I know that the 377 is a high horsepower, high revving engine, and the 383 is more of a low end torque motor. I figured that with the Mini-Ram with AFR 195s and cam to match, I would be contradicting myself in feeding a low end power 383 with that, and that a 377 would work better, am I right, or am I missing something? I mean, I see A LOT of people using the 383, and very few using a 377, what's the reason for that? All of these aftermarket parts are for improveing your high RPM power. I DO NOT want to use a 400+ cid SBC motor.

I would like to have some of you who know more about this stuff than me to explain everything about it to me. Thank you in advance, Dan.

------------------
1987 Chevy Camaro IROC-Z
L98 TPI 350 (5.7L)
TH 700R-4 Transmission
Borg Warner 7.75" 9 Bolt Rear End

Current Mods: LT4 HOT Cam, Comp Cams 1.52:1 Roller Rocker Arms, Edelbrock TES 1 5/8" Headers, Hooker 3" Aerochamber Cat-Back System, Performance Resource Chip, Accel Ignition Coil, Cap, Rotor, 8.8mm Wires, K&N Filters, JET TPI Air Foil, All Free Mods, Falken ZIEX Z-Rated Tires.

Best ET (w/o LT4 cam): 14.32 @ 97.7mph
(corrected for elevation)

Soon to Come: 7.625" 10 Bolt with 3.42s and Accel TPI Intake Base

 

your right in saying the 377 is the better choice for the mini ram. the reason more 383's are built is the block. alot easier to find a 4 inch bore block than a 4.125 bore block. 400's are getting scarce comparing to 350's and crank's are now available for the 350 block already made to fit. buying a brand new crank for a 400 block with the shorter stroke if very expensive compairing and it's just more work installing the 350 crank. the only real advantage to the 377 over the 383 is hp since the valve's are better unshrouded. for real high hp, it has the ablility to rev higher, but for street engines, both will turn 7k.

 

Exactly
a decent 400 is hard to find and most people dont care that "you can make a 377 with that"
they just go ahead and make the 400.

not to say theres anything wrong with that but I do like the 377 Idea and plan to build one when the 305 croaks.

------------------
88 WS6 T/A 305 TPI--
K&N,Air foil,hypertech chip, thermostat+fanswitch
free mods, dynomax catback, urethane motor+trans mounts,
SSM SFCs, Bilsteins
very trick homemade ramair, Accel 300+ ignition system.
Planning: hedman 1-5/8 longtubes, NOS 150 plate, world 305 heads, replace the "peanut"! and other susp. mods.
check it out at:
http://www.geocities.com/transam617

 

Why don't you want a 400 motor?

------------------
1988 T/A,
9" Ford, 3.50 gears, Auburn posi, 700r4 -w- 2100 converter, 360ci, 9.8:1 cr,
AFR 195 Heads, Weiand #7525 intake, Lunati roller 219/227, .479/.480, 112 LSA
Holley 700cfm 4bbl on TBI truck 7747 computer and chip by Howell-EFI

 

Because a shorter stroke allows an engine to rev faster and higher.

 

Just stick 6 inch rods in it!

 

Yeah, what JAYDUB said. A 383 or 400 with 6 inch rods has almost the same rod/stroke ratio as a 377 with 5.7" rods would (same as a stock 350, too).

Personally, I ran my 400 to 6500 on a fairly regular basis and that was with SHORT 400 rods! Not IDEAL, but it would do it and make good power up there.

Also, I don't hear a lot of guys running 383s complaining that they can't get their motors to rev!

Build what you want, but on the street, displacement is still king.

BTW- I am putting a short-rod, mild cammed 400 underneath my brother's Mini-rammed 87 T/A next month, so I'll let everyone know how it turns out. Sounds like a total mismatch, but trust me I have some tricks up my sleeve and this puppy's gonna make torque like no other mini-rammed engine ever has!




[This message has been edited by Damon (edited April 29, 2001).]

 

I know 400s aren't centerbolt heads, so will the Mini Ram even bolt to an old style head even though its made for the 87+ motors?

------------------
1987 Chevy Camaro IROC-Z
L98 TPI 350 (5.7L)
TH 700R-4 Transmission
Borg Warner 7.75" 9 Bolt Rear End

Current Mods: LT4 HOT Cam, Comp Cams 1.52:1 Roller Rocker Arms, Edelbrock TES 1 5/8" Headers, Hooker 3" Aerochamber Cat-Back System, Performance Resource Chip, Accel Ignition Coil, Cap, Rotor, 8.8mm Wires, K&N Filters, JET TPI Air Foil, All Free Mods, Falken ZIEX Z-Rated Tires.

Best ET (w/o LT4 cam): 14.32 @ 97.7mph
(corrected for elevation)

Soon to Come: 7.625" 10 Bolt with 3.42s and Accel TPI Intake Base

 

Can anyone answer my 2nd question?

 

Nobody in their right mind would use actual 400 heads in a high-RPM, high-HP application. IIRC there are 3 styles of Miniram, for each of the 3 possible styles of intake bolt pattern on the heads. You can bolt centerbolt heads on a 400 block.

------------------
"So many Mustangs, so little time..."
ICON Motorsports

 

Just changing the rod ratio does not make a torque motor and RPM motor. The additional friction associated with the longer stroke will prevent it from making hp at the same peak rpm as a 3.48 stroke motor. But, why try. It has more torque, use it.

 

I'm not using stock 400 heads on the motor. Using Trick FLow Twisted Wedge G2 heads with late-model intake bolt pattern and 400 steam holes drilled out by yours truly. The Miniram has the late model intake bolt pattern, too.

 

didn't you see the CHP test (I think Nov 2000) where they took the exact combination and built two SBs. One was a 383 and another was a 377. The 383 had about 4 ft/lbs more torque and the 377 had about 4 more hp. 6 of one half a dozen of another. These were 6000 rpm smallblocks with Comp XE292 solid rollers and the new TFS23 heads. A 377 would need to be build for much higher rpm to take advantge of the bore to stroke benefit.