Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I have 426 HEMI ENVY. I created this post to let you know .....that you also have it too. :) (been drinking Wild Turkey ;) )
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1koolkat

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
173 Posts
Gotta bore and stroke a 6.1 or buy it straight up.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
Discussion Starter #4

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
173 Posts
There's a few people on this site that have done it. I would think it'd be more structurally sound than a 6.4 doing the same thing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Well..."I'm a [email protected]:)

I just ordered a 392...

With big aspirations. Now I learn that I could have save BIG $$$....by purchasing a used 6.1. :(
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
173 Posts
I think the 6.1 can just take more of a beating based upon construction and boost stories I've heard. It's one of the reasons I got the used 2010 over a new '13. The other reason being 15k in savings that went straight to mods. The 6.4 is a killer stock engine though.
 
Joined
·
1,931 Posts
I think the 6.1 can just take more of a beating based upon construction and boost stories I've heard. It's one of the reasons I got the used 2010 over a new '13. The other reason being 15k in savings that went straight to mods. The 6.4 is a killer stock engine though.
Actually the 392 does very well with boost...the problem is the higher compression 10.3 vs 10.9...using MM drop in pistons resolve that....but I have also seen many boosted 6.1s blow.....and the 6.4 is a better base for the 426 stroker due to only needing to change the stroke...the 6.1 requires bore and stroke changes.......but dont get me wrong...I really like the 6.1 having built two......oh, did I mention I currently have an Arrington 6.4 based 426 in my 2013 SRT??..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
396 Posts
I would love to put 426 badges on my car. The 392 has a few options available for it. Arrington in particular.
There are a ton of choices coming up with the supposed hellcat coming out. I am trying to figure out which way I want to go myself. Take my 392, make it boost friendly and supercharge. There is also the option of adding cubes whether through Arrington with my 392 or replacing the core.

Too many choices.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,683 Posts
While it is indeed physically possible to bore'n'stroke (though, it's mostly stroke on these engines, right?) the small-block Hemi to 426, I always wonder if it is an "effective" way to enhance that engine. I'm all for building an engine with the most bore and stroke that is reasonable for the physical package, but maybe 426 is "too much" stroke as far as rpm and stresses? 426 is a number of historical significance, but for an engine block that is far removed from today's Hemi. A classic 426 was built on a 440 big block, correct?...a much larger and taller engine in physical size. You would never expect that a 340 block should/could be punched out to 426, right?

So while I can see pushing the modern Hemi engine block to 392, the notion of pushing it to 426 just seems like chasing a number that has no bearing on small block engines, in the first place. Though I guess if GM is daring enough to pull 427 out of a small-block with the LS7, maybe it can't be that out of line for the modern Hemi?

I also wonder if the aftermarket 5.7 Hemi wouldn't be better off being built and tuned for higher rpm, altogether (rather than sheer displacement increases with bore and stroke)? Maybe 2 possible options...a 5.7 L Hemi built for screaming rpm (7000 rpm?) or a modest bump to 6.0 L with 6600 rpm redline? The tuning of the cam would shift the torque peak to 4800-5000 rpm?...a high-winder profile for sure, but no 2 things are more acquainted with each other than rpm and pk hp, right?
 
Joined
·
1,931 Posts
You cant beat the torque the 426 and 440 strokers put out and these heavy cars need all the torque they can get. The stroked engines are nothing new. They have proven themselves to make power and win at the track. The 426s have been dependable over the long haul but the 440s extra long stroke has shortened the life of the engine. But it makes tons of front wheel lifting torque. The aluminum block has cured the 440 life issue. The thicker walls allow for more bore and less stroke. Expensive though.

All that said you can build a 5.7 or 6.1 that will scream at the track. friend of mine stroked a 5.7 to 6.08 using ultra lite rods and pistons. He installed a monster custom cam and went with 13.5 compression using E85 gas. This engine was installed in a 2006 Charger RT. The longer stroke gave the torque he needed to get the car off the line. He ran in the super stock division of the modern mopar shootout and turned a best of 10.7 in the quarter. That is 426/440 territory..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
437 Posts
No need to bore at all to turn the 6.1 into a 426. All stroke. The only reason why my 6.1 build is not changing to a 426 is that the smaller displacement reacts better to higher boost that my F1-A can put out. If you dont believe me, talk to Andy at Performancewerks. :cool:

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
173 Posts
You didn't mention it, but I've seen it done. I think the 6.1 would be a better base for it for body applications, though. If I get a 426, I'd for sure twin turbo it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,351 Posts
While it is indeed physically possible to bore'n'stroke (though, it's mostly stroke on these engines, right?) the small-block Hemi to 426, I always wonder if it is an "effective" way to enhance that engine. I'm all for building an engine with the most bore and stroke that is reasonable for the physical package, but maybe 426 is "too much" stroke as far as rpm and stresses? 426 is a number of historical significance, but for an engine block that is far removed from today's Hemi. A classic 426 was built on a 440 big block, correct?...a much larger and taller engine in physical size. You would never expect that a 340 block should/could be punched out to 426, right?

