Iowan

4006650-440-7 Is a 1977 cast crank, not much compression 440.

78D200

You may want to work closely with a local, well known engine shop. Let them know what you have, what you want and they can help, at least with the machining, maybe even some of the assembly if you ask nicely.

Indy and 440 Source have been around for a while and are great starting places. Don't be afraid to reach out to companies and get their input as well. I know some places like Crane Cam will talk with you about your goals for the motor to ensure you pick the right cam shaft.

67charger64

ok so that was the crank number we pulled then? it said 9/25/75 and mn near it as well

67charger64

ok thank you, yeah 440 source gave me alot of information that i didnt know before like the fact that the 426 wedge and 440 have alot of interchangeable parts which gives me alot more direction and understanding of the motor.

its all starting to click with what every one was talking about building the 440 up on some of the occasions. ive also located an old article from mymopar that was written in 1980 that had alot of good information, gave me alot of parts and numbers to consider when thinking about basically transforming the 440 into a hemi in a sense by using 426 part numbers.

my uncle did recommend that i locate another 440 block if i decide to go that route though so i can slowly rebuild the engine with the parts i want to run in in

Iowan

4006650 440 7 casting # 9/25/75 casting date probably out of a 76


All 440s of that vintage have a cast crank and low compression, if yours has been apart there's a chance the pistons have been replaced with higher compression versions. One other thing the max overbore on that block is .020 do to the thin wall casting.


That's not a block I would build.

67charger64

all the research ive done shows thin wall casting is a myth. it was in a site that a member posted on my thread in either on this forum or another forum im in. ive followed up and continued to do research and alot of what im finding supports it.

67charger64

"If you haven't read our new page on An explanation of Chrysler's part and casting number system, be sure to check it out also.

Blocks are one of the most misunderstood aspects of building a big block Mopar engine. Never has there been more misinformation, propaganda and rumors floating around. In the many years we have been involved with the big block Mopar engine, we have seen and owned many many hundreds of used core engines. We have used this opportunity to try and keep records as much as possible as to different advantages and disadvantages that various blocks offer. All the facts listed below are the result of our independently testing, measuring, sonic checking or otherwise gathering information directly from original sources: either the blocks themselves or the original factory drawings (blueprints) that Chrysler used to manufacture the blocks. This eliminates all chance of secondhand information, rumors, marketing or sales talk, etc. Hopefully this page will help hobbyists, restoration experts, and racers decide which choice of block is best for them.

First, let us address the biggest myth of all:

For many years it was thought that late model blocks were thin wall and should not be bored more than .030 over.

On page 198 of the Mopar engines manual, (the 8th edition) in the "B-RB Engines (block) section, it states: "The 1976-1977-1978 blocks for the 400 and 440 are a thin wall casting design. As such they shouldn't be overbored more then .020." This quote can now be found on page 58 of the new "Big Block B/RB Engines book from Mopar Perfomance, part # P4876825

Two pages later, (pg. 200) under "Boring and milling specifications," the manual states: "...The newer blocks (1975-1978) should only be bored .030" max., because they are thin wall castings. This quote can now be found on page 64 of the new "Big Block B/RB Engines book from Mopar Perfomance, part # P4876825

Then, in the May '98 issue of Mopar Performance News, in an article titled "The Big Block Story" on page 16, it states: "The newer production 440 blocks, '73-4 to '78 are thinwall cast, so you can only bore them .020"..."

So, as you can see, even these multiple sources of info which come straight from Chrysler engineering contain different information. What is the Mopar enthusiast supposed to think? Are the thinwall blocks from 76-78, or are they from 73-78? Can you bore them .030, or is .020 the maximum? We will answer all these questions once and for all based on scientific fact. The purpose of citing these books and articles is not to make Chrysler/Mopar Performance look bad. As racers and hobbyists, we are grateful for the resources and aftermarket parts that Chrysler makes available. However, it does demonstrate how even someone who does their research could be easily confused. So, it is to the benefit of everyone involved to help spread information which is known to be true, even if goes against popular thinking.

So what is the truth? Get ready for this.

There is no such thing as thinwall blocks. They DO NOT exist.

We have sonic checked over 50 blocks, and have found absolutely no evidence that later model blocks have cylinder walls that are any thinner then earlier blocks. In fact, we have found later blocks to have less core shift, meaning the cylinder walls are of a more uniform thickness all the way around. This makes perfect sense, considering that B engines were in production for over 2 decades. During this time, it would be expected that there would be small improvements in the technology of casting processes, quality control, etc, which would help create a better product.

In case you still doubt our findings, check out this article from Mopar Action magazine: http://www.arengineering.com/articles/sonicbig02 In it, they sonic check 20 blocks and come up with the same findings we did. They also explain how statistically 20 blocks is enough of a sample to estimate the rest of the 440 blocks out there. We've tested over 50 with the same results. This article also has some great info regarding hardness of the iron used, in which they find that the earlier blocks do have slightly harder cast iron, by about 10%.

Another issue is block weight, or the quantity of cast iron which is actually used in the block. Like the Mopar Action article, we have weighed many blocks and have found later blocks to weigh more, or have more cast iron in them. Since the reasoning behind thin wall blocks is that the factory used this practice in the late 70's to save money on iron (which is a known fact with SB Chevy engines), the fact that later blocks weigh more shows that Chrysler had no intention of using less iron to save money. Which is great news for us racers and performance enthusiasts.

So, the bottom line? Save and use those late model blocks. And go .060" over with 'em all day long. Also on that note, we know of several machine shops that have been going .060" with late model blocks for over 20 years with no problems."

-http://www.440source.com/blockinfo.htm just in case you didnt believe me. trust me when i say ive been scouring the internet machine trying to learn as much as i can before i really get going on building up the motor. my first priority is the body and gettin her road worthy so i have all the time in the world when im not looking for parts to look up info on what can be done to this monster.

Iowan

So now that your an expert, no more dumb questions. lol

RacerHog

We haven't got to " Case Core Shifting" Yet ....

Iowan

I've heard that was the problem with the late blocks, not thinner walls as mopar said.

67charger64

haha nooo im by no means an expert thats just the one thing ive learned for certain. things are starting to click though because of all your guys help

67charger64

haha oh jeez leave it to you to bring something new up! lol ill have to go searching for what that means now lol

RacerHog

Iowan

I've been looking at Indy heads and it looks like there are problems with castings and customer service that I wasn't aware of.

67charger64

like what man?

Iowan

Cracks in the heads ( new parts ) then difficulties getting the problem resolved. The owner of the co. is a dick to deal with.
This is what I've gathered from other forums.

67charger64

oh damn thanks for passing that along ill be steering clear of them.

67charger64

just checking in, havent done anything as far as building up the motor or anything like that yet. ive just been focusing on completing the car first and foremost which ive found alot of things im missing luckily. still a long ways to go before i have everything but its actually almost enough to get her moving around so i might get to start playing with the performance sooner rather than later