In theory the 426 max wedge should be faster than the Hemi in an identical car, right? Same power but less weight.

 

to be short. the street hemi 1966 to 1971 was NOT made to be the fastest car / engine. look at the specs on the race hemi 1964, 1965. then look at the specs on the street hemi. BUT the 1968 hemi cuda was ment to be the fastest. AND IS. that is the short story. man that was hard to keep it that short. see i couldn't stop. chrysler spends a of time to make the engine / car to meet a set if specs and the car / engine does.

 

Thats going to depend on when and who you talk to.....

You have to remember that the 426 Wedge was already in Stock car racing and doing well in 1963... The 426 Hemi cam along and had a bunch of troubles. It took some time to get thing worked out... But in the end, the 426 prevailed...
I think it was by 1966 they had it breaking records in drag racing. And ether 1964 or it was 1965 for the stock car winnings.
Now if you want to dispute this..... Your going to have to take it up with Tom Hoover and Don Garlits......
I hope I got most of that rite......lol

 

With equal compression, cam, and carburation I just don't see the Hemi having much advantage over a wedge. Tough to see it being worth the extra weight and packaging issues.

 

Now are you talk now days or are we talking back in the day?

 

Stock vs stock, so I guess back in the day. Present day build got me to thinking about it though, what are your thoughts on both?

 

Can I just say that I have a love for both of them......lol

I will say the 413 Max Wedge threw 1964 was awesome both in stock car and drag racing....

Then the big brute or the "Elephant" takes over... in stock car in late 64 and for drag racing 1965 / 1966 or somewhere in there...

I think in the end we all Hail the HEMI... And we are in the year of it's 50th Anniversary !

 

Hail, Hail, Hail, Gen 1, Gen 2, Gen 3!!!

 

It seems that for high rpm operation, say 4500 and over, the hemi should have the advantage due to larger valves and flow characteristics. Also, for any supercharged applications, the hemi should also have the advantage. But for a street car, the advantage may be marginal.

The newer generation hemis are purely for marketing reasons.

May be one day I will build a C-body with a hemi for super high speed driving. An engine revving too 6500 rpm at 170 mph would be cool. For now, 440's at much lower speeds (but reliable and consistent) will have to do.

 

Have you owned one, driven one, raced one, taken one apart?

Please feel free to enlighten us with yor Gen 3 HEMI knowledge.

 

Demetri... I truly hope, that really is not your take on the New Gen Hemi.

 

I think using the name Hemi is for marketing, it would be just as excellent though under any other name. Suggesting that it's excellent power characteristics are attributed soley to the hemispherical combustion chamber is short sighted, it is a well engineered and thought out package.

 

Ok...Let me market this..... Are you aware !!!!!!!!

That in 2013 (as far as my sources go) that the new Gen III 426 Race HEMI was the first Naturally Aspirated V8 Stock Eliminator car to run in the 8's !!!

And by the way Drag Pack guy's... You can legally upgrade your 2009's..:driving:

I think Thats Awesome in my book

 

ill add a note the STREET hemi was NOT ment to be a race engine. it was made so they could run a hemi in NASCAR. a race hemi and STREET hemi are NOT the same.

 

On an added note, that's on a 9" rear tire!!!

 

I don't know if you guys know, but the OHC V6's a few years back were more expensive for Chrysler to manufacture than the "Hemi". Nevertheless, it was a "added cost" option. Also, the new "hemi" does not have the extreme valve angles as the old hemi, apparently because its design it does not have all out performance in mind. And let's face it, by modern standards, the "hemi" is old school archaic technology, a 4 valve per cylinder engine is simply superior design. For all the pickup truck and car applications, a conventional wedge could have done what the new "hemi" does now (which is just as archaic). However, Chrysler of 2008 or 2009 was more interested in profit and selling cars and trucks with high profit margin than anything else, and in that respect, the "hemi" is a success.

Even if many modern cars may be faster than many old cars, you simply cannot have the fun and excitement that old cars give you. This is an unscientific opinion that cannot be proven, or disproven ... Fun is an irrational entity. So, the new hemi can never be what the old one was, in my opinion.

 

Demitri, Give it up. You are uninformed! Tell me again it ain't fun in a new HEMI car. With an NHRA compliant stocker GEN 3 HEMI engine ROLMAO

 

OK ill say it. i dont care if it the old hemi or new hemi if its fast its great. i love it.

 

Ok, I was wondering when someone would call me on this. Yes I was comparing a race engine (not available in a street car) to a street engine. You have to admit their power output is astonishingly similar, though.

 

Anybody who seriously thinks a wedge back in the day was competitive with a 426 hemi is badly misinformed.

 

It may be argued that the 80's K-car Dodge Charger was fun too.

I had read a road test of a 69 or 70 Dodge Charger Hemi 426 3.23. It had 14 seconds 1/4 mile and top speed of 156 mph. This was incredible performance for that era, for a 4 seat passenger car with reasonable comfort level. This was world class performance, and only an Aston Martin may have been able to beat it (at probably twice the cost).

