Talk:Chrysler B engine

383
this list is wrong the 66 Charger was also equipped with a 383 engine (HAVE ONE) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.30.243.170 (talk) 07:40, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

413i
The 413 section says that the 413 engine was used in trucks until 1973. However, I've been led to believe that the 413 engine used in trucks, RVs, etc. is not the same as the 413 Wedge -- it was known as the 413i (Industrial) and was a different engine. Same for the 318i. Can anyone confirm or disprove? Autonerd (talk) 22:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC) Autonerd

You are correct: the 413 was used in medium-duty trucks, RVs etc. as well as industrial/stationary applications (irrigation pumps, gensets etc.). Differences - from memory - were: forged steel crankshafts, improved connecting rods, thick-wall cylinder block castings, relatively low compression ratios, (7.0:1 approx), redesigned cylinder heads with sodium-filled exhaust valves, redesigned exhaust manifolds, larger water pumps which directed coolant straight from the radiator into the front of the cylinder heads and a gear driven camshaft (versus chain driven in "standard" RB engines). These engines were designed for full-load continuous operation for extended periods of time at moderate (~3600) rpm, not for drag racing or street performance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.136.118.252 (talk) 23:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

366
What's the actual stroke? I figure it's about 3 9/32" but cannot find any info on this engine. AMCKen (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

This engine does not exist. The sizes for B series engines are 350, 361, 383 and 400. The sizes for RB series engines are 383, 413, 426 and 440. Why do you keep deleting my corrections and comments? I dare you to read a book on the history of Chrysler Corp engines and you'll see I'm correct.

Non existent "B" engines
There was never a Chrysler Corp. produced 'vintage' 343 or 372 cubic inch "B" engine. Whoever is adding these to the "B" section is incorrect. Please stop reverting changes. The section erroneously titled '343' should in fact be '350', and the erroneous '372' should be '383'. Check your sources! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.136.118.252 (talk) 00:29, 29 May 2013 (UTC) There was a 341 in 56 and 57 Desotos but never a 343 mopar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.109.196 (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

400
The 1972-78 400 C.I.D. 'B' is missing.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.136.118.252 (talk) 00:22, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

71.209.33.100
This person either has math skills based on some fractional number other than 10 or is insistent on making this page perpetually incorrect. His/her edits are wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.136.118.252 (talk) 05:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I have spent the last few days correcting the misinformation and lies on this page. Why was my hard work undone? Everything I wrote was the truth and backed by fact unlike the tissue of lies we see on this page now. All of the engines mentioned here are non existent and should be removed. 331, 343, 372,381, 404, 422, 450 and 466 are not Mopar engines and no engines of these sizes were built by other companies either. The person who wrote this should be kicked off Wikipedia.

AMC had a 343 67-69, The first Chyrsler 300 had a 331 in 1955 as did the 55 New Yorker, in 56 the 331 was only in the Windsor, makin it a Mopar engine, Caddilac also used a 331 until 1955. But the rest of the engines mentioned I have never heard of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.109.196 (talk) 01:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Disinformation
I agree with the person above, somebody is changing the page and replacing facts with disinformation.

I have corrected the bore sizes and engine capacities once more.

The correct information is available at the following pages

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/383.html

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/b-engines.html

http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/deck-height.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.184.76.95 (talk) 05:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Factual accuracy
This is concerning the two sections above. Purposeful misinformation and vandalism has been ongoing on this article for the past four months. That being said, I'm not sure of how many edits since then inbetween the vandalism carry any new or useful information and so a thorough inspection of the article's information should be looked at by a person or persons knowledgeable on this subject. I've also posted an incident about it on the Administrator's intervention against vandalism page as well as opening an IP sock puppet investigation. This has gone on long enough and it needs to end. Antoshi ☏ ★  17:56, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism
Antoshi, the page is wrong now. Its been set to semi-protected with the wrong information.

Its been going back and forth because of persistent vandalism. The information on the page now is that of the vandal. It is laughably false, wrong engine sizes, bore sizes and more.

The correct information can be found here, which ironically is still linked to at the bottom of the page in the 'See also' part.

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/b-engines.html

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/383.html

The page was changing constantly because it was being corrected, then the vandal was removing the corrections.

The page is wrong now.

Example, I challenge anyone to find the following (false) information that is currently displayed on this Chrysler B engine page anywhere else....

"The 277 cuin (4.6L) & The 292 cuin (4.8L) & The 313 cuin (5.1L) & The 506 cuin (8.9L) was produced from 1960-1968 until 1979, making it the last version of the Chrysler RB block. It had a precision cast-iron block with iron heads and a bore of 4.25 inches (108 mm), for an overall displacement of 451.9 cu in (7,406 cc)."

Laughable.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.184.76.114 (talk) 05:59, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Why does this article even exist anymore?
Here we are in late 2015, and the information in this article is once again complete garbage. Apparently this has been happening for over two years. To anyone mildly familiar with Chrysler engines this entire article is ridiculous, but no effort is made to keep the correct information intact.

