A couple of easy 360 questions

Lifted79CJ7

Thanks for finally stepping in. I agree with MC here, just show common courtesy like your mother was standing behind you reading and we'll all be fine! #-o

SwampRat

Would your mom like to see Kermit the frog humping a doll? :!: :t:

jeepsr4ever

You guys should be talking constructively instead of trying to out-disrespect the other with clever metaphores.......

SwampRat

You guys should be talking constructively instead of trying to out-disrespect the other with clever metaphores.......

I would like to ask who that is directed to, as I can't imagine that little joke of mine is even in the least trying to disrespect "Lifted79CJ"

jeepsr4ever

That is directed to everybody

SwampRat

Well then, I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say we're sorry for letting our metaphors about our mothers and kermit the frog being portrayed as dis-respectful.

Holeshot

Talk about getting off the subject!!! Admin - don't you think the dirty laundry should be aired via PM??? :lo1l:

Holeshot

OK, boys, here we go. Pick up the Jan 2006 CarCraft and read about their 480 HP AMC cast-crank 360 buildup!!! Really gives the answers for this thread's question. They made 480 HP with Edelbrock heads & their peewee 2.02/1.60 valves. Those heads won't even take a larger exhaust valve!!! (according to the Edelbrock Tech Line) The Torker, big-tube headers, & big carb IS a great way to go for BIG numbers. You give away a few ft/lbs of torque down low but any losses are far outweighed by the gains made later in the range. Of course, you must have gears & torque converter (for automatics) to take full advantage. If you have power brakes you may need an air reservoir. I do believe that I could push that 360 to WELL over 500 HP with ported IRON AMC heads with 2.08/1.74 valves, a more aggressive roller cam, 11~1 compression, an 850 double pumper, & a 2" carb spacer. 600 HP is not out of the question by any means. I would start with a 401 anyway, and the forged crank & rods allow the redline to go up for more HP, and the extra inches should be worth at least 50 HP, over 600 HP is very possible. I actually learned in the article that the chevies & fords are at an even worse disadvantage than I thought!!! They ONLY use 7/16" main bolts, whereas the AMC uses 1/2" in their extra-beefy block design. Four-bolt-mains not needed in most cases. Maybe for an endurance engine for sustained 8000+ running. Let the mis-understandings end right here and now. The AMC design is VERY good and should not be underestimated.

tufcj

The general consensus is that they used INDY heads, although the article said Edelbrock.

Read the rest of the bashing on that article here:

http://www.amcforums.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1132460168

Bob
tufcj

Holeshot

Sheesh!!!!!!!!!!!! One thing I noted that didn't sound right was that they said the SBC rods were thinner than AMC rods, and their pics showed the bead-O-weld on the rods. I had always heard that the SBC rods were thicker than the 390/401 rods and had to be thinned. Must be that the 360 rods are thinner than 390/401 rods, eh? I sure-as-heck would never buy an expensive set of new, presumably high-performance rods, and then do that kind of butchery to them. For shame!!! For a national magazine, they sure did drop the ball on this one, apparently. On another note about credibility, take the TV show "Horsepower TV". On a recent show (rerun?), host Joe Elmore had an I-beam rod in his hand and said he was about to install these H-beam rods from such-n-such (SCAT?). I see from his BIO he has a B.S. degree, uh...yeah. A well connected tele-prompter reader, that's all. Another dis-service from people who are faking it, no wonder there is so much confusion. My apologies to SwampRat and the entire board. When mistaken information is published by the mainstream (automotive) media, we all suffer.

beyer05

Wow, I have been gone for a little while, but I want to clear a few things up. This is an offroad engine ('80's model 360) in a jeep that will run on pump gas (91-93). I want it to be in the ballpark with my buddies stock 401's, LT1's, and so-on, but still be reliable. Remember, this is not a race engine, just off-roading with the occassional hillclimb or mud hole where a little more power is needed. Thanks again for the help. 1. What is a good compression to go to from stock? 9.5:1? Is stock 8.5:1? Will the machine shop know how much to shave off to get me where I want to be? 2. I will call the cam manufacturer to get what I need, but aren't some companies better than others when it come to the 'cam walk' issue? I do not want to eat up cam gears and distrubitor gears. 3. What is a good rebuild 'kit' that is fair priced? 4. I do not plan on seeing over 5,500 rpm's, do I need to do any oiling mods? 5. What about a swinging oil pickup for an engine that will see ALOT of angles?

Holeshot

Just a quickee...

Bulltear is about (?) to release a dry-sump pan & already has a dry-sump oil pump cover available. Way better than swinging p/u.

You will need to make SURE that the cam bearings go in correctly, find an experienced AMC/Jeep builder. You will need to be SURE that the timing chain cam gear was machined properly and installs correctly. Same for the distributor drive gear & driven gear, Bulltear sells a matched set - get a set. I think there is a thread devoted to that exact topic, so find it and do read it. ("About distributor gear wear").

There is even a main topic called "AMC oiling" http://www.bulltear.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=25

There are some threads in the "How to" topic on oiling.

