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

[mkpj1]

Personally I have enjoyed the talk as I can only learn. I just think that some gave you their honest opinions and you jumped down their throat? I mean you did ask for their opinions. Just need to be ready if you don't hear what you want to hear. I did ask some of my true mopar buddies about it and they both had the first word come out of their mouth be, Why? But....these guys are racers and they never saw an engine they didn't want to make breath better. IMO, I think you are going to limit yourself when you do need a larger power band like in heavy traffic or climbing extended hills with a load or towing. I mean, you are basically, sorta, making a peaky motor and will be constantly trying to keep it in a narrow band to get what you want out of it. I say sorta because I think the cam is the most important tool in controlling your power band for fuel economy and power. So maybe this will be the perfect set up? Maybe it won't make any difference at all? The question is, is it worth it? The trade off that is? As Big J. said, Need to put the rubbber to the road. That's all there is left to do. Post back and let us know.

[MasterBoondocke]

MasterBoondocker wrote:

Leeann wrote:

MasterBoondocker wrote:
In which service manual does it say that they were installed on a 440-3 ? .

Dodge Motor Home Chassis Service Manual 81.370.3073, pages 9-33 through 9-38. With pictures.

SORRY Leeann .... I have that exact # service manual and if you LOOK at those pics OF those heads WITH those rotators ....

They are CLEARLY the 413 "industrial" heads.

I ask you Leeann ...why do you come after me on this -- when it was very clear that the other-guy was so wrong - on so many other TECH and real-world FACTS ?

Should I post a "correction" ? ..... but maybe looking at the service manual again and then again ...I don't know.

The pic on page 9-37 and fig#15 show what is described as a valve assembly listed as a 440-3. But the valve certainly appears much smaller than the well know 1.74 valve. And it appears to me to be the SAME size as the fig#16 - showing a 413-1 assembly. And BOTH of the pics show a rotator as part of that assembly. But is this correct? ... the people who made this service manual make another CLEAR error on the very next page fig#19-installing exhaust valves(440-3 engine). This head pictured IN this photo is CLEARLY an A-engine cylinder head.

I have pulled apart many MH 440's and I have NEVER seen a 440 in a truck chassis that has had exh valve rotators. In the last hour ...I called a Bud who worked at a dealership during the years that Chrysler was KING of the MH/truck chassis market. He has never seen rotators on the 440 either.

Oh well. Someone what to "talk" about this more ? ... Go for it.

[MasterBoondocke]

Big_John wrote:


That range of 800 to 4500rpm is where the stock 440 shines. I don't think anyone will disagree with that. It was never meant as a high RPM engine. Again, in my application, I do very little sustained speed highway driving and I see a lot of different RPM ranges.

My comments are really aimed at a small valve 413 head on a 440 engine. The 413 is a good piece, all the way around, just as the 440 is.

Try it? yes... exactly that. Bolt the heads on and head down the highway. Flow benches, dynos, whatever... will tell you a lot, but until the rubber hits the road, its only theory and a bunch of data points. FUN (note word "FUN") to talk about on forums such as these and interesting when someone actually gets their hands dirty and reports back.

Comments, thoughts and OPINIONS is what this forum is all about. But I must take-issue with info that is posted as TECH and a FACT - and that is flat-out wrong. Sorry -- that is just me.

The range of the 413 is just a tad short of what you claim for the 440. But WHERE do you run your 440 at 4500 rpm for any extended period of time? Would you not agree that 2500-3000 is where most-of-us run these motors?

The valve sizes are too small on the 413 ? ...... why then would the aftermarket head builders for race-stuff only build most of their heads with a 1.81 exh valve? .... and this is to be put on a motor that is very near 500 cubic inches and rpmed UP to 7000 commonly ?

My hands have-been-dirty and will be getting more-so with this project. My main object is to get the best fuel-econ as possible.

[MasterBoondocke]

Leeann wrote:

MasterBoondocker wrote:
In which service manual does it say that they were installed on a 440-3 ? .

Dodge Motor Home Chassis Service Manual 81.370.3073, pages 9-33 through 9-38. With pictures.

SORRY Leeann .... I have that exact # service manual and if you LOOK at those pics OF those heads WITH those rotators ....

They are CLEARLY the 413 "industrial" heads.

[mkpj1]

No doubt Big John,

we went camping too. Like three new pages! I thought it was a little technical for this forum but I did enjoy it. My thoughts is that I would want a very flexible power band in this application. This has to be combined with desired fuel economy. Industrial engines are built on a narrow power band as they reach needed RPM and stay there for long period. I think it's cool if these heads will be an enhancement so let us know what you get.

I'm really liking the 360 I've got. PW, you decide on carb? Edel 600cfm? Will it fit under the dog house with the perfomer? Do the putty test yet? You hope it' a core plug. Punch em sideways with a small punch or screwdriver so the swivel in the hole and grab em with a wrench and pull em out. punch a new "brass" one back in. You don't have a shiny spark plug in the back do you? Do small block heads have a coolant galley though the back? Maybe a small leak on the back of the head?

360 has good power for me with decent gas mileage. I don't like my oil pressure at all. stays around 12 psi hot. I need a tach. I imagine it's full of sludge. Anyway, I'm not going to drop tons of time and money into her but enuough to get her reliable and enjoyable.

Ken

[Leeann]

MasterBoondocker wrote:
In which service manual does it say that they were installed on a 440-3 ? .

Dodge Motor Home Chassis Service Manual 81.370.3073, pages 9-33 through 9-38. With pictures.

