440 vs 440 6 pack
06-18-2012, 03:10 PM
#1
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
440 vs 440 6 pack
Ok, I am not trying to compare the two engines, I just want to know what the differences are. i am trying to make the 440 6 pack and want to know the parts that make the 6 pack what it is? Is it a good idea or possible to make a regular 440 bottom end with like a 6 pack intake or what? As well as I was wondering where I could find the parts for the 6 pack. Thanks for the help.
06-19-2012, 02:46 AM
#2
Admin
The only difference between the two that I am aware of is from the intake up. Heads and block are the same. Cam is probably different too since you would be running 6 barrels rather than 2 or 4.
You'll need three 2 barrel carbs, 2x3 intake, fuel and linkage pieces, air cleaner, and a dyno to really help dial those three carbs in. As far as where can you buy everything, ebay is a good start, local swap meets too. If you want new and don't mind aftermarket, places like Summit Racing and Jeggs may have a full kit.
Depending on your reasoning to go with a 6 pack, if its for performance, I'd look at a going with a 4 barrel carb (easier to dial in) or a dual quad setup (still easier to dial in 2 carbs than 3). If its a clone car and you want it to look like a 6 pack, then go with it, just read up and be ready to spend some time dialing it in, then take the car/motor to a dyno shop and have them dial it in even more.
You'll need three 2 barrel carbs, 2x3 intake, fuel and linkage pieces, air cleaner, and a dyno to really help dial those three carbs in. As far as where can you buy everything, ebay is a good start, local swap meets too. If you want new and don't mind aftermarket, places like Summit Racing and Jeggs may have a full kit.
Depending on your reasoning to go with a 6 pack, if its for performance, I'd look at a going with a 4 barrel carb (easier to dial in) or a dual quad setup (still easier to dial in 2 carbs than 3). If its a clone car and you want it to look like a 6 pack, then go with it, just read up and be ready to spend some time dialing it in, then take the car/motor to a dyno shop and have them dial it in even more.
06-19-2012, 05:27 AM
#3
Mopar Lover
Tim -
Actually the block and connecting rods are different along with the compression ratio. May vary a bit from year to year.
Agree that for performance / manageability, a single 4V is the way to go. I know more than a few people who started out with the 6V setups and switched to a single.
Archer
Actually the block and connecting rods are different along with the compression ratio. May vary a bit from year to year.
Agree that for performance / manageability, a single 4V is the way to go. I know more than a few people who started out with the 6V setups and switched to a single.
Archer
06-19-2012, 07:25 AM
#4
Mopar Fanatic
Tim -
Actually the block and connecting rods are different along with the compression ratio. May vary a bit from year to year.
Agree that for performance / manageability, a single 4V is the way to go. I know more than a few people who started out with the 6V setups and switched to a single.
Archer
Actually the block and connecting rods are different along with the compression ratio. May vary a bit from year to year.
Agree that for performance / manageability, a single 4V is the way to go. I know more than a few people who started out with the 6V setups and switched to a single.
Archer
06-19-2012, 09:52 AM
#5
I'm not sure about the 69 1/2 engines, but the '70 had heavier rods and was externally balanced. I'M NOT SURE this is a particular improvement. Some of these, including mine, had a history of shedding the no6 rod
I'm sure the cam was different
The heads were same as the HP 383 and 440 4bbl
These were an incredibly torky and mild engine to drive. I once let a friend of mine "switch off" with me on a long trip. He had a 3/4T 4x4 and was used to a heavy rig. He started off in 3rd gear accidently and thought he was in first!!
I'm sure the cam was different
The heads were same as the HP 383 and 440 4bbl
These were an incredibly torky and mild engine to drive. I once let a friend of mine "switch off" with me on a long trip. He had a 3/4T 4x4 and was used to a heavy rig. He started off in 3rd gear accidently and thought he was in first!!
06-19-2012, 01:48 PM
#6
Admin
06-19-2012, 04:31 PM
#7
"The Block"? Uh, no. There was no substantial difference in blocks. Ma might have taken a harder look at the available blocks as to quality control, or to alloy, OR NOT, but there were no differences such as deck height, etc.
