the 401

[John V]

Originally posted by Bryan:
That plus I dont think you can buy the HP900 without the #6 dry sump drives; Total package about $80,000.00. Heck of a nice setup though.....[/QB]

You can get it without the outdrives, Still a pretty penny though.

[Bobbo]

Originally posted by jeepsr4ever:
lets get 10 pages

I think that it will ge there! This is a hot topic! All these 401 haters keep bashin Elliott. I'm still with ya buddy!

[Bryan]

Originally posted by John V:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bryan:
That plus I dont think you can buy the HP900 without the #6 dry sump drives; Total package about $80,000.00. Heck of a nice setup though.....

You can get it without the outdrives, Still a pretty penny though.[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Hey John V, are you one of the guys that was at the Olympic 4x4 sponsored run in Liberty, WA about 2 or 3 summers ago? Your rig looks vaguely familiar..........

[jeepsr4ever]

Ahh my daily 401 post here.........hmmmmmmmmmm thanks bobo im with you too

[Elliott]

Originally posted by Bobbo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by jeepsr4ever:
lets get 10 pages

I think that it will ge there! This is a hot topic! All these 401 haters keep bashin Elliott. I'm still with ya buddy!</font>[/QUOTE]Hanging right in there, having the dyno results helped back up what looked to be clear from the production specs... gap, but not a lot of gap.

The later Caddy 500, the one Crazy_Jeepman is using for a comparison, (1976) has 120cc heads and I doubt they flowed worth a tinkers damn. Hafta go look up the valve size. Compression was 8.5:1, 190hp.

[Crazy_Jeepman]

Originally posted by Elliott:

The later Caddy 500, the one Crazy_Jeepman is using for a comparison, (1976) has 120cc heads and I doubt they flowed worth a tinkers damn. Hafta go look up the valve size. Compression was 8.5:1, 190hp.

Don't recall comparing anything with the 500 do you? I think after 7 pages you are getting confused yourself.
Does not matter what Caddy head you use. Any compression ratio is available with whatever head you use. 120CC or 76 CC. I have a set of Non Smog 120 CC heads off a 76 Caddy. Valve size is 2.00 INT and 1.625 EXH.

[Crazy_Jeepman]

Originally posted by Elliott:
"Just for the record, I hate anything GM has ever created.

Originally posted by Elliott:
I'm ok with folk using big blocks, kind of like the Buick 455 myself for some strange reason.

Hmmmmm Yup Confused I think!! [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[John V]

Originally posted by Bryan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by John V:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bryan:
That plus I dont think you can buy the HP900 without the #6 dry sump drives; Total package about $80,000.00. Heck of a nice setup though.....

You can get it without the outdrives, Still a pretty penny though.</font>[/QUOTE]Hey John V, are you one of the guys that was at the Olympic 4x4 sponsored run in Liberty, WA about 2 or 3 summers ago? Your rig looks vaguely familiar..........[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Nope. Wish I had though, and my rig looks a bit different now than it does in my avitar

[Crazy_Jeepman]

Oh the Caddy head flow results at 28 inches of water in CFM.

......100 .200 .300 .400 .500
INT....72 119 162 214 237
EX.....35 87 129 149 160

More on Heads and Caddy 500's

[John V]

Originally posted by Elliott:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bobbo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by jeepsr4ever:
lets get 10 pages

I think that it will ge there! This is a hot topic! All these 401 haters keep bashin Elliott. I'm still with ya buddy!</font>[/QUOTE]Hanging right in there, having the dyno results helped back up what looked to be clear from the production specs... gap, but not a lot of gap.

The later Caddy 500, the one Crazy_Jeepman is using for a comparison, (1976) has 120cc heads and I doubt they flowed worth a tinkers damn. Hafta go look up the valve size. Compression was 8.5:1, 190hp.</font>[/QUOTE]Actually Elliot there is quite a gap if you look at the entire curve. Take into consideration how much $$$ folks pay to get an extra 30-40 hp. Also for the sake of fairness I didn't do any motor specific mods. I also had to use the worst heads for most of the big blocks so there would not be any advantage. If I had used the rect port bbc heads or the stock 440B 2406518 Mopar heads the gap would be MUCH wider. The 401 already is using the best factory heads made, I also just noticed I forgot to change the exhaust specs on the 401...those #'s reflect 1 7/8" dia 30" length primary tube headers and open exhaust!