[Leeann]

PW - I can't find anything in the service manual, but the bf says if you can reach them, you can change them. Use a small, narrow-blade chisel to get them out. You'll probably have to punch them and twist them out. Then you'll need a wide wooden dowel or brass seal punch thing to knock in the new ones.

If they're like the ones in my 240, they're bedded in with blue RTV.

[Big_John1]

MasterBoondocker wrote:

Big_John wrote:
In the industrial engine, yes, Chrysler did their homework and I'm sure the valve size is great for that application. A motorhome? I don't know. First you've got more cubic inches to feed. There's no getting around that. Then you're not running at a constant speed like you are with a stationary industrial engine. I think the small valve may narrow the power band. Under 3000 RPM may be fine for you, but for me, climbing steep hills and sometimes towing a car trailer, there are times were the RPM in my motorhome goes over 3000 RPM.

Honestly? It may work fine. Chrysler used the bigger valves in all the 440's they built though. They never saw the need to use a smaller valve.

Try it and report back. Its got me curious.

First ... this motor was designed and put in way more MHs(and trucks) ....than "industrial" by far. Are you aware that there were TWO "industrial" motors ? ... the 413 and the 361.

In a MH application you ARE running a basic "one rpm" for most of the running time. For SURE it narrows the power band AND the max output ... but I would rather have a motor that will run it's best in the range of 800-4500 than one that will run up to 6k. But is this just me?

Those HEADS are the reason why Chrysler dropped the 413 combo. That total motor cost Chrysler 250$ more PER UNIT ...than the 440 that it replaced. The exh valves? ... were sodium filled. They cost almost 50$ each(at the dealer) ! .... the rotators cost a TON too. ALL those items add-up ...big-time.

Try what ? ..... the flow work ? .... my intent is to get the fuel/air mixture automized the BEST .... at and around 3k. If this means epoxing up the intake ports ...so be it.

Boy... I actually go camping for the weekend and this thread kinda goes in a little different direction.

But anyway... yes, I knew about the 361. Chrysler has built a bunch of different industrial engines.

That range of 800 to 4500rpm is where the stock 440 shines. I don't think anyone will disagree with that. It was never meant as a high RPM engine. Again, in my application, I do very little sustained speed highway driving and I see a lot of different RPM ranges.

My comments are really aimed at a small valve 413 head on a 440 engine. The 413 is a good piece, all the way around, just as the 440 is.

Try it? yes... exactly that. Bolt the heads on and head down the highway. Flow benches, dynos, whatever... will tell you a lot, but until the rubber hits the road, its only theory and a bunch of data points. FUN (note word "FUN") to talk about on forums such as these and interesting when someone actually gets their hands dirty and reports back.

[79powerwagon]

Here's the Master Boondockers rig! I was right! It's one of those Saturday Morning Cartoon looking thing! Was it Land of the Lost? Anyway, I think it's REAL COOL!!!!!!!!!! thanks for sharing!

[Leeann]

Hm...that's the one problem we don't have on ours. So I haven't looked...

That said, if you can see them, I don't see why you can't. I have the service manual for mine at home - I'll take a look later and see if that says anything.

[79powerwagon]

Yes, Leeann. I am still waiting for the "new" intake and carb. I'm not even going to bother with the lousey Holley 2v that's on there now. I hope I don't have to pull the gas tank out, but I probably should clean it, just to be safe.

Also discovered a coolant loss, and while I was under her doing brake lines, I was getting dripped on by coolant from the strut that runs between the tranny and the block. I am assuming it's the core plugs leaking. Can I knock in new ones without yanking the engine?

Eric

[Leeann]

^ woohooo! Brakes are very important 😉

Go through and adjust everything on the carb to factory spec....then play as necessary (every adjustment on ours was so far out it wasn't funny).

But first, make sure the ballast resistor, coil, ignition module, plugs, wires, cap, rotor....everything, in other words, are good. They were all weak on ours.

[79powerwagon]

Wow!


Anyway, I'm changing my 16.5's to 16" because I can't find tires. Simply get a diameter of the tire to match your current tires.

Piece of cake! 😄

BABY'S GOT BRAKE!!!! Woo-Hoo!!!!!! I don't know how (or why) the previous owner of my rig drove this thing, but there were no brakes!

Not anymore! New master cylinder, new PB booster, new steel lines, new rubber lines, new calipers, new pads, etc. Nice, solid pedal now!!!!

Now to get her running properly...

[MasterBoondocke]

timmac wrote:
Yea lets change the subject, we all know that the 440 was the high water mark for the Mopar gas big block before there big change in late 79 to earlier 80..

Has any one with a older class c with 16.5in tires has changed to 16in tires and rims, was there much change in the RPM's, how much lower did it drop, any clearance problems etc...

I agree ....change the topic OR post correct info. Is this a Britney Spears chat-room based on "fantasy" ? ....or is this stuff supposed to be fact and opinion ??

The 16.5 v 16 tires ? ....depends on the diameter OF the tire. The 16 inch tires ARE more commonly available in a TALLER design. And YES I know of two people that have changed to the 16's on a Class C MH.

IF memory serves .... they had to trim the lower leading edge of the front fender for tire clearance.

[timmac]

Yea lets change the subject, we all know that the 440 was the high water mark for the Mopar gas big block before there big change in late 79 to earlier 80..

Has any one with a older class c with 16.5in tires has changed to 16in tires and rims, was there much change in the RPM's, how much lower did it drop, any clearance problems etc...