According to my old 70 shop manual, 440's were 9.7:1 except 3-2BBL were 10.5:1
They show the same cam timing for HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBl
Intake opens 21 BTC
Intake closes 67 ABC
Exhaust opens 79 BBC
Exhaust closes 25 ATC
Overlap 46*
Intake duration 268
Exhaust duration 284
They show lift at "zero lash"
intake .450
exhaust .458
I see no listed differences in such things as bearing or valve stem clearance`or even valve spring pressures between HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBL 440
As I recall, the 390 HP 69 1/2 engines (which were aluminum intake) were derated in '70 to 385 HP. I have heard that some 70's came with aluminum intakes, but I believe the vast majority came with iron intakes AND BOY ARE THEY HEAVY!!
The first time I drove the then nearly new 70 which belonged to a friend of mine, it was "factory fresh." At the time, I had a "fair running" 69 383 RR with 780 Holley, Edelbrock intake, headers, 3.23, and 4 speed. That 70 made that 383 seem like a /6 taxi!! Just absolutely incredible.
At the time I bought it from him, it was running an Edlebrock intake and 800 Holley, headers, and had "hang on" aftermarket AC. With a 4 speed, 3.54 gear, and G 60X15 rear tires, 70 mph was almost exactly 3000 RPM. In the day, the thing was a rocket ship. Few cars you ran across could give you much trouble. A 340 TA was one!!
According to my old 70 shop manual, 440's were 9.7:1 except 3-2BBL were 10.5:1
They show the same cam timing for HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBl
Intake opens 21 BTC
Intake closes 67 ABC
Exhaust opens 79 BBC
Exhaust closes 25 ATC
Overlap 46*
Intake duration 268
Exhaust duration 284
They show lift at "zero lash"
intake .450
exhaust .458
I see no listed differences in such things as bearing or valve stem clearance`or even valve spring pressures between HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBL 440
As I recall, the 390 HP 69 1/2 engines (which were aluminum intake) were derated in '70 to 385 HP. I have heard that some 70's came with aluminum intakes, but I believe the vast majority came with iron intakes AND BOY ARE THEY HEAVY!!
The first time I drove the then nearly new 70 which belonged to a friend of mine, it was "factory fresh." At the time, I had a "fair running" 69 383 RR with 780 Holley, Edelbrock intake, headers, 3.23, and 4 speed. That 70 made that 383 seem like a /6 taxi!! Just absolutely incredible.
At the time I bought it from him, it was running an Edlebrock intake and 800 Holley, headers, and had "hang on" aftermarket AC. With a 4 speed, 3.54 gear, and G 60X15 rear tires, 70 mph was almost exactly 3000 RPM. In the day, the thing was a rocket ship. Few cars you ran across could give you much trouble. A 340 TA was one!!
Last edited by 440roadrunner; 06-19-2012 at 04:36 PM.
06-19-2012, 06:20 PM
#8
Mopar Fan
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Cesspool, South Carolina
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I thought the rods were different too....I have a MOPAR Bible, I'll have to dig it out and look this subject up.
edit:
found this info
Edelbrock aluminum intake in 69, high compression, high rev Hemi valve springs, chrome flashed valve stems, low taper cam and lifters, dual point distributor quick advance, 1970 LY rods, iron Chrysler intake in 70, external balanced crank due to the larger, heaiver rods
edit:
found this info
Edelbrock aluminum intake in 69, high compression, high rev Hemi valve springs, chrome flashed valve stems, low taper cam and lifters, dual point distributor quick advance, 1970 LY rods, iron Chrysler intake in 70, external balanced crank due to the larger, heaiver rods
Last edited by OldMechanik; 06-19-2012 at 06:42 PM.
06-19-2012, 07:13 PM
#9
Mopar Lover
440 -
I believe the 6V blocks had extra/reinforced ribs below the heads. Most of the mechanics back then could tell the difference between a 4v and a 6v block. No, the internal specs weren't different.
Archer
I believe the 6V blocks had extra/reinforced ribs below the heads. Most of the mechanics back then could tell the difference between a 4v and a 6v block. No, the internal specs weren't different.
Archer
Last edited by Archer; 06-19-2012 at 07:16 PM.
06-19-2012, 11:30 PM
#10
As near as I know an can find out, this is not true. I'd be interested in documentation if you have it.
And, as I intimated above, the 70/ later rods were not necessarily better. After the untimely demise of my original 70, I acquired a used 67 375 hp engine. A "light" valve job, rings, and a to this day unknown mechanical cam or somewhere in the .5" lift X 300? duration resulted in instant 11 second times.
That was one of the cheapest, and best running 440's I had. It lived on, later in life, with a 69 383 RR cam in a 1/2T 74 Dodge 4x4. Torque monster.
