To start with, the R/T wasn't offered with a v-10, I wish it had been,
in fact that's what my gripe is, the R/T is woefully underpowered for
something that's supposed to be fast. You're right about the 360 being a
"truck" engine, once again my point, if a 318 is as fast and as reliable
as a 360, why bother even produceing both of them. They are, after all,
the same motor with different bore and stroke, amounting to little boost
in hp or any thing else. Alan S.
attached mail follows:
>Yeah, I've seen the numbers, my questions are more complaints on
>Chrysler than anything else. Everyone that recognizes the R/T asks me,
>"Is it fast?".I have to temper my answer by saying, "It's pretty quick"
>and they usually look at me funny and say "It's got a 360 and it ain't
>fast?" NO, IT AIN'T.(Texas and all). Anyway, my biggest gripe is, How
>can a motor that displaces 360 ci be only a few ponies more than a 318.
>Not to mention the rest of the BIG 3,they seem to be makeing more with
>less. I believe Z-28's are up to 320 HP(SS) on a 350 while Ford is
>makeing about 330 HP also with a 4.9L(Cobra). Once again I ask ,WHERE is
>the power hiding in the 360 and why does Chrysler continue to ignore
>developement of HP. Why have 2 V8's so close, even identical, offered
>in the same vehicle. OK, I'm not going to jump, I'll be OK, really.
>Alan S.
Could it be because the 318/360's are TRUCK engines designed for long life and durability
under heavy loads? Whereas you're comparing them to performance car engines.
Even in the 'olden days' (60's, 70's) the 360 was never a performance engines. There was the 340 and 383.
The 360 is the base engine in the Ram 250. If you want more horsepower, you buy the V10.
Sam
97 SLT Clubcab 4x4 V8
---------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at http://www.iname.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:10:58 EDT