1971 SBC 400 Versus 1967 BBC 396 Stock rebuilt , with cam and intake upgrade . 

Is that with the stock block or aftermarket? Thinking about doing the same thing to my gen 1 400 it’s all stock

it really points out how important compression And cylinder head flow is, To a performance motor,

Olds lack head sealing. Not enough head bolts.

6.8 rods are perfect

Thanks for watching,, Cool story

396 all the way

Okay I'll try it,,, I got some 1969, cast #186 heads that i'm proud of I want to try those first but then I'll go for the vortex's

We're gonna fix that and retest to see what happens. Thanks for the comment, Thanks for watching

The headers are just the dyno shop's standard headers that they use on all the Engines.

@@dzperformance7360 yeah they are huge, my buddies 454 was dynoed with 2 1/4” shop dyno headers then put on his 1 7/8 headers and it picked up 50 ft lb and hp!

I have a 406 sbc with all the goodies.When I ran it back in the day it was a beast even with the hump heads.When I changed to AFR 195 holly crap.It was night and day.

Heads will help, but compression has to be there in the base equation, and the one in vid does not have it at 8.5:1.

Thanks for watching. I'll be sure to show you guys when I give the small block another shot

I built a 400 SBC for my ‘71 Camaro when I was 18. That engine had so much torque and power. I’d rather the 400, you save a couple hundred lbs probably but you don’t lose the power.

Can’t nothing beat a bbc if you do all the up grades to both engines bbc still on top…..

​@@percydofoygubrown953I agree 100%. Guys that say stuff like "sbc is lighter and dont loose power" have NEVER had a big block chevy done right. A stout 454 will always be a night and day difference than a stout 400 at the drag strip period

​@@percydofoygubrown953way more expensive too, I will keep my 400 small block over any expensive 396/402.

Thanks for watching !! I've got some classic casting # 186 double humps. That's a 1969 Z28 or used on 350/350hp engine's, Those Head are going to raise the compression and also get a bunch more flow, Next month we'll see what they will do

Thanks for watching in the next couple weeks. I'm going to get a good set of factory Double hump heads On the 400 ,go back to the Dyno. To see what the difference will be , after that I will upgrade cam,

Did exactly that and made 428 hp and 525 lbs at 3500 rpm.Beat up on lots of big blocks and not a big cam at all!

@@dzperformance7360 vortec heads are overrated when swapping use something better.

Mind describing the cylinder heads that were used?

@@shootermcgavin2819 I had some old Iron Stock 70 cc chamber heads that An employee of Don’s Speed Shop here in San Diego ported & polished and flow tested & equalized . He made exhaust ports like Brodix Aluminum casting “ Raised D port “ style & port matched my Old Edelbrock intake Manifold also for little to no mis- match at intake ports. Silicone -Bronze guides were installed along with Manley stainless steel valves & screw in 3/8” studs & pushrod guide plates installed . We used Comp-Cams Single coil “ Beehive “ style springs & 3/8” diameter chromolly pushrods & he set spring height up for no coil bind for over .500” lift at valves . If memory serves me correct I think he said they were at 120 lbs seat pressure and around 450 at max lift . Since I used a Lunati Camshaft in engine we consulted them for recommendations on set up for cam I used . A Pete Jackson “ Dual idler “ Cam drive setup was used as were Comp Cams 1.5 ratio roller rocker arms to finish off valve train setup . With flat top 4.165” bore ( .040” over stock) pistons it calculated out to 9.75:1 compression ratio ( give or take a 1/2 point ) with .030” thick head gaskets from Felpro. Hopefully this answers some of your questions, and by the way it wasn’t cheap , even by 1988 prices …..🥴. But man did it run ..👍

I've improved it with some double hump heads and I'll have a video to you guys next week. Showing the improvement on the 400sdc

@dzperformance7360 love the channel I'll be waiting for this video. This kind of content is nice for guys like me who live for this kind of stuff. Keep it coming.

I want to use a factory style head and get the compression and cam about the same size for a more direct comparison., Before I finish this project

Sounds like it's going to be a cool motor!! thanks for watching

Yes, that was a lot of torque for the small block. When it's nearly 2 points less compression,

had the chance to witness the result of a bone stock 1971 400 being fitted with a mid 60s Winters intake and probably a 650 Holley with a set of headers absolutely blow away off the line a very healthy Mopar 360 and that was with a TH400 and 2:93 ratio

Thanks for watching

You are correct, but a 4sp and a board out 396 With a rumbling cam in a Nova. Camaro or chavelle just looks bad ass

This is the first time i've run the stock 5.56 rods, I know they're hurting power. But I wonder how much?,?

Them 5.565 rods don't make that much difference as u think. They help but not as much as people claim. I'm going run the 5.7 rods on my next 400. 6.0" rods get expensive and not many pistons choices.

@@jessesyfie7244 i guarantee they make a colossal difference ive turned 3 sets into horseshoes windowed two of the 3 blocks so yeah i put 5.7 rods in the one i didnt window and its still alive 26 years later used 6 inch rods in every other motor why do you suppose theres so many low deck 426 mopars out there using a rod about the same exact difference in length cause it squares the rotatioal force and doesnt put stress on the outside wall and go from the outside wall to the rod bolts . they make a lot more difference than you could ever imagine

@@dzperformance7360try this get 3 sets of rods a 5.56 a 5.7 and a 6 inch i already know the end result but ill let you do it so you cant say its not making much difference all floating pins so you can use the same piston with all rods take an old style torque wrench with the gage you can see turn the motor over this is rotational force and directly effects both hp and torque measure each set of pistons one ft lb of difference = roughly 30 hp the longer the rod the longer the lever you are using to turn the motor over thus less static rotational force there is a point the rod can be too long but definitely not with any factory sb chevy or oldsmobile rods when i built my first 6 inch rod motor i used oldsmobile rods and never went back to a 5.7 knowing what i found out