And, as I intimated above, the 70/ later rods were not necessarily better. After the untimely demise of my original 70, I acquired a used 67 375 hp engine. A "light" valve job, rings, and a to this day unknown mechanical cam or somewhere in the .5" lift X 300? duration resulted in instant 11 second times.
That was one of the cheapest, and best running 440's I had. It lived on, later in life, with a 69 383 RR cam in a 1/2T 74 Dodge 4x4. Torque monster.
06-20-2012, 06:11 AM
#11
Mopar Lover
440 -
Sorry, no documentation, only what I've seen and what was pointed out to me. Not sure when Chrysler started cutting back on the engine specs, but I would guess, it was more like 71/72. That's why I'm using a 69 block and 6v-rods.
Just curious, what was that 440 in that gave you 11 sec ETs??? That's a little hard to believe with those specs (assuming a full size/weight vehicle).
Archer
Sorry, no documentation, only what I've seen and what was pointed out to me. Not sure when Chrysler started cutting back on the engine specs, but I would guess, it was more like 71/72. That's why I'm using a 69 block and 6v-rods.
Just curious, what was that 440 in that gave you 11 sec ETs??? That's a little hard to believe with those specs (assuming a full size/weight vehicle).
Archer
Last edited by Archer; 06-20-2012 at 06:17 AM.
06-20-2012, 07:46 AM
#12
I should have said INTO the 11s, IE 11.80.
This was in a 70 'Cuda which I'd got in a trade. It had been raced one season at Pikes Peak, and had a cage installed. It ran a 5? 5.38? gear and really tall slicks, don't remember anymore, this was about 1973-4.
If you find THAT unbelievable this was with only 3 gears in the 4 speed, as I never did get the clutch problem sorted out before moving N from San Diego. After the fact, it turns out that clutch disc debri had compacted between the pressure plate and cover, preventing full release.
So I launched in 2nd gear, and shifted with OUT the clutch, taking probably 1/2 second or so with the two shifts. Because of the 5.x gears, that thing spun OVER 7K in the lights. I don't remember, I believe I had Crower springs and retainers on it, with the old style Mopar adjustable rockers.
Edelbrock Tarantula, 850 dp (a REAL one, not a spread bore) an old hemi tach drive dual point, and a Jones Motrola (it's spelled right!!) mechanical tach
This was in a 70 'Cuda which I'd got in a trade. It had been raced one season at Pikes Peak, and had a cage installed. It ran a 5? 5.38? gear and really tall slicks, don't remember anymore, this was about 1973-4.
If you find THAT unbelievable this was with only 3 gears in the 4 speed, as I never did get the clutch problem sorted out before moving N from San Diego. After the fact, it turns out that clutch disc debri had compacted between the pressure plate and cover, preventing full release.
So I launched in 2nd gear, and shifted with OUT the clutch, taking probably 1/2 second or so with the two shifts. Because of the 5.x gears, that thing spun OVER 7K in the lights. I don't remember, I believe I had Crower springs and retainers on it, with the old style Mopar adjustable rockers.
Edelbrock Tarantula, 850 dp (a REAL one, not a spread bore) an old hemi tach drive dual point, and a Jones Motrola (it's spelled right!!) mechanical tach
06-25-2012, 08:18 PM
#16
Love it.
"The Block"? Uh, no. There was no substantial difference in blocks. Ma might have taken a harder look at the available blocks as to quality control, or to alloy, OR NOT, but there were no differences such as deck height, etc.
According to my old 70 shop manual, 440's were 9.7:1 except 3-2BBL were 10.5:1
They show the same cam timing for HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBl
Intake opens 21 BTC
Intake closes 67 ABC
Exhaust opens 79 BBC
Exhaust closes 25 ATC
Overlap 46*
Intake duration 268
Exhaust duration 284
They show lift at "zero lash"
intake .450
exhaust .458
I see no listed differences in such things as bearing or valve stem clearance`or even valve spring pressures between HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBL 440
As I recall, the 390 HP 69 1/2 engines (which were aluminum intake) were derated in '70 to 385 HP. I have heard that some 70's came with aluminum intakes, but I believe the vast majority came with iron intakes AND BOY ARE THEY HEAVY!!
The first time I drove the then nearly new 70 which belonged to a friend of mine, it was "factory fresh." At the time, I had a "fair running" 69 383 RR with 780 Holley, Edelbrock intake, headers, 3.23, and 4 speed. That 70 made that 383 seem like a /6 taxi!! Just absolutely incredible.
