How many of us are there? Owners of Dodge based RV's?

[whiteknight001]

I'm new here, and curious.

How many of us in Class C own Dodge B300 incomplete
cab/chassis based RV's? I know two others- Steve aka
Ripsaw, with a 1977 Brougham, and Leroy aka 1978_Dodge
_Delta who owns a 440V8 powered sharp looking 1978
Delta RV. I would like to ask, and offer, help, idea
swapping and comparing notes on our particular RV's
which are based on the Dodge B300 van chassis.

Yeah, I know. These are low tech, podgy old RV's that
would be considered "entry level" for folks like me,
but I have a deep and abiding respect for the quality
of these old "monsters of the open road". And anyone
wanting to pick brains, joke about, share notes or just
brag about our old A- Dodge-io's are certainly welcome
to PM or email me. Between all of us we can form a real
good support group, and help each other with problems
we know we'll encounter with an older vehicle.

Sure. I'd love a new RV. But I'd rather have an older
one already paid for, and a lotta great memories. Call
me frugal, an old hippie, or whatever you will. I'm proud
of my old land yacht.

Mopar Madness Manifest in the flesh,

Mark aka White Knight

P.S. Mine's a '72. Is there an older one out there someone's
motorvating in? Maybe even a Travco? W/K

[Leeann]

If you have an ASME tank (horizontally-mounted), you are exempt from the OPD requirement.

[79powerwagon]

eyeteeth wrote:
I'm curious... what have others been doing about replacing/updating propane tanks for the opd valve regulation on these older units? Can they use "standard" 20-30-40 lb tanks?

My truck came new with 2-20 lb tanks. I simply went to the RV place and bought 2 new hoses with the new style connector and BINGO! All done! The previous owner was even nice enough to "forget" that he the new tanks there (probably for a grill since they wouldn't work on the rig), so my only expence was for the 2 new lines!!!! :B

[MasterBoondocke]

An OPD valve is not required on any permanently mounted RV tank that I am aware of.

[eyeteeth]

I'm curious... what have others been doing about replacing/updating propane tanks for the opd valve regulation on these older units? Can they use "standard" 20-30-40 lb tanks?

[MasterBoondocke]

Big_John wrote:


Yes, I guess you're right that you wouldn't have to use that pump, but I thought that was the idea. 😉

Does the industrial engine have the removable valve seats? All the other big block Mopar heads I've ever seen don't have this.

I still think the valves are too small, even in the low RPM range, but that's only my opinion. It would be interesting to see how well they work in this application though.

That massive pump is not required to use the heads ... but under heavy load -- it does prove it's worth.

Those valve seats ARE removeable - indeed. But in the many sets I have seen ... I have never seen a "smoked seat". Now on the 440 heads ... I have seen heads that have had the valve sunk almost .200. Are you also aware that the exh valves had rotators on them? ...

How well they work in "this" application ? .... the proof is in the pudding. Chrysler really did their home-work on these heads.

You question the valve size ? ..... at under 3k rpm? ....why?

[Big_John1]

MasterBoondocker wrote:

Big_John wrote:
Chrysler did a lot of different stuff over the years, so I may be completely wrong but, IIRC the 413 heads have smaller valves. Of course that can be changed and you'll want to go to hardened valve seats anyway, so the job is already half done. The combustion chamber is most likely the closed chamber type like Chrysler used in '67 and before. It'll bring up the compression ratio a touch, but at the chamber design isn't the best for "breathing". Of course, then you have to use that big funky water pump that has the ports into the head too.

There might be some benefits from additional cooling in the heads, but IMHO, unless you're going to increase the valve size, I think it would make a bunch less power.

As to the question about the bottom end handling increased compression, the 440 is pretty strong. Take one apart and you'll see what I mean. Unless you're thinking about something really crazy, the bottom end will take about anything you can throw at it. Head gasket failure shouldn't be a problem either, as long as everything is flat before assembly. Myself, I don't use the steel shim gasket anymore and went to the far superior composition gaskets years ago.

The heads have MUCH smaller valves ..... 1.88 intake... 1.50 exhaust. But you don't need any more than that IF you are running a motor in an RV application like we do.(under 3,000 rpm for 99.99% of the time) The exh seats are REMOVEable and hardened. PLUS the exh valves are sodium filled. Plus PLUS the spark-plug is in an angled location towards the exh valve. The comb chamber is a "closed" design but it appears larger than a typical closed chamber head. I will be getting some cc numbers OF the chambers and the ports ASAP.

You NEVER have to use that funky-pump -- you can just block the head off .... but having all this extra coolant IN the head -- why not use a proven combo?

Head gasket ? ... I have always used a steel-shim. UNless I want to lower the compression ratio.

Yes, I guess you're right that you wouldn't have to use that pump, but I thought that was the idea. 😉

Does the industrial engine have the removable valve seats? All the other big block Mopar heads I've ever seen don't have this.

I still think the valves are too small, even in the low RPM range, but that's only my opinion. It would be interesting to see how well they work in this application though.