[John V]

Originally posted by Crazy_Jeepman:
Oh the Caddy head flow results at 28 inches of water in CFM.

......100 .200 .300 .400 .500
INT....72 119 162 214 237
EX.....35 87 129 149 160

More on Heads and Caddy 500's

You da man Pete!

[Elliott]

Pete,
You definately misquoted me, that was Bryan's comment about GM and maybe you copied it out of somewhere I quoted him later, but thems not my words. Here is his statement from page 6 (no confusion here):

[quote]Originally posted by Bryan:

Originally posted by Bryan:
Jesus H Christ on a frickin popsicle stick, enough already!! the 401 is agreat motor-no doubt. So is the 500 CI caddy. To each their own. If either of you want to race, I'll put my 1974 258 1bbl against either of you, and smoke you both (literally, the cloud is impenatrable). for gods sake put it to rest [img]smile.gif[/img] [/QUOTE

Just for the record, I hate anything GM has ever created, but to try to compare a stock 401 against a stock 500 CI (or stock 454, 496, or 502) GM is just stupid. Torque moves our giant turds we call FSJ's and the 401 (stock) falls behind any of the big 3 big blocks. If you want to talk about building a 401 then lets talk about building any of the big 3 big blocks. Dollar for dollar your done. Period. End of Discussion.

Not trying to argue with anyone, and I love my J10 with the 258 I6, I dont think any of the big 3 ever built anything that will touch my jeep as far as off road capability. Just "encouraging" everyone to put bias aside think rationally.

Then, here's a quote from you (page 1) making the comparison you must have forgot:

Originally posted by Crazy_Jeepman:
Still though 41 Cubes differance.....even at a Horse a Cube. If the 401 was rated being overly conservative then why not the 360 of the same year? At any rate, .085 larger bore and .24 in stroke does not equate to big power gains in my book, since everything else is the same on these motors in the stock form, there is no secret power elsewhere. Seat of the pants horse power and actual real horse power sometimes are two very different things, and hard to tell apart. To be safe I am going 140 cubes over the 360 so I do not get fooled. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ December 11, 2003, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: Elliott ]

[Elliott]

Interestingly the torque difference between the Jeep 401 and 360 that some thought wouldn't be noticable.... is about the same difference in gap between the '76 Caddy 500 and the 401.
All I've been meaning to say all along is that the difference is noticable enough to make a difference. Stock for stock the '76 Caddy that Pete is building makes more torque then the 401, but it takes twice the CI difference between the 401 and 360 to make the same amount of torque difference. That is a 500 CI motor running a Rochester Quad.
I don't hate GM and the Caddy is a good torque producer, it needs some head work obviously and without dumping some serious money into it you better not make a habit of running over 5000 rpm which many would consider to be a limitation for some purposes... but not most 4X4ing. Building a stock 401 to run 7000 grand (if that's what you're into) is a sure bet from a stock motor because the quality is there, the heads are already there, and the potential is definately there.
All said, I couldn't personally build a 500hp 401 for under $2,000 like you can pick up a Caddy for.
What I'm really interested in all of this is to see the 401 known for what it is rather then to continually to hear baloney about what it is not.
If you took a stock Caddy 500, swapped out the manifold, balanced it, ran new pistons and dumped 250hp of nitrous at 6,000 - 7,000 rpm through it you would probably lose your valve train or a rod pretty quick. I hear all the time on this board about what a loser block the 401 is and that's nothing specs or experience demonstrate. I can't explain some people's bad luck with 401s, but I've heard the same from about every manufacturer's product right on out to the Cat 3208.

[ December 11, 2003, 01:03 PM: Message edited by: Elliott ]

[Rogue]

anything but AMC in an AMC is blasphemy!!!you should all be punished for even thinking about something different - next you'll want to lower your Jeep and tuck some 20's - ooooohhhhh the heresy !!!

[John V]

Originally posted by RogueStar:
anything but AMC in an AMC is blasphemy!!!you should all be punished for even thinking about something different - next you'll want to lower your Jeep and tuck some 20's - ooooohhhhh the heresy !!!

No I won't be lowering it, I just want monster torque AND reliability...so any AMC mill is out of the question! [img]tongue.gif[/img]