At the time I bought it from him, it was running an Edlebrock intake and 800 Holley, headers, and had "hang on" aftermarket AC. With a 4 speed, 3.54 gear, and G 60X15 rear tires, 70 mph was almost exactly 3000 RPM. In the day, the thing was a rocket ship. Few cars you ran across could give you much trouble. A 340 TA was one!!
According to my old 70 shop manual, 440's were 9.7:1 except 3-2BBL were 10.5:1
They show the same cam timing for HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBl
Intake opens 21 BTC
Intake closes 67 ABC
Exhaust opens 79 BBC
Exhaust closes 25 ATC
Overlap 46*
Intake duration 268
Exhaust duration 284
They show lift at "zero lash"
intake .450
exhaust .458
I see no listed differences in such things as bearing or valve stem clearance`or even valve spring pressures between HP 383, HP 440, and 3-2BBL 440
As I recall, the 390 HP 69 1/2 engines (which were aluminum intake) were derated in '70 to 385 HP. I have heard that some 70's came with aluminum intakes, but I believe the vast majority came with iron intakes AND BOY ARE THEY HEAVY!!
The first time I drove the then nearly new 70 which belonged to a friend of mine, it was "factory fresh." At the time, I had a "fair running" 69 383 RR with 780 Holley, Edelbrock intake, headers, 3.23, and 4 speed. That 70 made that 383 seem like a /6 taxi!! Just absolutely incredible.
At the time I bought it from him, it was running an Edlebrock intake and 800 Holley, headers, and had "hang on" aftermarket AC. With a 4 speed, 3.54 gear, and G 60X15 rear tires, 70 mph was almost exactly 3000 RPM. In the day, the thing was a rocket ship. Few cars you ran across could give you much trouble. A 340 TA was one!!
08-14-2012, 12:55 AM
#17
Mopar Fanatic
Yes, heavier rods, externally balanced, and uses a different harmonic balancer. It uses the 906 heads. Same as the 383 and 440 magnum. I believe the compression height on the piston is higher as well. And thats how they raised the compression ratio I think. Does any one know the piston to deck clearance on these motors? At TDC? I would think a well built 440 could handle a 6 pak intake with no problem. And I have seen more than one big block have problems with #6 cyl. Ok C Ya
02-27-2013, 03:21 PM
#19
i was around in 1969 1/2, i remember it well. had a friend that raced one. he made NO changes, whipped up on chevys so BAD, well thats an other story. mostly EVERYTHING in that engine is different, than a reg 440.
02-27-2013, 07:45 PM
#20
Mopar Fanatic
The six pack is a running mf'er. I had a '69 440 Six Pack in a '68 Charger in the 80's and that car would turn high 12's at the track on Radial TA's with 3.23's, stock manifolds and full exhaust. Plus it got 20 mpg on the interstate.
03-05-2013, 03:34 AM
#23
shesh.. okay guys your off base. The block on a 440-6 is marked that way in the external casting same place as the date clock is. The stamping near the front of intake is marked 440 HP.
The crankshaft, con rods, pistons are the same as the regular 440 but they were balanced in 69 and 70. 71 they were not.
THe compression ratio for the engines was the same as the regular 440 HP 10.5 however you can't run regular fuel in that and would want the 71 ratio of 9.5:1.
They use a holley 2 barrel carb X3 that are made ONLY for the six pack and quite truthfully leak. One day they run perfect the next they dump fuel.
A regular 4 barrel 600cfm does wonders true but you can also get a similar look and power with 2x4 setup. Eldebrock has a choice of dual inline or offset in original chrysler mold. These are aluminum however, mores the pity.
To run dual 4's on regular or premium fuel you need a compression ratio of 9.2:1, a stock purple mopar cam for the magnums, 915 heads with the seats checked or changed with good quality ones and your on your way. Add a set of high flow stock manifolds and you got an original looking engine with tons of power.
Warning the air cleaner base for the large oval with the orange top will probably have to be custom fitted as the current repro one for dual inline is off.
The crankshaft, con rods, pistons are the same as the regular 440 but they were balanced in 69 and 70. 71 they were not.
THe compression ratio for the engines was the same as the regular 440 HP 10.5 however you can't run regular fuel in that and would want the 71 ratio of 9.5:1.
They use a holley 2 barrel carb X3 that are made ONLY for the six pack and quite truthfully leak. One day they run perfect the next they dump fuel.
A regular 4 barrel 600cfm does wonders true but you can also get a similar look and power with 2x4 setup. Eldebrock has a choice of dual inline or offset in original chrysler mold. These are aluminum however, mores the pity.
