|
|
Veteran
Posts: 119
Location: Piedmont, Oklahoma | So... Im sure this has been asked many times but its hard to search "hemi poly 354" on a forwardlook forum LOL. So if someone could send a thread link or tell me what I need to do this convert, Id be most appreciative. You see some differing opinions on google searches so I defer to the masters. Thanx guys
Edited by flyinbuttress 2015-12-05 12:15 AM
|
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 119
Location: Piedmont, Oklahoma | ... And is it even worth it powerwise? Seems my Poly runs pretty strong as it is. |
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 9684
   
Location: So. Cal | Is it worth it? In terms of performance, no. In terms of looks, maybe.
The problem is that to do it right, you need to change the pistons to get a decent compression ratio because the hemi heads reduce the compression quite a bit.
But here is a list of what you will need:
pushrods
heads
rocker arm assemblies
valve covers, spark plug tubes, covers, etc.
hemi spark plug wires & spark plugs
pistons
exhaust manifolds & pipe connection
Edited by Powerflite 2015-12-05 11:10 AM
|
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 888
Location: Peoples Republic of Oregon |
The Spitfire engine is a very capable performer. If you think that you need a little more 'scoot' then just upgrade the cam package.
I'd also look at the intake and carb and definitely add a Mopar Electronic Ignition package (P3690426)
Edited by wayfarer 2015-12-05 11:55 AM
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3575
Location: Netherlands | For looks the Hemi can't be beat. But for rarity the Chrysler Poly engine would be the winner imo.
I've also tought about converting my 354 poly to a Hemi, but after a while I decided to leave it be and maybe even hop up the Poly instead.
I've already got a set of header flanges for it from Wayfarer. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 119
Location: Piedmont, Oklahoma | Pistons too? Screw a hemi then. Where do you find a cam package for a poly? Id like to do a dual 4bbl intake tho. I often see some headers on FEEbay too. Thanx for the replies folks. |
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 6502
Location: Newark, Texas (Fort Worth) | This may help:
http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/hemi-c4.htm
http://www.hothemiheads.com/hemi/tiki-view_forum_thread.php?topics_...
Edited by mstrug 2015-12-07 5:15 AM
|
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 119
Location: Piedmont, Oklahoma | Cool! Thanx! Im assuming since neither article mentioned the cam then I can get a Hemi cam from Hotheads for my poly and it'll work? Thanx
Edited by flyinbuttress 2015-12-07 1:28 PM
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 9684
Location: So. Cal | Yes, a hemi cam should work fine in your poly motor. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3035
Location: N.W. Fla. | There has been debate as to weather the cams actually interchange or if they have to be different grinds. The 2X4 intake interchanges. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 1622
Location: Seville, OH | Yes, i would look deeper into the cam interchange. I recall that they are different due, at least in part, to different pushrod angles between poly and hemi. |
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 6502
Location: Newark, Texas (Fort Worth) | http://www.thehemi.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2854
there's a lot of history involved with this question
the cams are identical right down to lift/duration on many poly and hemi engines up to 1956 from my knowledge- and although later years had different lift/duraton between hemi/poly, you could take a 1958 354 poly cam and put it in an early 331 hemi or poly and it will run fine. Cam interchange on these engines boiled down to deck height- if the engine had the same deck height, the cams will interchange, and are often identical. The whole purpose of the poly line was to make a cheaper engine with hemi-like performance- and use as much of the hemi stuff as possible, except for the expensive heads and rocker valvetrain. The solid 300 HP 331 hemi cam is much hotter than the hydraulic 331 poly/hemi cam- but if you put it in a 301/331/354 poly and used the solid lifters and custom adjustable pushrods, you could run the solid hemi cam in a poly as well. If you look in a vintage 1950's Chilton manual, you'll see the lift specs for 1955-56 poly and hemi hydraulic cams and spring tension are identical- reason being, it's the same darn cam- the poly loses a tiny bit of valve lift on the exhaust side due to a more extreme pushrod angle or rocker arm ratio variance. They would never cut a new cam for a poly just to reduce lift by .010", it would make no sense in production.
there's a lot of misconception about this swap on the net message boards, I've read more than once "you have to change the cam" in threads, when in fact you don't. The only time you need to change the cam, is when you go from a short deck motor, to a tall deck motor. Example: 241/270/277 Dodge poly/hemi and 315/325 Dodge poly/hemi have different cams. 301/331/354 poly/hemi and 392 hemi have different cams.
The Chrysler poly/hemi engines with interchangeable heads, were actually decades ahead of the competition for their time, in that they had both canted valve and hemi heads that interchanged on the same block. Everyone else was still at the inline valve stage for their OHV V8. Chevy didn't offer anything comparable until the 348 staggered valve arrangement in 1958, but the first true Chevy canted valve head with multiple valve angles wasn't until the BBC in 1965. The 348/409 had all the valves at the same angle into the head, just not in a line. (the Mystery Motor 1963 was a true canted valve head, but was not a production engine, it was a lab engine). Ford didn't get a comparable canted valve V8 engine until the 429 and 302 Boss of 1969, and Cleveland 1970. (again, the SOHC 427 was not a production car engine, it was over the counter special order, and rare- basically another Chrysler clone, hemi heads on the old FE427, with OHC's) When the general public thinks of canted valve engines, they think Chevy and Ford, when in fact Chrysler had them 10-15 years earlier with the polys. The problem is, there is almost no polys out driving around today, the history is lost to the average hot rodder.
engineering really was Chrysler's ace in the hole back then. The only thing these early engines lacked was cubic inches and compression, they were just starting to get with that program with the 392, when they pulled the plug on the hemi/poly engine line. Chrysler had to be bailed out financially in 1959, and to cut costs, they went to one basic big block engine across all the car lines, and dropped the DeSoto line.
GM and Ford competed the easy way by just adding valve size/porting/cubic inches to their OHV inline valve engines. Add 50 cubes to an inline valve engine, then you can run with or beat a hemi performance- the old saying there's no substitute for cubic inches. So in that way, GM/Ford took the cheap way out- their engine lines were more profitable and cheaper to produce.
how do I know ? I owned 7 of these engines, and disassembled them all, and looked at them closely. 2 hemis and 5 polys. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 119
Location: Piedmont, Oklahoma | Fair enuf then... Thanx!! Think Ill throw the money at my poly with a cam, dual 4's, and widdle up some headers. |
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 888
Location: Peoples Republic of Oregon |
While not part of the original question, many folks will suggest that using a solid cam with adjustable pushrods and stock hydraulic rockers is an invitation to damage at the pushrod tip/rocker arm socket as these parts were never meant to have any operational clearance. They will, essentially, beat the snot out of the pushrod.
For anyone interested, we do the adjustable conversion as well as regrind cams. |
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 9684
Location: So. Cal | I ran a solid cam 392 hemi that way for 20 yrs and approximately 30k miles. It was always the smoothest running motor I had. I never had an issue with it, but my cam wasn't too aggressive. A typical RV type cam, 1 step up from stock. It would have been a little easier to adjust the rockers, rather than the pushrods though.
Edited by Powerflite 2015-12-08 9:26 PM
|
|
| |
354 poly to hemi conversion