Allowing this nonsense to not only exist but to continually be vandalized to bogus information seriously damages Wikipedia's credibility as a source of accurate, verifiable information. 24.231.131.31 (talk) 03:57, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism (continued)
@ Why does this article even exist anymore? ... you are right, somebody keeps vandalising the page with incorrect information.

I have corrected the wrong engine sizes and more now, 3rd December 2015.

But going off previous months and years, someone intent on sabotaging the page will no doubt do again what they have done many times over already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.183.69.89 (talk) 03:10, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I spent a week earlier this year repairing the article. I am not sure why it is the target, but I recommend that whenever you look at it and see problems, restore it to the current (7 Dec, 2015) version. It is almost impossible to protect an article from a long term attack by a tenacious vandal, so we will just have to let it be and then restore it every so often.


 * More importantly: before adding useful material to this page, restore it to the most recent good edit. Post here on the talk page, and that way we will be able to maintain the page without losing valuable additions. Cheers,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  06:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

"Blueprint sell-off"?
The 440 section says The blueprints were sold off as part of the financial reforms spearheaded by CEO Lee Iacocca in order to stabilize the company's finances. That sounds like an urban myth. Car companies don't generally publish or release or "sell off" the blueprints for their parts. Is there any evidence (that passes muster with WP:V and WP:RS) to support this claim? And if it's true, how about some more detail? Whom were the blueprints "sold off" to? What was done with them next? I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but until then this unsupported claim sounds like a bunch of baloney. Pogorrhœa (talk) 00:11, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2016
Standard bore size for 400cid is 4.34, not 4.31. For 440 cid engine standard bore size is 4.32. My source : http://www.allpar.com/mopar/b-engines.html

Jarkka58 (talk) 09:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: The error on the 400 was found in the Aftermarket components section. Can you point me to where in the article that the 440 is incorrectly described?  Stick to sources!  Paine   01:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2016
"Please change the 383 B bore from 4.21 inches to 4.25 inches"

2602:306:B89E:6090:0:0:0:3E9 (talk) 11:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2016
"Please remove 4.21 in (106.9 mm) from the bore list in the right bar, as no B or RB had such a bore."

2602:306:B89E:6090:0:0:0:3E9 (talk) 12:10, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  02:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2018
There never was a Chrysler B engine with a bore of 4.21". Your section on the Chrysler 383 B engine cites the bore as 4.21" this is WRONG. The correct bore is 4.25" or 4-1/4" View the math! An engine with a bore and stroke of 4.21" and 3.375" would have a displacement of 375.852840872563 cubic inches, there never was such an engine. The 383 B has a displacement of (4.25/2)^2 * PI * 3.375 * 8 = 383.028866811893 cubic inches.

There are numerous other dimensional mistakes that have crept into your American engine articles. They seem to be related to rounding errors introduced when converting to Metric dimensions with too few decimal places to represent fractional inches.

In order to represent fractional inches converted to Metric dimensions, an acceptable granularity of 25 microns is required. The millimeter is unsuitable by a factor of 40 to represent fractional inches down to the common machine shop accuracy of one thousandth of an inch.

For example: If you converted 4.25 inches to 107.95 mm then you can convert 107.95 mm back to 4.25 inches.

If, on the other hand, you convert to millimeters truncating the decimal remainder, 4.25 inches becomes 107 mm and 107 mm becomes 4.21 inches when converted back. I suspect that this scenario is how the bore of 4.25 inches became 4.21 inches in the case of the aforementioned Chrysler 383 B engine.

When you consider that an inch micrometer used by a machinist has an increment of .0001 inches on its Vernier scale, the granularity becomes 2.54 microns.

I have collected MOTOR'S Auto Repair Manuals Dating back to 1935 as the source of my dimensional information. 174.227.128.9 (talk) 20:06, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.      Spintendo       21:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2021
Douglesc (talk) 21:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC) This is concerning the 361 engine, it list a total cubic inch as 360.83 , after further looking into this , most have the stroke as 3.38 , but it is most likely 3.375 and at least for sure the bore is not 4.12 but 4.125 which is 1/8. you should at least change that as 1/8 is .125 not .12, anyway how they got the 360.83 is using the 4.125 x 3.375 even though most sources do use 3.38.......just trying to be accurate here.
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NW1223 ( Howl at me &#124;  My hunts ) 00:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2021 (2)
I am not aware of a "B" Block 350 ever being made but I am not sure. this however is one of "the", if not the best source for accurate dimensions on Chrysler engines https://www.mopar1.us/engines.html Douglesc (talk) 22:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NW1223 ( Howl at me &#124;  My hunts ) 00:23, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

hemi is an RB
426 Hemi is a raised block. Which makes alot of this article sound like gibberish.

Wedge and Hemi referring to the combustion chambers in the head not the block. b/rb and hemi, makes this aeticle sound foolish. 67.246.120.54 (talk) 05:55, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2024
Please remove the general motors patented engine family terms such as big block and small block from your explanation. You can say overbore, you can say under bore, you can say square engine. These are generic terms used universally. However GM owns the terms big block and small block as they are patented engine family terms. Stop confusing the public. 2605:59C8:337E:3610:C088:4935:F473:2C6 (talk) 13:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 18:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)