So while I can see pushing the modern Hemi engine block to 392, the notion of pushing it to 426 just seems like chasing a number that has no bearing on small block engines, in the first place. Though I guess if GM is daring enough to pull 427 out of a small-block with the LS7, maybe it can't be that out of line for the modern Hemi?

I also wonder if the aftermarket 5.7 Hemi wouldn't be better off being built and tuned for higher rpm, altogether (rather than sheer displacement increases with bore and stroke)? Maybe 2 possible options...a 5.7 L Hemi built for screaming rpm (7000 rpm?) or a modest bump to 6.0 L with 6600 rpm redline? The tuning of the cam would shift the torque peak to 4800-5000 rpm?...a high-winder profile for sure, but no 2 things are more acquainted with each other than rpm and pk hp, right?
Not sure if this is what you meant in your post but the B block engine and the RB blocks (i.e. hemi and 440) are not the same. Aso, not sure the Gen 3 HEMIs of today should be classified as a "small block". Dimensions alone make them as large as many vintage big blocks. I've actually wondered myself at which point the modern engines get classified as small block or big block or if that is really a differentiation of the past. The modern modular v8s e.g. Coyotee 5.0 and trinity 5.8 are very large in physical dimensions, displacement aside.
 
Joined
·
1,931 Posts
No need to bore at all to turn the 6.1 into a 426. All stroke. The only reason why my 6.1 build is not changing to a 426 is that the smaller displacement reacts better to higher boost that my F1-A can put out. If you dont believe me, talk to Andy at Performancewerks. :cool:

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
You can just stroke a 6.1 to 426 but you are getting into the same issues as a 6.1 based 440...the long stroke kills engine life....most builders do a square bore with the 6.1 (4.08 X 4.08) to arrive at 426.7 cubic inches.....my 6.4 based 426 has a 4.095 bore (same as 6.4) X 4.08 stroke...this gives me 429.8 cubic inches w/o making the cylinder walls thinner......you will find that most 6.1 based 426 strokers are actually 410 to 419 cubic inches to make them durable...Ask Andy what his 6.1 stroker is in cubic inches and he will tell you 419 (he does bigger)....

I dont have to ask Andy why you are doing a smaller displacement build....there are many ways to make power and you have to balance the whole....BTW Andy is the one who built my friend's 6.08 stroker I mentioned in an earlier post...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,683 Posts
Not sure if this is what you meant in your post but the B block engine and the RB blocks (i.e. hemi and 440) are not the same. Aso, not sure the Gen 3 HEMIs of today should be classified as a "small block". Dimensions alone make them as large as many vintage big blocks. I've actually wondered myself at which point the modern engines get classified as small block or big block or if that is really a differentiation of the past. The modern modular v8s e.g. Coyotee 5.0 and trinity 5.8 are very large in physical dimensions, displacement aside.
Well that is certainly news to me. I had thought the Gen 3 Hemi was based out of a 340 sized block and the Gen 2 was a gargantuan big block by comparison. That would really surprise me if they are nearly the same in physical size.

I was working on this while ago, just to get a visual grasp on various engine blocks...don't remember if I ever got around to posting it (probably waiting for the "right" topic ;) ). Yes, I know...hard to judge actual size from different viewing angles. What I spent a bit of time on was scaling each pic based on known bore size and angle of maximum bore dia (since they appear as ovals in each pic when viewed at an angle). So I'm not saying this is definitive by any stretch. I'm just saying this is where I got the notion that modern v8 blocks are mostly along the lines of "small blocks" and big dinosaurs (that were based on big blocks) from the golden age are big blocks. If for nothing, I think they are just interesting to look at, all in one spot! :)

 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,683 Posts
Naked engine blocks on a Fri night!...hot right? :p

Here's some data I had collected along the way (I think my scaling exercise may have drawn upon this data):

426 HEMI GEN II
Stainless 426 HEMI GEN II
SS 2.25" Intake, 1.94" Exhaust
4.250" Bore, 3.750" Stroke
8.7:1 C.R. ???

426 HEMI GEN III
4.0" Bore, 4.125" Stroke

5.7 L Hemi Gen III
2" intake, 1.55" exhaust
3.92" bore, 3.58" stroke

6.1 L Hemi Gen III
intake 2.08", exhaust 1.600"


LS7 427
intake 2.200", exhaust 1.610"
4.125 bore x 4.0 stroke

LS3 427
2.165" Intake, 1.590" Exhaust
4.065 bore x 4.1 stroke

Coyote 5.0
3.629 bore, 3.649 stroke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,272 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,339 Posts
Nope no envy here, 426 stroker in my girl under a maggie and the world is A-OK in my book.
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
Top