Printable View
Just another point of data:Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
My 1990 block did require a little grinding at the bottom of (at least) most of the cylinders for the 393w crank - specifically it was to provide clearance for the bolt heads on the h-beam rods as they pass the outside bottom edge of the cylinders.
Great Perspective Having Ample Seat Time In Both Cars!Quote:
Originally Posted by bobl
I want to use the Edelbrock Victor intake on my Windsor build. Will I have any problems with clearance?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Kleiner
The shortest intake for a 351-W, especially if you are looking for a single plane intake, is the Torker II.Quote:
Originally Posted by rezell3d
https://www.edelbrock.com/torker-ii-...fold-5081.html
Hope This Helps!
This was my case as well. My block is an 351W F4TE (1994 truck engine). No clearancing necessary to get to 408 using a cast steel eagle crank.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
My 351-based 427 with rpm air gap intake, carb and oval air cleaner JUST fits under the hood even without the hood scoop (waiting for painter to do that). If I get after it there is the slightest of scrapes but will be plenary of room with scoop.
Yep, it depends on the specific crank and piston combination and how far you are going. The OP sounded a little freaked out about it. But the first time someone sees a clearanced block, they quickly realize that it is no big deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
I had a 351W built for my Mk IV and love it! Only pulling 370 hp but that's more than enough to have fun with. I'm running a spacer under my slayer and the oval cleaner which just fits in the scoop tunnel with only a slight modification.Quote:
Originally Posted by edwardb
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalanche325
I would put me less than freaked out, but losing some cylinder piston guidance gives me cause for concern. Seems a 347 is on the ragged edge of comfort to make the power that a 351w will. Still earning and absorbing from the great conversation!
I understand why people go w/ a 347 especially if they already own the car/engine. Because of the taller deck a 351 needs different intake and exhaust headers so they would be an additional expense. But if starting w/ nothing, a 351 costs no more than a 302. And, if you are satisfied w/ about 350 cubes, you can use the stock 351 internals, vs a stroker kit to get from a 302 to 347.
You're talking about a notch about 3/8" wide and about the same tall on the very bottom edge of the piston wall to clear the rod bolt as it swings past. It has zero affect on piston support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugzilla
It's common on strokers (Ford or Chevy) to require a small relief for rod bolt clearance -- not a big deal if done correctly. Want something important to consider when looking at a stroker -- look at rod lengths. Because the deck height is fixed you have to keep the piston travel within the original cylinder length which will require a piston with a lower compression height, shorter rod, or both. Rod length has more affect than folks realize. A short rod can cause a significant amount of friction and pre-mature wear on rings, pistons and cylinder. That friction also robs a lot of HP.
Rod length has other performance characteristics you should be aware of. Longer rods are less prone to detonation, increases piston dwell at TDC, improves combustion efficiency, and produces more power from mid-range to peak RPM.
So don't fret about block clearance mods but do look closely at rod length when considering a stroker. For example, before I built my latest engine I spent many hours with my modeling software to arrive at the bore / stroke / piston / head combo. Since I was building a nitrous engine I was limited on compression height (same for boosted engines), therefore limited on rod length and rod ratio. My 406 actually makes more peak power than the same basic configuration with 434 cubic inches because I can run a bigger rod ratio with the shorter stroke. There's that much less friction with the longer rod ratio (1.6:1 on the 406 vs 1.5:1 on the 434).
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by NAZ
Here's a good reference: https://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/...ker/index2.php
Also do not be oblivious to compression ratio - lest you build something that runs better on diesel than regular unleaded...
Thanks For Sharing!Quote:
Originally Posted by mike223
I Am Glad I Went With 6.0" Rods Over The 5.7" Rods For My 383.
Great reference Mike! Particularly for the SBF. And good advice on the compression ratio.
Folks may want to also research dynamic compression ratio if doing their own combining of parts and assembling an engine themselves. The static CR we commonly cite and most pay attention to is only a reference point -- dynamic CR is becomes important when you start pushing the envelope on pump gas. For you amateur engine builder, GTS (Google that stuff) to learn more.
NAZ & Mike223,
I totally missed the boat when it comes to Dynamic CR.
Guess that's the Banker in me, but the car runs very well.
My Static CR Is between 10.00 and 10.125.
I am running iron heads. (Dart 215 CC Intake Runner Iron Eagle Tall Ports With 72 CC Chambers)
383 CID / 4.030 Bore / 3.75 Stroke
6.0" rods in the sucker so my rod angle ratio is 1.6.
12 Degrees initial timing, mechanical advance only, 32 total.
Duration @ 0.006": 288° / 294°
Duration @ 0.050": 236° / 242°
Max Lift w/ 1.5RR: .520" / .540"
Lobe Separation: 110°
Intake Centerline: 106°
Do I have any issues the be concerned about?
You mean other than the distributor being on the wrong end?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoDadGo
Jeff
Ha! hahahahahaha!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Kleiner
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Kleiner
Correct End For Acceleration Since Da-Sump & Da-Pump Both Get Covered For All Hard Launches.Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalanche325
Totally Wrong End If You Like Stopping More Than Geauxing!
Geaux Tigers!
Geaux Saints!
Distributor on the wrong end -- that's funny. As a former Ford technician, I have to agree. But working with SBC & BBC engines for so long now it almost looks normal.
Steve, if you don't have any detonation issues now you should be OK until AOC and her friends outlaw 91 / 93 octane pump gas. Dynamic CR is always lower than static as it takes into consideration the point at which the intake valve closes. Compression can't start until all the valves are closed. If you were to add a turbo you might want to revisit your CR or you can change the cam timing or grind to hold the intake valve open longer and lower your dynamic CR.