@@stevenbean9706 I havnt messed with rods much but the .020 over pistons I wanta run for my compression arnt available anymore for the 5.565 rods but are for the 5.7 rods which is better anyway so I'm going go with them. The 6.0 inch rod pistons u don't got many pistons choices plus then I'd have buy some 6.0 rods, just more money. I can grab some 5.7 rods from one of my 350s

Thanks for watching,, Stick with me. I'm gonna change some stuff and we'll make more horsepower in future test

Thanks for watching. I'm going to tune them in closer To each other next month and retest the small block

Thanks!!! I was kind of showing it off as a backdrop

That's a good idea,, Thanks for watching

That would be the logical answer,, But I'm having a hard time finding vortex Heads cheap,, I've got some 1969 double humps. I'm going to try on the small block,

@@dzperformance7360 Those are good heads, should make good power... Is the casting number 186?

yes

They're upgraded to 2.02/1.60 valve's

he'll yaa

I'm on it

1969 ,cast# 290, comp cam' s 924-16 springs, Springs are shimmed to 125lbs on seat, new 2.07 / 1.72 stock valves, Minor bowl clean up and gasket match porting, Single angle vale job, Heads were rebuilt and came with the motor I just changed springs and clean The ports up a little bit, Thanks for watching.

So sounds like you could do better on the big block for heads also

Bigger valves does only make power at higher rpms. Kills torque at low rpms.

Care to quantify 'out perform'? And explain how much of a difference intake velocity due to rod ratio makes?

I'm betting on 420 horsepower and 465 tq.

Hey good to hear from you!!! You always put down positive comments on my Low quality backwoods videos appreciate it!!! In my racing experience, I've used cheap headers on a lot of 10 second cars. I don't really think you'll hurt it much,, Just my opinion.

To give a more direct answer. I think those inch and 3/4 headers will be just fine. Work great on a 550 horse motor.

882

@@dzperformance7360 those castings were available in 1.94/1.50 and 2.02/1.60 as well. I believe as cast they are 165 cc runner.

I think they were 165cc, I did not know you could get them from the factory 2.02/1.60

@@dzperformance7360 I've cut a few of the smaller valve 882 heads out to 2.02/1.60 without issue. I believe they flow 205 cfm on the intake in that configuration without porting. That's second hand data though.

It's possible it could work in my opinion.You would need at least 175lbs of seat pressure and 385# open to make it work.

You need to get the proper solid roller spring. Its not so much lift its the seat/open pressures that change. Dont reuse those on the solid. Call a reputable cam co to get the right ones.

Thanks nick there was a video awhile back a guy did it with the same heads he was told to use a certain retainer and keepers buy the cam company ill just try by calling comp cams thanks for your help

Yes,,We're going to get there,,

I've used them in street strip cars many times and never had a problem,, But the more that theory is spread around the more cheap 400 small blocks for me

400 only have over heating problems if you put heads on without the steam holes drilled. Other than that they run cool as ice 🧊

That's all bullshit and is fair from the truth!

​@@jimreaume2937that's all bullshit and is from from the truth! No heating problems what so ever!

Your information that 400 SBs have heating problems is all bullshit!

$4,800 And I deliver it For an extra $150 to $350, depending on where you're at in the U. S

That's a great idea. I'm working on it. Thanks for watching.

I'll do that next time

The information i've seen is all of the 400 small blocks were two barrels up until 1974

And I've taken lots of 2 barrel heads off of 400 that appear to be stock. Original?? But I could be incorrect

​@@dzperformance7360 74 first year u could get the factory 400s with 4 barrel. 1970 only was the only year of the 598 heads on the 400s that use the 1.94/1.6 valves. 77 to 80 the 400s use the 1.72/1.5 valve 642 heads.

I've got some 1969 double humps we're gonna try on the sbc,, Thanks for watching

Thanks for watching

Yes! I'd say the same think too!

Like fucking bullshit they were!

There is some truth to it because the large bores were pushing the limits for the small block size. That's why cooling was more of a challenge than with 350s and smaller. Head gaskets were a challenge because of poorer water circulation, again because the cylinders were almost too big for the small block size. That and the bigger heads are why going to a 396 big block is a good idea. But there are fixes for the 400 SB that get around those limitations, which is why they're still a good option.

Yes you are correct,, But Both motors are only stock rebuilds with cam , intake,carb Upgrades, 1971 sbc 400 was rated @ 265hp/400tq. Many people are forgetting that Those upgrades made + 70 horsepower and 30 lbs tq. All under four 4500 r p m. Would be a great setup to pull a trailer

@@dzperformance7360 Some decent heads, cam, intake, and exhaust will really wake up the 400 sb. They do make great torque. The 265 hp and 400-foot pounds were with a 2-barrel carburetor, so a 4-barrel is a great improvement when the rest of the induction and exhaust are upgraded. And you don't have to spin them very fast to get the good hp and tq numbers. Hope you tear back into it i will be watching for that video.

Thanks for watching ,,thanks for your input!

If you watch the next video on that four hundred small block I put one eighty six double humps on it and it picked it up 90 horses

No it wont! Vortecs arent as great as everyone makes them out to be.

Id take a 400SB way over any 327 for a truck towing engine just for the torque down low and the grunt!

@@jessesyfie7244 Crack up at the 327 comments. So what they can rev whoopee! Cubes on teh st every time. 0 comparison between a mild 400 and 327.

Very true!! like I said they was not even worth painting

$4950 today with Trick Flow heads, text me if interested, Nick 816 213 7204