To run dual 4's on regular or premium fuel you need a compression ratio of 9.2:1, a stock purple mopar cam for the magnums, 915 heads with the seats checked or changed with good quality ones and your on your way. Add a set of high flow stock manifolds and you got an original looking engine with tons of power.
Warning the air cleaner base for the large oval with the orange top will probably have to be custom fitted as the current repro one for dual inline is off.
03-05-2013, 08:38 PM
#24
440 vs 440 6 pack
Good info hear and this will clean up misconceptions on blocks. http://www.440source.com/blockinfo.htm
03-06-2013, 12:24 AM
#25
I have 3 sets left of the original 6 pack con rods , they used to be worth a lot but not now , yes the rods are much heavier although probably not stronger given the extra weight & yes the 6 pack engines were external balanced with special damper & flywheel , a new set of H beam rods are lighter & stronger
03-06-2013, 10:36 AM
#26
I have 3 sets left of the original 6 pack con rods , they used to be worth a lot but not now , yes the rods are much heavier although probably not stronger given the extra weight & yes the 6 pack engines were external balanced with special damper & flywheel , a new set of H beam rods are lighter & stronger
03-06-2013, 09:26 PM
#27
Mopar Fanatic
Yeah, too bad the six pack rods are so heavy, used to be that everybody wanted them, man if you got a junkyard engine with them in it you thought you struck gold! I guess back in the day you would have... Oh and I never had any problem with leaky carbs on my six pack. Truthfully.
http://www.440source.com/stockrods.htm
http://www.allpar.com/mopar/440.html
http://www.440source.com/stockrods.htm
http://www.allpar.com/mopar/440.html
03-07-2013, 06:26 AM
#28
Mopar Lover
Gents -
The 6 pack rods are heavier and stronger than the std 440 Magnum rods For a street machine, they still hold up quite well. If you're trying to squeeze every last ounce of power from an engine, then a lighter (and more expensive rod) may be in order.
I'm still using mine.
Never saw a 6 pack leak either. The issues where getting them optimally synched up and just about everyone I knew found that a single 4V gave better overall performance.
Archer
The 6 pack rods are heavier and stronger than the std 440 Magnum rods For a street machine, they still hold up quite well. If you're trying to squeeze every last ounce of power from an engine, then a lighter (and more expensive rod) may be in order.
I'm still using mine.
Never saw a 6 pack leak either. The issues where getting them optimally synched up and just about everyone I knew found that a single 4V gave better overall performance.
Archer
03-20-2013, 04:16 PM
#29
The 6pk Rods are a much heavier and stronger BEAM section(similar to the HEMI Rod) only when compared to the stock 440 " LY" Rods
however,
the weak link, and downfall of the 6PK Rods is the fact that the same "fastener" Rod Bolt was used.
Much past 6K rpm on a regular basis, this small 3/8" Rod Bolt is overstressed on the heavy 6PK Rod, whereas it will live with the lighter LY Rod assuming aftermarket ARP Bolt or similar are substituted.
* 1969-70 6PK Piston was 2.062" Compression distance, 4 Valve reliefs, .020" downhole from deck @ TDC on the nominal RB Block 10.72" dimension.
*1969 std 440 & Magnum Piston was a 2.020" Compression Distance, Flat Top, .060" Downhole @ TDC on std 10.72 RB Block.
* All Blocks are the same
* Camshafts were the same specs 440 "Magnum" 375hp 4 BBL, and 6 Pk 390hp, However, 6PK was a "low-taper" lifter design for higher rpm expected..no longer available.
however,
the weak link, and downfall of the 6PK Rods is the fact that the same "fastener" Rod Bolt was used.
Much past 6K rpm on a regular basis, this small 3/8" Rod Bolt is overstressed on the heavy 6PK Rod, whereas it will live with the lighter LY Rod assuming aftermarket ARP Bolt or similar are substituted.
* 1969-70 6PK Piston was 2.062" Compression distance, 4 Valve reliefs, .020" downhole from deck @ TDC on the nominal RB Block 10.72" dimension.
*1969 std 440 & Magnum Piston was a 2.020" Compression Distance, Flat Top, .060" Downhole @ TDC on std 10.72 RB Block.
* All Blocks are the same
* Camshafts were the same specs 440 "Magnum" 375hp 4 BBL, and 6 Pk 390hp, However, 6PK was a "low-taper" lifter design for higher rpm expected..no longer available.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MoparBryon
Mopar Classifieds
7
12-04-2008 06:37 AM