All is good.
UPDATE:
My bad, I left off some important 411. While the DCR is always less than the SCR, the octane requirement scale is also adjusted when using the DCR. For example, my SCR is 12.97 and my DCR is 10.71. If we were talking 10.7 SCR that would be a pump gas engine with a moderate cam, however, when looking at DCR the requirement is 110 octane minimum and that is also dependent on ECT and alum vs cast iron heads.
But you're still OK on your set-up -- if it's been running good so far, no worries.
This won't rectify your distributor orientation issues GoDad, but it can be fun to enter your numbers into a calculator to see what you come up with. I have downloaded and use this one frequently:
http://members.uia.net/pkelley2/DynamicCR.html
It's a very useful guide and aid in selecting components, especially camshaft. Make sure to read the technical guide and enter data in the format requested.
Sean
Canuck1, looks like your attachment must be an old version. Seems like it provides some good info but some of the links to other sites are faulty. David Vizard is one of my heroes and of course I clicked his link first thing. Interesting bunny trail to follow -- not what I expected, but interesting. :rolleyes:
Naz,
An old link, for sure. I downloaded the dynamic compression ratio calculator from there years ago. The link to download Pat Kelley's DCR calculator is still there, but some of the other links are probably not valid.
There are online sources for similar calculators, but I like having it at hand when I'm curious about a combo.
Sean
Sean, not everyone appreciates my sense of humor. You should check out David Vizard's link but make sure your virus protection is up to date before clicking past the first page. Enter at your own risk.
There is no excuse for a chevy, or forgiveness.:rolleyes: :p
.Yep, Chevrolet Never Forgives Where I Live.Quote:
Originally Posted by rich grsc
They Just Win!
https://www.gulfportdragway.com/ford-vs-chevy/
I'm running a Dart block 427W - absolutely love it - running it with Nitto NT01 tires - soooo much fun. Easy to control the rear end with the right foot.
Now I have some thinking to do; If I stroke this thing, I’ll be creating low end torque, which, while fun, can end up NOT being your friend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugzilla
It's easier to build power into the engine now than add it later. That skinny pedal modulates the power so don't fret all the talk about tires up in smoke, you don't have to accept that (well, maybe with an IRS). My car has a 6000 RPM stall converter, 3.90:1 rear ratio and on a standard day at sea level will produce over 10,000 lb feet of torque at the rear axle (>600 lb ft of engine torque & >700 HP at 6000 RPM). When I leave from a stop light off the trans brake & two-step there is no drama, no scalded tires up in smoke but it will plant you in the seat with more than 2 G's. The car weighs less than 2500 lbs full of fuel and my pear shaped body in it. It is possible to harness that power and turn it into acceleration with a solid rear axle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugzilla
I built a mild 408. I told Comp Cams I wanted to be able to drive at 1300 in 5th. Used their recommended cam. I should probably have gone one step up w/ the cam. But the engine drives perfectly, almost as well as an injected engine. I can drive around at 1300 in 5th or at 1000 in 3rd ambling around in a neighborhood. I also set up my mechanical throttle linkage to have a little more than average pedal travel so I have better control. So I say that, if you want to stroke it go ahead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugzilla
That is the exact opposite of true. Having torque makes it very easy to drive, you don't have to constantly be shifting, and easily rolling into RPM's make for a smooth steady drive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugzilla
Every throttle pedal I've ever used operated like a hinge---they swing both ways, up AND down. ;)
Jeff
Even if I run a FFR hood scoop?
No, you can't run a hood scoop
Run without a hood. Problem solved. What else can I help you with?
What does this mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by GUARDDOGG
I can't help but show off like a proud pappa and add to this thread:
I just had my 347 stroker on the dyno last week. I could not be happier with the performance. FLAT torque "curve" and HP that just points to the sky. This engine is fantastic. It's got 10.5:1 yet starts and runs like it's 8:1. It's got gobs of power everywhere. Yet that 302 block gives me enough room to work on it and looks great.
Oh, and I was really curious to see how badly my 1.75" oval air cleaner was choking it so my runs were: #1) air cleaner on, hood open. #2) air cleaner off, hood open. #3) air cleaner off and hood closed. I made the most power on #3! I suspect it made more power as it got fully heat soaked, but I went up 5hp with each run, making the most with the air cleaner on.
385HP at the wheel, so approx 450+ at the crank. And with 3.55's and a T5 with .6 overdrive (73 MPH @ 2,000 RPM) and it loves to run at all speeds, all RPM's, etc.
https://youtu.be/6hhnwAYj-Jc
https://youtu.be/QboLm0fO7Yo
Attachment 137207
An Edelbrock Performer RPM (not air gap) w/ this cleaner works fine.
https://www.summitracing.com/search?...rs%20SPE-47622
What am I in for?=> too much fun!
Based on my experience with a stock 351W block, don't go too high in HP. If you keep it under 500 HP you will probably be OK. Consider a crank girdle for a measure of insurance. If you want more I'd suggest an aftermarket block that will handle the torque and HP, like the Dart SHP. I tore the block apart where the crack main bearings bolt to the block. Chunks of block floating around the engine = failure. Admittedly this was WOT on the straight at a track, so that equals maximum stress on the 2 bolt mains. All said and done, I say go for it, build the engine of your dreams, you will not be disappointed. If you need an Eagle crank for your build, I have 2 good spares, one for a 351W and one for a Dart SHP. I can share the stories of why if you care to hear.