CC. and 70s wasting 69s cars? this is new to me but whatever you were there you should get a cookie right? Cause by you being around in that time makes you the winner. Ok I'm only 25 so I can't speak for myself on this, but my family was around then and they say the 70s was the downfall of the american car. Point differs between me and them when they say bigger is better, and that's not always the case as has been shown lots of times, the mustang 5.0 is a great example of that as is the 427s dominance over the 454 in racing everywhere. this is lame to each their own.

 

dont need that much compression with a 400,,,

 

Black363IROCZ has no clue what he is talking about. You sir get the

 

WHOA !!!!! You don't visit for awhile, and see what happens??

C'mon guys, no need to get into witty posts and argue about this.

I've seen this happen too many times on this board. By the time you get done reading through the post - you've forgotton what question the original post was even asking!!

In the words of the great Rodney King - "Can't we all just get along??"

To reinerate: compression low enough to run on premium pump gas. Street 95% of the time. Not competing at the drag races, but will take it down the 1/4 every once in awhile just to see what times I can get.

A tidbit I left out - emissions.

No visual, but has a dyno and sniffer in this state (at least in SE WI. ) The state has already determined what "Streetable" means where I live.

Would think it'd be neat to pull 12's if possible with these limitations. Possible??

Anyways, I appreciate the help!! :hail:

 

Yes, the recipe I gave you should pass easily, with a good cat. You can leave the AIR pump on too and it will certainly pass. That's the good thing about using cubic inches to make power; you don't have to run big cams and do other things to extend the RPM range, which is what makes an engine emissions-unfriendly in the first place.

 

No, It's easier (and cheaper) to make mid-high power with induction parts that are suited to that power range on a given sized engine. The same parts on a 400 will yeild more power than on a 377.

On what planet?
No. What gave the 302 the advantage was better induction, better ECM (and programming), roller cam, stock hearders, duel exhaust w/Hpipe, and MOST of all, lighter vehicle. If you had raced as long as I have you'd know that.

Yeah, that's why Top fuel dragsters, Funny cars, and Prostockers try to stick to small displacements, so they don't "roast their tires". LOL. Get better suspension and tire.

Being 25, you should listen people with more ACTUAL EXPIRIENCE. The 70's WAS the down fall of American HP, but certainly, not the early 70's! '70-'74 yeilded the sickest cars ever... untill nowdays.

You should stop posting. Not only are you spreading blatent mis-information, you are doing it with a terrible attitude and tone. It discredits you immediatly, and makes you look like an fool.

 

I know I used to own a 72 Charger. And yes, it was a Dodge and I loved the stupid thing. Wish I'd never have sold it.

Anyways - starting in 72 - for Dodge at least, the HP rating dropped to 150HP!! In 71 it was 230!

Lower compression was the biggest diff I seen.

Whether due to measuring HP at the rear wheels, or simply emissions requirements, I think all makes started looking sickly that year.

BTW, I decided to just go ahead and buy the block. So I'm in this for the long haul! Like I said at the beginning, already machined - he just wants to get out what he put into it (OK - 48 bucks more!) - costs him 952 bucks, so....If ya think I got ripped and I'm an - I already know that!!

 

They say apicture is worth a 1000 words....



Everything on these two engines are the same, except the stroke is shorter on the 377. Both have a fairly aggressive XR288HR cam & AFR 220 Race heads.
Notice how the 377 NEVER excedes the 406 in horsepower or torque.

 

BTT....Still open for opinions...

 

well, the 400 tpi is really a torque machine but, I guess If you don't want to have the extra hp and torque then go with the destroker If you ever saw my car and what is really done to the eng. I think you would be really surprised just how fast it is. everyone does try and tell you what to do like they really know. its funny how alot of people tell you to ditch this and change that but, when you look at what they have and what they did to there car it will make you laugh when you see there times. just use the cubes if you get the 400 block. if you want rpms let some one else have the 400

 

$1000 is a lot for a bare block. There are engine shops out there selling assembled 406 shortblocks for $1500 - 2500, depending on which internals you want. One example: www.gustafengines.com I would keep on shopping.

 

Thanks for the info! But as I said, this is a done deal. The site you posted in very interesting, especially the 406 shortblock.

I don't know why a stock 400 flywheel and balancer are required though...I thought it would be internally balanced, unless their using a stock crank. 1300 plus shipping is a good price for a short block!

I know I won't be able to build it that cheap, but I have control over the parts I use at least. I figure a couple grand for the bottom end. Maybe cheaper - I have to call Eagle to see if they just sell the whole rotating assy.

BTW - I want torque in the stock configuration, i.e. - no stroker.