Now, fast forward to today. What does the new "hemi" have to show for? Even the basic GM small block (another anachronism) can run with it. A well done 6 cylinder turbo variable valve timing DOHC will be able to beat it. Let's face it. Chrysler was no longer capable of producing a technologically competitive car, and instead exploited its past and created the new "hemi". It worked for a little, and allowed Chrysler to sell cars at high profit margin. But this is "short term" corporate mentality. Once this brand name loyalty group gets too old and retires from the car purchasing business, the name "hemi" will mean nothing to the average customer, and Chrysler will have nothing to replace it.

 

I'm just basing my earlier question on published specs of the 426 street Hemi and the Ramcharger III 426 Max Wedge. I wasn't there to witness these in person, what am I missing? Are the published numbers incorrect?

 

the published specs of the 426 street Hemi is way low of the real horsepower. this was done a lot by all car makers in the 60s. mostly for insurance reasons. Roger Huntington did an artical on this subject. he had a chart showing the factory rattings. and his idea of the real horsepower. i have studied this chart closely and think it is very close. but i cant find it now. if i find it ill list the site.

 

HP numbers all through the late 50's and up until carmakers went to "net HP" were known to be both high, and low. If you want some idea of how this "is" Google up some of the old NHRA "factoring" for some of the factory stock classes to see how this works. I can't speak for the introductory period of the "late" hemi in say, 64-5, but by '66.....................

And bear in mind that a "max wedge" was just what it says.........hardly a "street" engine. These things might have "seen" the street, but they were hardly "street able". The "street hemi" on the other hand, was a comparably mild engine.

 

i fond the artical.

Auto journalist Roger Huntington wrote an article about what these engines actually put out, and here is the list. The figures are for gross HP though, I have the list of net HP ratings too.


Engine------------------Advertised----Rated----------True
------------------------HP @ RPM---- Torque@ RPM-- HP @ RPM

Buick 455 Stage 1-------360@5000----510@2800------420@5400
Camaro Z/28 302--------290@5800----290@4200------310@6200
Chevelle 396 L-78-------375@5600----415@3600------400@5600
Corvette 427 L-88-------430@5200----450@4400------480@6400
Mopar 340-4 bbl---------275@5000----340@3200------320@5600
Mopar 440-Magnum------375@4600----480@3200------410@5400
Mopar 440 Six-Pack------390@4700----490@3200------430@5600
Mopar 426 Street Hemi---425@5000----490@4000------470@6000
Mustang Boss 302--------290@5800----290@4300------310@6200
Ford 351-4 bbl Cleveland--300@5400----380@3400------340@5600
Mustang Boss 351--------330@5400----370@4000------360@6000
Mustang 428 Cobra-Jet---335@5200----440@3400------410@5600
Mustang Boss 429--------375@5200----450@3400------420@5600
Oldsmobile 455 W-30-----370@5300----500@3600------440@5600
Oldsmobile 350 W-31-----325@5400----360@3600------350@5800
Pontiac Ram Air 400------366@5100----445@3600------410@5600

 

So perhaps the real question is, how much power did the engines mentioned above actually make? I've heard stories of both engines taking down purpose built race cars in stock form.

 

now that runner said a max NOT being street able . which IS true. i think the max came with a paper sheet that said something like do NOT run this engine at WOT for more than 20-30 seconds. i think. and a label came the THE HEMI CUDA saying it is NOT street legal. i think.

 

Something like this!

 

I don't know what you mean about the hemi Cuda. Those were incredibly docile creatures. No different than a 383 RR or similar. My favorite old car was a 440-6 RR and that thing was an absolute torque monster in it's day.

I let a friend drive it one time to spell me on a trip. He was used to his '70 Chev 3/4T 4x. Started out from the side of the freeway in 3rd and hardly knew the difference. It was 3.54 rear, turned right at 3K at 70. Used to run 13. oh's any day of the week. You have to consider this was my daily driver. It was not a weekend drag racer.

 

I do not know where this table of hp came from, but they do not look realistic to me, if they are in stock form production cars.

All the big blocks installed on large cars were typically well below 300 hp net (exception the 440, which was between 330 and 350 hp net, I am not sure how much difference the six pack really made). I had seen a test of a factory rated 400 hp Cadillac 500 cid done somewhere in Europe, and they got something like 230 hp at 4000 rpm. Most of the big American engines of the day coming from GM and Ford had horrible bore/stroke ratios, poorly designed valve train components, poorly designed cylinder heads and manifolds, and generally designed for low end torque. The average consumer back then was interested in the performance image, but rarely actually drove fast to know the difference between a fast car and a not so fast car.

This is where the Chrysler big blocks shine. They were reasonably well engineered engines. And the hemi was was step further, at the cost of higher weight and complexity.

The corvette engine may have been a bit different. Been a small car engine with sharp differential gear ratio, low end torque was not necessary, and so it probably made good horsepower. But I doubt the figure was 480 hp.

The small blocks were pretty bad too. The typical 302 was only good for about 150 hp. The sporty versions may have been capable for a bit more.

But its all clear as mud. Its difficult to extract reality from the old legends.