I would not go as low as 9.5₁, myself. If you do want to be conservative, 10₁ or 10.5₁ will be OK so long as you keep the piston .045" to .040" (minimum, .075" for aluminum rods) from the head. If you get too much dish it will ping even on 104 octane. Your machine shop will have to "CC" the heads to see what they are starting with, there is a formula for determining how much milling increases the compression by what factor. I believe it was +.22 CR per .010" milled, on my 53cc heads.

In cams, I think a lot of manufacturers just use smallblock chevy type grinds. There are a few that have grinds SPECIFIC to the AMC, a little research at this site will reveal the answer, I believe.

I wouldn't buy a kit. FelPro makes good head gaskets & rubber valve cover gaskets. Then you will need a pan, timing chain cover, intake, & water pump gasket. Plus seals & freeze plugs.

I would also advise that you have your machine shop set the heads up for "PC" seals, the beefier 7/16" screw-in rocker studs, a 1.95" tall spring, & while they are machining for that, have them machine for spring seat cups to fit your 1.55"₁.65" diameter springs. I have seen a few valve springs that get to spinning & dig in to the shims & destroy the shims (shrapnel) & break off at the thin spring tip, the cups should solve that. Now would be the time to do that so you aren't locked in with short & small dia springs forever. You may want to up the power later w/o having to pull heads.

Are you getting it bored? More decisions there, lock in to 5500 or enable higher RPM & higher horsepower. The thing is, if you DO go for more HP, you will likely end up with more torque as well. But I've been all through that previously.

None of the mods I have just talked about would be "race" & reliability would really be improved, until you rev it past what you have built it to run. Nice to have those off-brand beasts behind you, eh?

quickee????????? ooops

SwampRat

I believe it was +.22 CR per .010" milled, on my 53cc heads.

That formula sounds a little iffy to me. It even sounds kinda optimistic for flat milling, and especially not angle milling. I personally think the most accurace way would just to be "cc" the heads after the angle milling, as it has to be done anyway, chamber volume can change pretty easily with changing of valves and depending on valve heights ect. Oh yeah, and use a calculator like this one...
http://kb-silvolite.com/calc.php?action=comp

In cams, I think a lot of manufacturers just use smallblock chevy type grinds.

I couldn't agree more, if your looking for the most power, a grind specifically for the AMC tappet would be best.

I would also advise that you have your machine shop set the heads up for "PC" seals, the beefier 7/16" screw-in rocker studs, a 1.95" tall spring, & while they are machining for that, have them machine for spring seat cups to fit your 1.55"₁.65" diameter springs.

The only thing I wonder about with doing that, is that if the cam is really mild a 1.55-1.65" diameter spring may have too much spring force for the cam (RPM) needed, and too much spring pressure adds to valvetrain wear very quickly.

About that AMC article, read what I said at the American Motors forum, I believe it is simply the use of another picture of a engine with Indy Cylinder Heads, there is pictures of engines in the article with Edelbrock heads and one with Indy Heads.

Holeshot

Why don't you go out and buy an AMC V8 and run it for a couple of years and tear it down and build it up. Then you can come back with your advice. You have already admitted that you are a chevy guy and you don't have any AMC, so your advice is irrelevant and unneeded. If you knew ANYTHING about AMC engines, or you would know that angle milling is not needed whatsoever with AMC V8 engines, as flat top pistons can yield 12.5 to 13.5 to 1 compression, depending on the size of the combustion chamber, etc. The SBC has such a crappy combustion chamber that it takes desperate measures to get any compression out of them. Or use domed pistons, which offers a lot of opportunity to destroy parts. BTW-Since you are a total novice with AMC engines, you have no idea what formula to use. And of course everybody should cc EVERY combustion chamber they do, as I do. As far as your spring observations -DUHHHH!!!!!!! There are ALL kinds of different spring pressures available in the physical sizes I said. Why do you follow me around this board and challenge my data when you have NO experience whatsoever??? But, yeah, it would make SO much more sense to pull the heads for machining every time you went to a stronger cam, rather than doing it right the first time. 111!!! Apparently you are suffering fatigue from too many years using disposable engines, or you'd be hanging out on a chevy board rather than attacking me. Like I keep TRYING to tell you, the AMC design IS superior and if you build one like you are telling everyone else to, you will be bringing up the rear and eating a lot of rocks and dust!!! That's fine with me, but you shouldn't be advising people who don't know any better, and using your SBC experience as a guide. It simply does NOT apply. Why are you trying to impress us with your knowledge when you know nothing about AMCs? I thought you heard the moderators when they told you to can it. #-o

SwampRat

I simply do not understand some of your suggestions, I DON'T say that I HATE AMCs, I DON'T say that you're totally wrong, and I don't know why you think that I do, or at least that's the impression I'm getting from you. If there is a very significant change in camshaft size the valve springs will have to be changed, that is always what I was lead to believe, there is no point in using way too much spring pressure on a mild cam, since high spring pressures are basically the root of the problem of valvetrain wear in most cases (especially for flat-tappet cams), if you make a large jump in camshaft size I doubt your gonna have a valve spring that will cover both scenarios, but I guess you can still convince me, if you have experience doing this. If you are referring to the chevy open chamber style com chamber, it is very poor but the closed chamber camel hump heads and vortec heads chambers are pretty darn good if I do say so myself.

jeepsr4ever

This topic is closed and their wont be any public bashing of each other please

« Previous Page