cougarbird86

Im hoping this post attracts some of the engine builders that have had experience with 302 based strokers and 351w strokers to get some feedback and what they are like and the difference between them whether on the street or strip.

So basiclly, whats your guys real life experience opinions on all the different strokers out there?

331 vs. 396*

396 vs. 408*

408 vs. 426*

__________________
1986 Ford Thunderbird

"Its kind of like being the redhead stepchild in the mustang world" ; )

cmefly

It is simple. A 331 beats a 302 a 347 has a slight advantage over a 331 and a 408 beats a 393/396 and crushes a 347. I own a 331,347 and a 408W. It really depends on your budget and what type of car and application. They can all be made to go fast.

ROG30Y

if its easy to fit a windsor style block by all means build the biggest thing you can.

if my falcon accepted a windsor block easy i would build a 445.

__________________
1964 Falcon hardtop
N headed 302/vic jr/c4/10''convertor/4.11/drag radial(235/60/15)

11.20@118.66

frdnut

Here is my take on it..I would go for the most cubes that work easily within the block..If you have room for a 351 block then the 408 is a no brainer....It has a few advantages over the 393(less rotating mass and easier to balance) and the 427 is getting a little too big in the stock block...The 351 block can handle more power than the 302 based blocks...If room is tight I would go with a 347 in the 302 or 8.2 deck block....Of course all of this is assuming you want to use a stock block and not aftermarket with bigger bores.

__________________

1968 mustang 408W Hybrid..Burns gas and rubber!
11.82@120.85mph shakedown pass.

cougarbird86

Well, i can pretty much fit either block in my thunderbird so that gives me choices. I guess i was just lookin for some info on what everyones personal experiances are with the different combinations.

I know the bigger the stroker, usually the less RPM's and im always concerened about reliability regarding the increase in stress on components from the longer stroke.

Ide really like to have a stout motor to consider it hot street, but also to be able to drive to work and not just have it be a weekend racer. Do you guys have any opinions on things like the reduced rpm range and reliability?

__________________
1986 Ford Thunderbird

"Its kind of like being the redhead stepchild in the mustang world" ; )

dennis111

The more cubes you have, the less RPM's that are normally required to make the same HP as a smaller motor. Using lower RPM's also increase reliability.

With the choices given, I would do a 408w to get the best of both worlds-it is a very popular and proven combination that would push that Tbird around just fine. A 418 wouldn't be bad either.

__________________
Dennis

65' STANG, Dart 428W NA, Toploader 4 Spd, 4:33, AFR 205's, Vic Jr. Intake, 950HP DP, 11.1 CR, Pump Gas

10.62@125.82

Racing Videos

frdnut

You said it yourself..The bigger the cubic inches the lower the rpm it will peak at and low rpms are good when it comes to being realiable and easy on parts..A 408 stroker with the right parts will easily make 500+ ft/lbs of torque and hp and move your bird along very nicely!

__________________

1968 mustang 408W Hybrid..Burns gas and rubber!
11.82@120.85mph shakedown pass.

dennis111

Tree'd ya. . . .

__________________
Dennis

65' STANG, Dart 428W NA, Toploader 4 Spd, 4:33, AFR 205's, Vic Jr. Intake, 950HP DP, 11.1 CR, Pump Gas

10.62@125.82

Racing Videos

cougarbird86

True true. I guess i was more focused on the reliability due to the rod ratio and i completley forgot about how having the lower RPM's would easily increase reliability lol

Ok, with that said, Frdnut, what type on camshaft are you runnin in your 408?

Oh and thanks for all the help guys! Just tryin to get different perspectives before i sell my left nut for this new build.

__________________
1986 Ford Thunderbird

"Its kind of like being the redhead stepchild in the mustang world" ; )

frdnut

I would expect no less from a former track champ.

__________________

1968 mustang 408W Hybrid..Burns gas and rubber!
11.82@120.85mph shakedown pass.

frdnut

I am running a pretty big solid roller..I think for what you are doing a hydraulic roller would be the way to go..

__________________

1968 mustang 408W Hybrid..Burns gas and rubber!
11.82@120.85mph shakedown pass.

ROG30Y

hydro roller all the way,easy maintanace,no parts breakage,lasts a long time and makes comparable power to a solid roller.

__________________
1964 Falcon hardtop
N headed 302/vic jr/c4/10''convertor/4.11/drag radial(235/60/15)

11.20@118.66

cougarbird86

Did you get a custom grind or were you able to find one "Off the shelf"?

Ive noticed theres not a whole lot of even hydraulic flat tappets that have a respectable rpm range for the reduced rpm range of the 408 stroker. I did however find a lunati Voodoo series 268 cam that seems pretty nice if i go for off the shelf.

__________________
1986 Ford Thunderbird

"Its kind of like being the redhead stepchild in the mustang world" ; )

retyler

If I was building that car I would go with a 460 based stroker. 514 or 545. You can make very street friendly high h.p. and torque very economically much easier than you can with a small block. There's really no reason to go with a small block when you have room for a 460.

__________________
"Tell it like it is or don't tell it at all" 1964 Falcon 2dr HT, 347V8 4V, dual exhaust, 5sp, pwr assist R&P steering, AM radio, heater with defrost and 2sp fan, electric windshield wipers, cigar lighter, dlx light group, bucket seats, console and full carpet.

mtnmotorrider

Dennis and frdnut: I was really leaning toward the 4.040 bore, 4.17 stroke combination for 427 cubes until I read this thread. Do you both think the 4.17 stroke is too much? I would use ARP main studs and a stud girdle and my block is a '95 truck roller block. Part of my reason for this combination is I'd really like to put 427 badges on it! I'm building a '64 Fairlane replica Super Stocker and I just like those numbers even though it's not a FE.