Hi Phil:
The weight of the Hemi was caused by the heads which were easily twice the
size of BB heads. Intake and exhaust manifolds were a bit heavier as well.
Hemis used dual four barrel AFBs and he cranks were bigger in the Hemi all
of which contributed to substantial increase in weight. I've owned and
worked on quite a number of hemi engines from the earliest to the 426.
They are wonderful - powerful, smooth and quite economical for their power.
The early hemi is distinguished by its tremedous torque and its ability to
pull to top rpm without losing its strong acceleration. My 300B is
actually considerably faster from 50 to 100 mph than it is from 0 - 50. My
56 New Yorker convertible, which uses the 2 speed Powerflite really
demonstrates this aspect of the Fire Power engine. These early hemis could
easily achieve 22-23 Imperial mpg when driven at highway speeds of about 70
mph and could do this in 4000 lb + non-aerodynamic automobiles. My new
Mercury Gran Marquis with 4.6 liter OHC V8 and sophisticated fuel injection
and engine management systems, electronic 4 speed OD transmission and
lighter and more aerodynamic shape can only do about 26 - 27 mpg under the
same conditions. I wonder how far we've really come.
The 440 is a slightly rougher, snappier engine. It has very strong
acceleration from scratch but reaches its peak quicker and tends to fall
off in power above 80 mph (with normal sedan-type gearing). This is
typical of the Mopar BB engines. My Chrysler 300E (413 c.i. BB) was
similar with fierce acceleration to about 80 then a definite falling off of
urge - although it would still reach speeds of 140 mph +. My '61 Plymouth
Fury with 383 Cross Ram engine shows similar characteristics although it
could defeat a stock 440 car of equal weight in the quarter mile.
The 426 Hemi is definitely slower than the 440 - by about a second in the
quarter mile but after that will walk away from anything. I have ridden in
a close friend's '69 Plymouth GTX Convertible with the speedometer hovering
between 145 and 150 mph. At that speed the throttle wasn't floored and
some grunt was still available when this was done. We decided that the
speed achieved was sufficient for the highway and the time of day
(midnight). This same car when floored at 60 mph (initiating a down shift
into second gear in the Torqueflite automatic) would lay long strips of
rubber from both its very large back tires. The 440 could not do this at
this speed.
Chrysler officially achieved a speed of 152 mph from the Chrysler 300B on
the 5 mile oval at the Chelsea proving ground. This was in February of
1956. The engine was the optional 355 HP, 354 c.i. hemi Fire Power with
standard Chrysler 300B equipment which included 9:1 compression, dual
four-barrel Carter WCFB carburetors, a full race camshaft, solid lifters,
dual valve springs, dual point distributor, tri-metal bearings, forged
crankshaft, 2 1/2 inch center dump exhaust manifolds into 3" pipes. This
was accompanied by all the usual 300 suspension and tire mods. These cars
used a standard 3 speed transmission and did not have power steering or
power brakes. I don't know what axle was used but about 13 ratios were
available - from 6.71 to 2.54. I suspect that something around 3.1 was
used. My 300B, which has the engine described above, has a 3.54 ratio
which was the most common type and was good for about 140 mph with quarter
mile times (with Torque Flite 3 speed automatic) of around 16 seconds.
Most 300Bs used the 2 speed Powerflite trans.
Chrysler smallest BB was the 350 as used in the '58 Plymouth Fury. This
car was a quick as the Hemi-powered 300s up to about 70 mph then it was
sayonara time. Again, the BB engine was quick but the Hemi was faster.
As to reliability of Chrysler automobiles - all I can say is that I have
personally owned 56 of them. The oldest was a '41 Chrysler Windsor and the
newest is a '95 Neon. They are undoubtedly the most reliable of all the
makes which I have owned - and I've owned most (43 different marques at
last count) - including 25 British cars. Perhaps this is why so many
Euro/Brit specialist makers used Mopar engines. It certainly wasn't
because they were the cheapest.
John
>From: John McEwen <mmcewen@ualberta.ca>
>
>
>>The Dodge was a Charger as mentioned. It was not a Hemi car but was a 440
>>(7.2 litres) - suitably prepared. These cars were not faked and the scenes
>>were not faked.
>
>Not only that, but it was the first modern Hollywood movie in which both
>cars in a chase were driven by the actors. McQueen did his own driving, and
>in a turn-about, the guy with the glasses was actually a stunt driver doing
>a bit of acting.
>
>>The 440 engine was considerably lighter than the Hemi
>
>This certainly surprises me. Why would the Hemi be particularly heavy?
>
>>and made better low-end power which was useful for the film.
>
>
>Absolutely. The 440 had more grunt than a Hemi. They were the engine of
>choice for motor homes.
>
>Phil Ethier Saint Paul Minnesota USA
>1970 Lotus Europa, 1992 Saturn SL2, 1986 Suburban, 1962 Triumph TR4 CT2846L
>LOON, MAC pethier@isd.net http://www.mnautox.com/
>"It makes a nice noise when it goes faster"
>- 4-year-old Adam, upon seeing a bitmap of Grandma Susie's TR4.
|