[79powerwagon]

fourthclassC wrote:
Hey,
That RV you could be our old one. Same rear entry, green, 360... If it has a solid state isolator and 100 amp alternator it probably is. What I mean about a grey water tank is, orginally the rig has only a tank for the toilet. (directly under it) The sinks and shower, just go out on the ground. OK in 73 now you can go to jail for it. (go figure?) any way I added a grey water tank and figured out how to vent it ... and make it work. Much more convienent then collecting grey water in a portable blue tank or some other method. Any way I do not think I have any photos but I will check.

Hey 4th, I tried sending you a PM, and you don't allow it... Can you provide me with more details about your grey tank conversion please?

Tahnks in advance!

Eric

[Morgan1984]

thank you eric.

[79powerwagon]

Morgan1984 wrote:
Does anybody have any idea if a 76 dodge 440 with 70,000 miles is gonna make it from seattle to maine?

Welcome Morgan! As with any brand and with any size, how long an engine lasts is dependant on the care takers. If yours has been cared for, 70k is nothing for milage. If it's been taken care of like the one I just bought, 70k is about the end of the road for it.

Oil changes and keeping it cool go a LONG way to engine longevity.

If you want a quick look to see the health condition of your 440, simply remove the valve covers and have a peek at teh heads. If they're shiney and wet, and look like metal, that's good! If they look like they're full of asphault, that's NOT good (but expected, really). Put your covers back on (probably need new gaskets there anyway) and hook up a vacuum gauge to manifold vacuum. If the reading is pretty steady, you're in good shape! If the needle is wobbling around, you've got issues.

Will it make it cross-country? Probably, but if you just got the rig, it'd be wise to check it out. NEVER rely on what the previous owner told you...

Eric

[Morgan1984]

Does anybody have any idea if a 76 dodge 440 with 70,000 miles is gonna make it from seattle to maine?

[MasterBoondocke]

timmac wrote:
Has anyone had there 440 heads shaved to increase compression, my heads are soon due for a rebuild, thinking of doing this while they are off and getting rebuilt,, does it increase compression much or is this just a waste of time and money..

I would get a set of 516 heads(small chambers with 1.60 exh valves) and throw some seats and guides in them and cut-em 30-50 thou.

I do not have the formula in front of me ... but I would imagine you could see 1.25 points in ratio diff.

[MasterBoondocke]

Big_John wrote:
Chrysler did a lot of different stuff over the years, so I may be completely wrong but, IIRC the 413 heads have smaller valves. Of course that can be changed and you'll want to go to hardened valve seats anyway, so the job is already half done. The combustion chamber is most likely the closed chamber type like Chrysler used in '67 and before. It'll bring up the compression ratio a touch, but at the chamber design isn't the best for "breathing". Of course, then you have to use that big funky water pump that has the ports into the head too.

There might be some benefits from additional cooling in the heads, but IMHO, unless you're going to increase the valve size, I think it would make a bunch less power.

As to the question about the bottom end handling increased compression, the 440 is pretty strong. Take one apart and you'll see what I mean. Unless you're thinking about something really crazy, the bottom end will take about anything you can throw at it. Head gasket failure shouldn't be a problem either, as long as everything is flat before assembly. Myself, I don't use the steel shim gasket anymore and went to the far superior composition gaskets years ago.

The heads have MUCH smaller valves ..... 1.88 intake... 1.50 exhaust. But you don't need any more than that IF you are running a motor in an RV application like we do.(under 3,000 rpm for 99.99% of the time) The exh seats are REMOVEable and hardened. PLUS the exh valves are sodium filled. Plus PLUS the spark-plug is in an angled location towards the exh valve. The comb chamber is a "closed" design but it appears larger than a typical closed chamber head. I will be getting some cc numbers OF the chambers and the ports ASAP.

You NEVER have to use that funky-pump -- you can just block the head off .... but having all this extra coolant IN the head -- why not use a proven combo?

Head gasket ? ... I have always used a steel-shim. UNless I want to lower the compression ratio.

[MasterBoondocke]

mkpj1 wrote:


MB, why the change? I'm a Blue Oval guy when it comes to building engines and could tell you castings and years to look for depending on application in regards to big block, small block Ford. This is probably not the forum to ask that technical question? I have a buddy who is a machinist who bleeds Mopar blue (And he does bleed a lot) and he would probably know if you can't find a mopar site. I know that it would increase your compression, doubt it would blow head gaskets if done right. Issue would be going above 9.5 compression and eliminating pump gas. Detonation would kill an RV engine quick. Another question is if your lower end could tolerate it either? Do you need heads and have them laying around? I wouldn't see the need otherwise? Please explain.

Ken

The change ? ... is for the better RV engine combo. And there would be NO WAY of going over 9.5 to 1 with these heads. And I now have a couple of heads etc laying-around and they will be going to a cyl head guy with a flow-bench for some severe testing. I plan on doing some epoxy-port-work if need be.

OFF to the other two posts about this. It is nearly 3 am here !

[Morgan1984]

I got a 76 dodge coachmen statesman

[timmac]

Has anyone had there 440 heads shaved to increase compression, my heads are soon due for a rebuild, thinking of doing this while they are off and getting rebuilt,, does it increase compression much or is this just a waste of time and money..