Your donations help keep this valuable resource free and growing. Thank you.
|
327 to 360 conversion. |
Post Reply | Page <12345> |
Author | |
nda racer
AMC Addicted Joined: Nov/28/2009 Location: Ohio Status: Offline Points: 2591 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
See, I'm a auto 101 guy, since I needed that explained to me. So hence the easy pickin's. A 327 2bbl with single exhaust should wax a junk Chevy that a guy without a clue owns. We'll be bumbling around at the track waiting for a race. Also, a 18 y/o boy that's only had the car down the track once before will be racing. Not me. I'm also willing to weigh the cars, if that classic is #200 heavier, 3600pds, it's a lousy chassis. My Jav IS #200 lighter than the Camaro. I have the weigh slips to prove it. 71-74 Humpsters seem to be the only AMC chassis worth building, since all the others are so stinking heavy. |
|
FSJunkie
AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/09/2011 Location: Flagstaff, AZ Status: Offline Points: 4742 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
HP/CID: 270 HP / 327 CID = .825 horsepower per cubic inch. 315 HP / 390 CID = .807 horsepower per cubic inch. Torque is the same story. The 327 wins by a small margin for it's displacement. Yes, the 340 HP 390 beats them both. Yes, we can debate the accuracy of factory ratings. Neither is the point. I realize saying anything against the 390 on this forum is forbidden, so let's find another engine. Look at the 360 instead and it's the same story. Even the highest output 360 is close, but not quite to the 327's HP/CID. We can argue the accuracy of factory ratings all day long, but that's not the point. Absolutely a 390 will suck the doors off a 327. I'm not arguing the faster engine here. I'm arguing use of available displacement volume. The 327 is not a high performance engine by initial looks. 465 CFM carburetor, 244* camshaft (a 232 six had more than that), tiny valves and head ports. Compare that to the 360 or 390 with 600 CFM carbs, 266-293* cams, and ample heads. The fact that the 327 puts up a good fight against these without a doubt superior engines is a great testament to the 327's engineering. That's all I'm saying here. |
|
1955 Packard
1966 Marlin 1972 Wagoneer 1973 Ambassador 1977 Hornet 1982 Concord D/L 1984 Eagle Limited |
|
amc67rogue
AMC Addicted Joined: Nov/05/2008 Location: Phx. AZ. Status: Offline Points: 1578 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The early 199-232s used the same grind as the 327s . 244deg. .375 lift .
|
|
Keith Coggins 67Rogue X code
|
|
farna
Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Duh!! Yep, did the math backwards.... thanks for the correction!!
I thought my wagon weighed around 3700#. Just looked up the specs and I'm off 500# -- shipping weight for the six cylinder 63 Classic wagon was 3200. Mine probably weighs a little more with the Jag axle and all, but not much. The two door V-8 model was 3100#. |
|
Frank Swygert
|
|
Buzzman72
AMC Addicted Joined: Sep/15/2009 Location: Southern IN Status: Offline Points: 2725 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Guys....I think you missed the boat on your estimates. Not that your numbers are off...but that the important thing here is how many pounds of car you have per horsepower.
If your car is packin' around 20 pounds per horsepower, you shouldn't be surprised if the car is a slug. Back in the '60's, AMC was hesitant to rate any of their engines at less than 10 pounds per horsepower...probably for insurance reasons, as the '70-'71 season saw insurance surcharges on a lot of high performance cars. So a 3150-pound AMX with a 315-hp 390 beats the surcharge, but barely. Same for the 3400-pound, 340-hp Machine. The '66 Shelby GT-350 Mustang was considered a high performance car by anyone's standards. Its 306 HP and 2940-pound curb weight translates to 9.60 pounds per horsepower. For a 270-hp 327, a 2592-pound car would approximate the Shelby's power-to-weight ratio. [A Bill Kraft Rambler American comes to mind here as a possibly competitive package...a '66 American weighs between 2552 and 2782 pounds.] With the right gearing, camshaft, some bigger valves [SBC comes to mind], and a suspension that's dialed in, the 327 might just be competitive...not above 6 grand, but up to that point it should be a decent performer. Edited by Buzzman72 - Mar/02/2015 at 5:51pm |
|
Buzzman72...void where prohibited, your mileage may vary, objects in mirror may be closer than they appear, and alcohol may intensify any side effects.
|
|
nda racer
AMC Addicted Joined: Nov/28/2009 Location: Ohio Status: Offline Points: 2591 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
http://carnut.com/specs/gen/nash60.html
There's some weights, prolly shipping. Anyways, that's why I put mine on the scale. No guessing. Some 78 Camaros weigh 3700 pds, (I had a 80 Z I parted out with all the paper work it's shipping weight was 37xx) so I could pull that card and use it as an excuse for losing, but I don't play that game. Edited by nda racer - Mar/02/2015 at 6:14pm |
|
RamblinMan
AMC Addicted Joined: Sep/26/2007 Location: Port Charlotte Status: Offline Points: 1237 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The curb weight of a 66 Classic V8 model is 2980, so you're getting real respectable horsepower weight ratio with the 4V 327. The 327 is a pretty heavy motor so that's a light chassis.
|
|
The Right Reverend of Blessed Acceleration
|
|
nda racer
AMC Addicted Joined: Nov/28/2009 Location: Ohio Status: Offline Points: 2591 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I just get amused when TSM Based cars are compared to Track Raced cars. Have fun figuring the woulda coulda shouldas, cause all the stuff I've seen published on them, isn't close to what I've put down the clocks in a far inferior car.
I've been begging for a real 1/4 mile time out of one for years. It hasn't happened, prolly never will. They're a bench racers dream, it sounds good on paper, but the reality is often very different and not very pleasant. |
|
purple72Gremlin
AMC Addicted Charter Member Joined: Jul/01/2007 Location: Illinois Status: Offline Points: 16611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The 327 is heavy and overbuilt. It is just a reliable engine. The heads are the limiting factor for better performance, and its heavy rotating mass doesnt help either. The 343 4bbl was rated 10 more hp, but it would out perform the 327. I personally would not waste my time with the 327 for performance use. The 360 is much better. Just because it idles smooth doesnt mean much. Any older engine will idle smootg if its working right. Ive fooled with older engines as well.
|
|
purple72Gremlin
AMC Addicted Charter Member Joined: Jul/01/2007 Location: Illinois Status: Offline Points: 16611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
Post Reply | Page <12345> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |