Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
--- 302 vrs 351 stroker


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

radracing - 8:14 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

Hi FORD Fans
ok what is better, a stroked 302 or a stroked 351w what kits are best.whatis the best what cubic in. for hard racing with a 4 or 5 sp. what HP can we get WP heads or a great set of after market head do you suggest
we are going for all throttle no bottle

----------
64 Falcon Sprint, 66 Comet Cyclone GT 95 Mustang GT
race it or show it, don't let it rust



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

jason mcginnis - 8:21 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

hey there is no replacement for cubic inch displacement. Well unless you have a ton of money(ha ha!). 4sp or 5 speed? I guess for my self I would go with the 4 spd, because i don't need an over drive, which most of them are?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

radracing - 8:27 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

well we were going with a Jerico or a G-Force 5sp with 1:1 5th gear. which stroker kit is reliable and cheaper to replace crank,pistons and rods

----------
64 Falcon Sprint, 66 Comet Cyclone GT 95 Mustang GT
race it or show it, don't let it rust



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 8:45 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

The 351W block is WAY more durable. The 69-74 blocks are the strongest. These blocks have 1/2" main and head bolts and MUCH thicker webbing than any factory 302 block.

Personally, I don't believe any factory 302 block (when stroked) is strong enough for serious racing (or power adder) duty. The 2-bolt 7/16" main bolts and thin webbing, combined with 10 measly 7/16" head bolts don't exactly spell "full race". The main caps will bounce (especially when stroked) and head gaskets will blow.

If you want to spend the $2k+ for a machined R302 block, you can play "race car" with a stroked high compression/power adder 302, but otherwise, you're better off with the 351 for serious race duty.

In non stroked form, 302's are fine for up to around 500hp as long as the tune is kept conservative and the engine is not run into detonation. Running one into detonation at this level will kill it. At this level, head gaskets will also need upgraded to loc-wires or the block/heads will need grooved for wire. Strokers are reliable to even less power, since they put more of a strain on the lower end.

Do NOT combine a stroker with a power adder on a stock block if long life or is expected.

Stroked 351W's are the best way to go fast with a small block ford. With a huge set of heads, they can make scary amounts of power!

My $0.02

----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

drag79stang - 9:40 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

I hate being redundant, but...........351W w/Eagle stroker kit. 418 cubes, w/world product sr/s, crane solid cam, victor jr, 950 holley= 572.6 hp @ 6400 rpm, w/517 ft lbs tq @ 5200. (that is what was on the motor when we dyno'd it in feb.

----------





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 10:37 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

Building 500hp is relatively easy with a stroked 351, and it still isn't really pushing the envelope of block strength. Also, if it really matters, a 393 or 408 still dont compromise the ring lands with the pin hole. As stated, 500hp is on the ragged edge with a 302 block, and the engine will not really be streetable IMO. The cost for the two engines is practically the same, and a 351 fits in all but the smallest of engine bays, any of the cars you have listed will accomodate it.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ghettostang - 6:08 am on Nov. 14, 2001

no replacement for displacement. besides, 351 is stronger.
my .02

----------
George E. Leggett




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

a66gt - 9:38 pm on Nov. 14, 2001

Buy the 302 sportsman block. Theres 12 1/2 more pounds casted into thisblock in the webbing department



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- 9:56 pm on Nov. 14, 2001

What motor or you running now?? What car is it in?? 302 stroked is less weight in a late model mustang and 351 stroked is better if you prefer a faster setup!!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ron1 - 1:18 am on Nov. 15, 2001

Hi Mike...starting to get the feeling you really don't like 347's. And I think I feel a bit insulted...although it is fun to "Play race car"..anyway, 347 with an R302 block, forged crank, Eagle "H" beams and Ross forged slugs, Victor Jr. heads and Victor intake, 825 CFM Barry Grant race demon.
N/A on the engine dyno it made 604.6 at 7200 and 490 ft/lbs of torque at 5400-6200.

Dyno sheet is on web site.

Ron


Edited by: Ron1



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DynoTom - 1:35 am on Nov. 15, 2001

Well Ron 1, I for one am very impressed with your dyno numbers!


I will be using a 408-W package set up by Keith Craft racing.

I think for me since Im starting from scratch on this new motor,I would be best off going with a "big winsor".

But its sure nice to see your dyno numbers with your 347 come in at around the power Im looking for.

I will be using allot of the same types of parts your combo uses just bigger.

Keith Craft says there is no reason the motor combo he setting up should not pump out a consevative 600-650 on motor.

I will also have a little shot of nitrous to add some torque to it.

The compression ratio were using is 13 1/2 to 1 with Victor heads and intake allong with King Demon carb.

I know it will make the car perform to my ET goals!


----------

95 F-350 XLT 460-95 Crown Victoria 4.6 P.I.-91 Mustang GT 302 H.O.

Edited by: DynoTom



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 7:37 am on Nov. 15, 2001

I'm VERY impressed with those numbers. 605hp is nothing to sneeze at!

True, I'm not that big of a fan of 347's, especially ones built out of stock blocks. If you want to push one of these strokers, a stock block just won't take the additional stress a big stroker like that will generate.

To do a small block stroker RIGHT, you DO need an aftermarket block. This is a big $2k+ upgrade. Plus, to go 347, the pin is up in the oil ring, and the pistons have extrememly short skirts that don't distribute the side loads or keep the piston from rocking as well as a longer piston. 347's just don't last as long as they should.

I'm not saying they CAN'T be made to work, and produce some serious power in the process, just that things are being pushed to the max, and won't last as long as something a bit less radical. That $2k+ block (necessary at the 500+ hp level) is also a deal killer.

A stock 351W block, especially the 69-74 models, will withstand those power levels all day long. A buddy of mine built a 426W with a 79' model block and cut down 400 crank and pushed to for two seasons to the tune of 5.92 @ 121 in the 1/8 on two stages of nitrous before selling it to a guy who ran it after that. He then built a Motorsport siamesed 9.5" block and started running 5.3's in the 1/8... this time shifting at 7800rpm instead of 6200. It was a little smaller too. I believe it was a 396.


All I'm saying, is that if I were going to the expense of building a maximum effort stroker, it would be a 351W stroked out to around 400ci. I just think you're further ahead in the long run. If your target is 600hp, it won't have to turn insane rpms's to do it, and should last a lot longer... OR, if you're really serious, the wick can be turned up to make close to 800hp.

That's just how I would do it. Everybody else is free to do what they want. Maybe they want a block that looks like a 302... Maybe they already have the intake, oilpan, headers and distributer for a 302 and don't want to buy new stuff... Maybe the race class only allows the 8.2" block...

Everyone has their reasons for choosing their particular path. If everyone was the same, racing would get boring pretty quick.

I'm not trying to offend anyone. I just state my opinions in a "matter of fact" style. I just state the facts as I see them, and don't always think about how people might feel about it.

I DO like your 605hp 8.2" mustang, and have your page bookmarked on my computer.
Good luck next year! I think you just might be knocking on that 9second door no bottle once the bugs get worked out.


Later!


----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 10:00 am on Nov. 15, 2001

My heart goes out to the people who read all the ads and put a pile of money into a stock block 347... then lean on it pretty hard with a blower or nitrous. Combinations like this EASILY overcome the capacities of the stock block casting. What the customer ends up with is a pile of scrap iron after a short period of time.

A stroker 302 that is going to be subjected to the stresses of a power adder, NEEDS some sort of aftermarket or Boss 302 block. Main girdles just aren't enough.

In short, if you're going to build a "power adder" 302 using the stock block, don't stroke it. All you are doing is weakening the foundation. A power adder is enough to push a stock block to its limits. (no stroking needed!)

My $0.02

Good Luck!

----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

racer7088 - 4:04 pm on Nov. 15, 2001

I agree about using strokers AND NOS on stock 302 blocks but they seem to run fine and last forever NA when done right. I've been looking at this very objectively and for some time and haven't seen any big probs with the stroker small blocks. The same places that do have probs screw up 306s too all the time.

----------
Erik Koenig




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ron1 - 7:20 pm on Nov. 15, 2001

I think you hit on it Mike. Had all the parts from the 306 that I re-used. And you and I have had this talk many times before. I'm just looking for 10K miles out of the motor...I think that equates to 4 passes per mile or 40,000 passes..at 20 per weekend x 36 weekends that would be 50 plus years...hmmm.

One thing that did help me is that my youngest son works for Ford Motorsport...smart kid.

Ron

Edited by: Ron1



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- 7:33 pm on Nov. 15, 2001

Give DSS Racing a call and get yourself into one of there stroker motors!!! Prefferably a 331 stroker!!They have a great main support system for the bottom end and hold up to LOT'S of horsepower!! Less weight and makes just as much power as a 351!!

----------
RANDY




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ron1 - 11:13 pm on Nov. 15, 2001

how do you define LOTS...



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brumby - 12:35 am on Nov. 16, 2001

Has anyone tried the 351 to 427 stroker from PAW that was featured in Mustangs and Fords? Incredible



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

giddyup - 4:42 am on Nov. 16, 2001

so if i have a stock 302 block stroked to 347 with about 400hp whats the longevity of this engine likely to be???



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 6:50 am on Nov. 16, 2001

As long as it's not pushed overly hard with a big shot of nitrous or a blower, it should be fine.

It might not deliver quite the service life of a non stroked 302, but it's not going to wear out tomorrow either. Just realize its limitations. From reading the ads, people will slap a girdle on one and think they have full race block ready for whatever they can dish out.

You'll be fine.


Good Luck!

----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

racer7088 - 10:31 am on Nov. 16, 2001

""so if I have a stock 302 block stroked to 347 with about 400hp whats the longevity of this engine likely to be???""

It's all about how it's setup and tuned. I've seen far more blown up 306s with the same blowers as 347s but they run higher cylinder presuure and have crappier stock cranks and balancers usually for the most part. If you aren't trying to make too much power and aren't detonating then you'll be fine a lot longer than people will tell you.

If your running naturally aspirated with an EFI long runner I don't think you'd ever blow up a 331/347 and youll only make more streetable power and tq with the bigger inches.

----------
Erik Koenig




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

radracing - 10:56 am on Nov. 16, 2001

It sounds like the 351 stroker is the way to go. this motor will never see the street or a blower or NOS it will get hammerd alot on the strip.what is a good manifold will a 850 DP be enought carb we will run a Doug-Nash 5 sp. with a 3.19 1st gear and 5th will be 1-1 so how hard can we turn the 351 stroker what RPM can we leave at

----------
64 Falcon Sprint, 66 Comet Cyclone GT 95 Mustang GT
race it or show it, don't let it rust



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

qtrhors - 11:14 am on Nov. 16, 2001

The stroker thing is always an interesting subject. They are the latest rage in the Hot Rod world it seems. Especially now that we have great cyl heads to feed these beasts:)
IMHO the ring package, the piston length, and the piston speed are the most important areas in a stroker combo that someone wants a long service life out of. It seems that Ford has general never liked low rod ratios as related to piston speed. Stroker kits that use short pistons and thus ring packages that move the rings together or closer to the top of the piston deck or both and also moving the piston pin into the ring package (usually the oil ring) have potential problems. It seems a shorter piston would be less stable and tend to "rock". Combine that with higher piston speeds and increased cyl wall side loading because the rod ratio number is getting smaller and the ring seal may not last as long as the factory combo. I know people say that rod ratios mean nothing. Maybe they don’t when it comes to Horsepower but I’m using them for comparison sake. It’s really ring seal quality and longevity that matters. Especially for those who want an engine that will last several years and thousands of miles like a factory engine. Any stroker combo that uses a very short piston/ring package and puts the piston pin into the oil ring IMHO will not last long. I have heard the 347 with the 5.4 rod has had ring seal problems. Coast High Performance has even went to a slightly shorter rod to move the piston pin out of the oil ring area. Now on race engines or engines that will be torn down every year the issue of long term ring seal of course doesn’t matter as much.


----------
351W/AOD 81 Stang Coupe 12.23 111.7
pump gas....street and highway driven regularly



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cyclone Joe - 2:04 pm on Nov. 16, 2001

If you are putting the motor in the Cyclone, just do the brand new 427 block with tunnel ports or Ebock heads. Please for the sake of pete, the Cyclone is asking for the FE. Sorry, eheh, just my rant for the morning. It sounds like your choice is clear, unless you get a new 427 block!!! sorry, now I'll shut up. Hehe

----------
1967 Mercury Comet Cyclone GT convertable
My car isn't aerodynamic, it doesn't need to be



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

racer7088 - 2:43 pm on Nov. 16, 2001

qtrhors,

Not a flame but just some good old fashioned truth. Coast conveniently has a setup they want you to buy so it's a selling point for them and an obvious conflict of interest. Why believe them? Who is "Coast" really? Have they done an ABA scientific test with the only difference being this piston type? I doubt it. I have had three problems with stuff and products from them and never talked to anyone there who had even a clue. It was like they were reading off of cue cards. When you repeat what "they" say it is almost worse without any real proof.

There are several new engines that also feature MUCH shorter pistons and skirts nowadays as OEM ala LS1 for instance. A stroker will usually actually be MORE reliable due to lower rpm. I'd do a 351 anyway but then I'd stroke that too!

The pin in the oil ring thing has been done for years and there are no real problems with it at all. Coast/Probe was still using non located oil rail supports until recently so they had problems maybe. JE and Wiseco and other decent piston manufacturers have had this figured out for a long time now.

----------
Erik Koenig




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

qtrhors - 6:14 pm on Nov. 16, 2001

I just mentioned Coast from what Ive read and heard from others. I personally have never dealt with them. The question you ask is one that I have wondered many times. How do those who sell this stuff know that it works long term. Could you get 50000 miles...100000 miles outa one of or all of these stroker combos? You say that the pin in the oil ring is no real problem....based on what data? Im only asking because I have heard that ring seal quality and longivity wasnt up to par vs stock. I plan on stroking my 351 too. It woulda been a 393 had that crank been available in early spring 98 Our current motor is 3 1/2 yrs old....it has been on 2 1000 round trips...1 3800 mi round trip...with over a 100 passes on a dragstrip. It is driven almost every day in nice weather. It uses no oil and still pulls the same numbers on the track. This is what I want any combo I build to be able to do. I know that I may be be reaching....but I want 500 NA horspower windsor on 91 oct gas and I want the longivity of a bone stocker.








----------
351W/AOD 81 Stang Coupe 12.23 111.7
pump gas....street and highway driven regularly



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

radracing - 6:55 pm on Nov. 16, 2001

well thats what I want to know about stroker kits what I'm hearing is the eagle makes the best kit.for 302 or 351W alot of peple have tryed differant kits and and had no long term use out of them we are not easy on our motors because we drag race them we come out of the line at6500-7000 and shift at 7200 just because our top loader won't shift above that. our little 302 we have now makes HP up to 8300rpm no problem yet after 1 1/2 years on the track the leak down is still under 10% can a stroker do this? anybody run a stroke hard and what does it look like have you ran a leak down on it
Alan



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 7:15 pm on Nov. 16, 2001

Being limited to 7200rpm is even more of a reason to go the 351W route. A stroker 351W will pull your b*lls off... and won't want shifted much over 6000rpm.


They last a LONG time that way.


Good Luck!

----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ron1 - 11:19 pm on Nov. 16, 2001

One thing i forgot to mention in my other posts. I was VERY impressed with jd's performance where i bought my kit. He called, asked questions, talked with the machine shop. Then to top it off, he delivered on the day he said he would, and the cost was as quoted and at the best price. He took care of the custom pistons from Ross and put together a package he felt would work, using all the top manufacturers in the business. You can find them at http://www.jdsperformance.com or you should call and talk to Dave. Tell him Ron said to call.

BTW...the hp level he predicted? Almost right on the money.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

racer7088 - 11:22 pm on Nov. 16, 2001

qtrhors,

I know your just going with the flow but it is mostly internet rumor. I have been looking at this now for two years and I've seen 3 347 motors go over 100K now. They run fine and one had bad guides and when that was fixed the motor seemed new again! One was built in the old days by Ronnie Crawford and one was by Ron Anderson and the last was by a local shop here in Houston.

That local 347 had Pinto rods and they are only like 5.2 inches! This engine was almost ten years old. That car was in to have a piston fixed because of NOS and it turned out to have cracked a place in the intake port near the pushrod that was sucking oil and had two slightly bent exhaust valves. There was still nothing wrong with the bottom end. It honed out nice and we reused the pistons which were all right side chevy manley pistons or something. It cleaned up easy.

When I was first here in Houston I also helped a guy freshen a 347 that was built by KC and that one had 48,000 miles on it. It also was in great shape but the tfs tw heads had several loose guides that were causing the smoking and after putting k-liners in it and new seals the shortblock leaked down at 7 per cent on all cylinders and this guy used a 100 shot a lot!

I'm not really worried anymore and I used to be really concerned.

----------
Erik Koenig






_________________
Administrator

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: admin on 1/3/02 5:48am ]</font>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
--- WHAT STROKER KIT TO USE FOR A PULLING TRUCK?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

greg a morton - 7:41 pm on Nov. 11, 2001

Im looking for a good combination for a 79
f-100 for pulling. any suggestions would be
appreciated. looking at cost and duribilaty.
my email is [email protected]

----------
greg morton




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 10:36 pm on Nov. 11, 2001

You mean truck pulling as in pulling a racecar trailer, or pulling as in weighted sled on a dirt track? Very different needs.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

greg a morton - 10:44 pm on Nov. 11, 2001

pulling very heavy loaded trailers!!!


----------
greg morton




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MonsterMach - 10:50 pm on Nov. 11, 2001

Greg ... I'm building a truck engine (460)... not stroked ... desk Top dyno is estimating a peek of 595 ft lb of torque and it stays above 500 ft lb all the way to 3,500 RPMs ... It's all low end grunt. I could send you a copy of the dyno print out and give some input on what we have planned. My build is not all etched in stone yet.

----------
Larry Madsen
Las Vegas Nevada



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hrspwr - 10:51 pm on Nov. 11, 2001

PAW offers a 490 ci stroker that should be able to yank stumps. $2795.00 for the short block.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mavman - 10:56 pm on Nov. 11, 2001

you want low end grunt? get the largest stroker kit you can fine, they will all use the same basic 460 bore, but with longer stroke. The longer stroke will increase torque dramatically. I've see a 604 (at least thats what he said it was), so the sky's the limit. For cheap, you could go with a 490, 512, or just a plain ol' stock stroke 460...it will make PLENTY of torque.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JeremyL - 1:45 am on Nov. 12, 2001

Everyone welcome Greg to the forums. He's a good friend of mine.


----------
64 Galaxie 500XL 460/C6
85 Ford F-250 6.9 Diesel



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 8:46 am on Nov. 12, 2001

Try http://www.flatlanderracing.com/stroker460499.html This place has some of the better prices on stroker kits.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 9:09 am on Nov. 12, 2001

A buddy of mine is in the process of building a stock stroke 460 pulling truck engine. he got the connecting rods from flatlander. They are H-beam Pro-Line (I believe Summit used to sell these before going to their own house brand) and cost only $399. There was no tax, and shipping was only around $12.

He recieved good service, and the rods seem like quality pieces.

Some of his buddies had rod problems... They would break in the middle of the beam. Both ends would be fine. Go figure. That's why he decided to go aftermarket. He's using flat top pistons and ported D0VE heads, along with a zero deck block to achieve a 11.7 cr. The cam is a solid 248/260. The engine will be topped with a Weiand Stealth and 850 Speed Demon. It should be a monster from 3000-6000 rpm.


L & L makes 1 3/4" fenderwell headers, but they are THICK! They use 1/2" flanges and very thick tubes. Both headers together weighed 48lbs!

Good Luck!

----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

greg a morton - 9:22 am on Nov. 12, 2001

Im realy only looking at power below 3500rpm
im running a tall gear to go fast. 2.75s
Thats the reason i need so much torque.

----------
greg morton




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

classic79 - 10:02 am on Nov. 12, 2001

I don't mean to sound like a sissy or nothing, but how much weight are you planning on pulling on a 1/2 ton chassis??

If you stay with-in the limits of the truck a stock 460 w/ some bolt-ons sill move it out nicely.

But if you are towing something heavy you might want to step to a 250 or 350.

----------
Chris
79 stang (work in progress) & 79 F-150



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

greg a morton - 10:10 am on Nov. 12, 2001

I plan on putting a 3/4ton rear end in it
with helper springs or air bags if the motor
will pull it with the tall gears. like to
cruise at high speeds with low rpm.
Thats the reason for the stroker.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 10:55 am on Nov. 12, 2001

I thought you were building a truck for sled pulling... which is fairly popular around here.

----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gary79F250 - 5:16 pm on Nov. 12, 2001

Hmmm, Greg where are you going to find a rear end with gears like that? i think the highest you can go in a dana 60 is 3.54 a dana 70 is 3.08. You can put any rear end you want in the truck, but i think that you would be better off with a bigger truck. Also if you swap in a larger rear end upgrade your brakes, there is no point in being able to go fast if you cant stop fast. I drive a real truck for a living, it amazes what some people try pull with a small vehicle, it is easy to look at it this way, if the tounge weight of the trailer puts the truck on the blocks, the trailer is about 10 times heavier than you should try to pull.

----------

There is no excuse for winning.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

greg a morton - 7:34 pm on Nov. 12, 2001

you are right about the weight but I still
will haul as much as I can. Plus I just want
a lot of torque.
I would like a bigger truck, like a hotshot
rig but I dont need it that bad.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TorinoGT - 8:04 pm on Nov. 12, 2001

Exceed the weight limits of your vehicle as specified by the manufacturer and then have an accident, especially if you have installed a monster stroked motor, and your insurance company and the victim's lawyer will both have a stroke of their own. Most insurance companies require that you operate the vehicle legally and in the manner it was designed for...ie not grossly over weight... and will refuse a claim if they determine you willfully operated the vehicle on the highway illegally or in a manner that exceeded it's design limits for weight/braking/etc. When the victim is refused payment by the ins co their lawyers will use that refusal as "evidence prima facia" in a civil suit wherein, not only will you end up paying out of your pocket, you'll be required to pay; their lawyer, your lawyer, and probably a healthy "punitive damage" assessment......stay within the weight limits your half ton truck was designed for.....or, let me know where you're operating it so I can stay out of that area.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MonsterMach - 8:30 pm on Nov. 12, 2001

Greg ... How much torque is ... "A Lot"?

Any ball Park numbers we could use as a guide?

Also, Keep in mind that these huge stroke engines quite often have short skirt pistons (so the skirt doesn't hit the cam at BDC) Or the rod pin further up toward the crown of the piston, this can lead to things like "piston wobble" in the bore which leads to shorter engine life ... etc.

ON CLOSER INSPECTION I CAN SEE THAT THE CAM ON A 460 IS NOT IN THE WAY OF THE PISTONS


This is why ... if you've seen a couple of my previous posts on the Clevelands, I wouldn't stroke a Cleveland I'd just move to the 385 series to attain more Cube. Well, obviously you are at the top of the heap on that progression with a 460 so stroking is the only option if that's what you need (want).

I'd just hate to see you build the biggest "Stroke Monster" you can and in the end forfit dependability and longevity.

Which brings me to my original queston on this post ...

How much torque is ... "A Lot"?

As I said in my earlier post ... My 460 build is estimated at 595 FT LB torque @ 2,000 RPM and stays above 500 up to 3,500


----------
Larry Madsen
Las Vegas Nevada

Edited by: MonsterMach

Edited by: MonsterMach

Edited by: MonsterMach



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gary79F250 - 10:01 pm on Nov. 12, 2001

Ok, with a F100 if you need to haul alot of weight and need ample torque get a 300 six. It will pull all of what a f100 will haul at rated weight.

----------

There is no excuse for winning.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

qtrhors - 12:29 am on Nov. 13, 2001

greg

what motor does it have now and what are you going to tow with it?

----------
351W/AOD 81 Stang Coupe 12.23 111.7
pump gas....street and highway driven regularly



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

greg a morton - 1:11 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

It has a stock 1979 460
any thing that i can haul plus I will drive it to work a couple times a week



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gary79F250 - 7:33 pm on Nov. 13, 2001

If you want to tow heavy stuff get a peterbilt, fifth wheels and F100's don't mix. Thats what i use, oh also the R model mack's are kina bullitproof.

----------

There is no excuse for winning.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
-- 351 W stroker once more


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ville - 3:54 am on Nov. 2, 2001

Have still not fully decided which stroker to build for my Futura.I´ve dealt with Flatlander Racing and they suggested/recommended the smallest/simplest, the 393. I am, however, tempted to go bigger while I am at it.
I will be using a stock 351 W block( have several to choose from), H beam rods and good quality forged pistons from SRP or JE.
Which combination you suggest,I really would like to have 408+ inches. Then I also would be able to use the 205 heads from AFR.
This is a street/strip car,pump gas,10.5 compression.Must have driveable power from 2000 rpm up.And want to get to high 10s one day( 3200 lbs w driver).
Will those 205 heads kill the low end torque if used with a Victor Jr and something like Comp 282 Extreme Hydraulic roller?

----------
1980 Fairmont Futura 355W+T5+4.11 9". 13.01/108 mph with BFGs.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 9:04 am on Nov. 2, 2001

Ville, I'm building the exact combo that you just stated. 408 with roughly 10.5:1, AFR 205s, and a Victor Jr. I really didn't want a weak low rpm motor, but everyone I talked to suggested the 205's. Obviously, the 185s should make more low rpm grunt, but I think the tradeoffs are worth it. Plus, I'm planning on around 4000rpm stall which should put the motor right in the area that the 205s are making better power. I believe you are running a 5spd? With overdrive I'd think you could go to a nice steep gear that would work nicely with the 205s. Either way I think you'll be capable of high 10s.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

qtrhors - 12:41 pm on Nov. 2, 2001

uummm I think a 427 ci is the biggest you can run with a regular assembly line block.
4.060 x 4.125...with a 6.2 rod you still have a 1.50 rod ratio and I believe the piston pin is not into the oil ring land area(1.24 compression height) I wouldnt run any stroker combo that calls for a piston with a compression height that causes the piston pin to go into the oil ring land area.
It seems now you can get the 4 inch crank for the same price as the 3.85 inch crank. To me if you have to notch the bottom of the cyl walls for H beam rods with the 3.85 crank(393) you might as well go 4 inch stroke. Cost is a little more as the 4 inch crank will require custom pistons and rods were as the 3.85 stroke crank can use the available off the shelf 302 pistons and stock length 351w rods which can be slightly cheaper. If already at .030 I would go just to .040.This would give you a 395W with the 3.85 crank and a 410W with the 4 inch crank.

----------
351W/AOD 81 Stang Coupe 12.23 111.7
pump gas....street and highway driven regularly



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

dark7068 - 12:52 pm on Nov. 2, 2001

a friend of mine has the 427 stroker, he just loves it. Not sure on any spec. but looks like a Windsor and just screams. All in a 68 Cougar. It ROCKS.

Rick



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 1:06 pm on Nov. 2, 2001

Right, if you need H-beam rods you may as well go with a 408 IMO, cranks are same price. Otherwise, stock rods make the 393 very affordable. 408 doesn't seem much bigger, but in a very elemental sense if you're making 1.2hp/cube it's a ~20hp upgrade when you use the longer crank. Rod ratios are almost the same so that's not really a determining factor. Longer piston skirt in the 302 could add a little longevity, but I've really heard no concerns with a 408.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

qtrhors - 2:21 pm on Nov. 2, 2001

I would love to have a wet sump 9.5 deck height 4 bolt main nascar block wich 2.75 mains. With 4.125 x 4.125 bore and stroke. 441 cubic inch mega monster Windsor:) Imagine the cyl head work needed for that beast....Oh well...ar least i can dream cant I?:)

----------
351W/AOD 81 Stang Coupe 12.23 111.7
pump gas....street and highway driven regularly



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

drag79stang - 6:03 pm on Nov. 2, 2001

All I can say is.....(with risk of being redundant)......Eagle stroker kit #14127. 418 cubes. 572.6 hp @ 6400 rpm, and 517 ft lbs tq @ 5200.
That was last year..............This year, hopefully LOTS, LOTS, LOTS more.........

----------
YOU CAN SLEEP IN YOUR RACE CAR, BUT YOU CAN'T RACE YOUR HOUSE!




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

coolfalcon - 6:53 pm on Nov. 2, 2001

I have a set of 6.2 Carrillo rods with a 2.1 big end and a 4.0 stroke crank rods dont come near the block or the cam i love it.

Edited by: coolfalcon



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mach1Morgan - 9:02 pm on Nov. 2, 2001

You can buy 6.250" long rods with a 2" diameter big end.(pre 67 small block chev size) An offset ground 400(I'm dying to say "M" here...lol)crank with these rods would give you a 4.311" stroke. Custom pistons with a 1.095 deck height would be needed to finish off the assembly. A 4.03" bore and a 4.311" stroke makes a 440 cubic inch windsor.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

R Code - 1:06 am on Nov. 3, 2001

Original question was biggest realistic Windsor stroker for the street. Well, if you are using rods with bolts, max stroke is about 4.125" with a standard base circle cam. Even that will probably require some clearancing of the bolt heads. So that 440 combo with the 4.3" stroke might be possible with capscrew rods (no bolts) and might even require a small base-circle cam. Mach, are those chevy rods capscrew or bolt?
Did see a write up of a race 454W using a steel crank with 4.250" stroke and big overbore of a Motorsport block. Used capscrew h-beams and didn't provide a lot of detail...



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SCOTT - 1:39 am on Nov. 3, 2001

USE CHEVY SIZE ROD ENDS (ITS WORTH IT) AND YOU BARELY HAVE TO GRIND ON THE BLOCK WITH A 4 INCH STROKE

----------
8 sec. solid roller stroker




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ville - 4:16 am on Nov. 5, 2001

Ok,thanks for your input.Few notes about my coming motor:
I will use H-beam rods because of their reputation being best for clearance issues.
I will use small base circle cam due to an early non-roller block + stock hgt lifters/spider assy.
Just hesitating here about the heads....tempted to go with 205s but need to have smooth power from 2000 rpm up...its a 5 speed car with 4.11 gears.




----------
1980 Fairmont Futura 355W+T5+4.11 9". 13.01/108 mph with BFGs.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

460 Sleekcraft - 12:25 pm on Nov. 5, 2001

It seems to me at some point it would make sense to step up to a 385 series engine. Cheap cubes.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paxtonman - 1:12 pm on Nov. 5, 2001

514
You will be suprised how close it is $ wise to the small block



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

n2omike - 3:04 pm on Nov. 5, 2001

205's are fine. Remember, you are dealing with big block cubic inches stuffed into a smallblock package, fed through small block heads. It's pretty hard to go too big, especially for a hotrod engine.

You'll want at least 1 3/4" headers.

Good Luck!

----------
Mike Burch, 66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads, 10.63 @ 129.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mavman - 7:54 pm on Nov. 5, 2001

514
514
514
cheap 600 hp stroker...almost the same price (right now) as the windsor strokers. Buddy of mine built one and put it into a 86 hatchback with ported aluminum cj heads, it runs 6.2's in the 1/8th and 8.2's in 1000' at 127 mph. Hmmm....wonder if I can make a 460 fit in a maverick??



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

qtrhors - 9:02 pm on Nov. 5, 2001

well I love the big block strokers but the cost is not as cheap as you think. For one if you already have a smallblock car. Its always cheaper to stay with what you have. When cahnging to bigblock...you need a diff tranny,exhaust sys, and the carb you already is too small, Everything for a big block coast more then the small block stuff. It adds up.

----------
351W/AOD 81 Stang Coupe 12.23 111.7
pump gas....street and highway driven regularly



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RPM - 2:22 am on Nov. 6, 2001

Ville, who started this post, lives in Finland. I believe he must use the original size motor to be legal. That is, me thinks, why Ville axed about the 351w, not a 385 series. What up Ville?

----------
I've been this way since 1956




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ville - 3:04 am on Nov. 7, 2001

Yes, I live in Finland...the legislation does not permit to install a bigblock into a 80 Fairmont.When I bought my Futura 1989 I really wanted to have a bigblock in it ( I had a 66 Fairlane Wagon with a 460/500 ci combo before the Futura).I really tried hard to convince the authorities about the safetyness of the combination(....???) but it really was impossible to get it legal even though I used the weakest 385 series engine as a "template"- of course I would have fitted a 500 ci+ in it...
Another thing is that the MOT authorities here are not too familiar with Ford V8 engines so I doubt none could have told the difference between a Windsor series small block and a 385 series bigblock.
But, here I am at the moment, this coming 393/408(?) will be my 4th 351 W based engine in the Futura. I have also driven some open track events with it and I really love it!! I dont think it would perform as well with a heavy bigblock.
Best et, by the way is a 12.00 / 117 mph with my 3rd 357ci engine( 11.0 CR,ported World Products heads, Victor Jr, CC 248 degree solid cam)but it was not fun on the street- no power below 4000 rpm.
Now I want to have best of all worlds(!!)- driveability on the street,hi 10 second ets and good handling maneuvres on a road course.
Wish me good luck...


----------
1980 Fairmont Futura 355W+T5+4.11 9". 13.01/108 mph with BFGs.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
--- Stroker 351W


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Skroo - 12:43 am on Dec. 2, 2001

I was looking at the Keith Black website and saw they had pistons for a 383. It used a 3.75 inch stroke and 6.2 inch rods. I've been thinking about stroking my 351W but have never heard of a 383W. What kind of crank would I have to use. Is it an aftermarket or a modified stock piece. What kind of advantage does this have over a 351w with a 400 crank? Will there be a reliability problem? It'll be run with EFI and a turbo but it will be drivin to work and on the street. where would I get the rods from?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TorinoGT - 3:15 am on Dec. 2, 2001

Look at Summit Racing's website under the tech articles. All your questions can be answered there plus some you haven't thought of yet. IMHO a reground 400 crank is not the way to go nor are the rods you asked about but that's just my opinion. Hope this helps ya

----------

"I know it's ugly but, ya gotta start somewhere"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TurboCoupe50 - 4:01 am on Dec. 2, 2001

A 3.85 aftermarket crank is available that can be used with stock length 351 rods and a 5.0 piston. Gives 387 cubes, or 393 with a .030 overbore. The 383 sounds like it uses a custom ground crank.

----------
1988 Turbo Coupe [email protected] Now with 5.0 Power
1969 Fairlane Cobra [email protected] Bone stock no traction



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ville - 12:37 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Its a reground stock 351 W crank to my knowledge, doesnt KB pages give you info about the rods?

----------
1980 Fairmont Futura soon to be 393+T5+4.11 9".




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RPM - 3:49 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

You don't need to use a 302 piston. KB makes a piston for a 3.85 crank, stock 5.95 rods. Part #364 fit the bill.

----------
I've been this way since 1956




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

dark7068 - 3:59 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

This site has some good info as well. It has technical data on the kit.

http://www.speedomotive.com/Stroker%20Kits.htm

Rick

----------

68 Fairlane 500 Fastback/70 Cougar Eliminator

Edited by: dark7068



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

89 coupe - 5:20 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

CAT and Pro-line(one in the same) makes a nice Forged 3.75" stroke crank and the SBC 6.2 or 6.25 H-beam rods can be used and that should handle more power than you could possibly make with an inline valve aftermarket head. A little over $400 for the 3.75" and 4" stroke crank, $300 for the H-beam rods, and about $450-$550 for the pistons. 4.030" bore with the 3.75" stroke is 381 and 4.040" bore with 3.75" stroke is 383 CID. Personally I would get the 4.1" stroke Eagle crank and make a 418 for the same money.

----------
--'65 Fairlane 500 wagon w/351W, '68 Falcon wagon w/289, '2000 SD F-250 V-10 crew cab off road 4X4, 01 Focus w/DOHC 2.0 4 valve, '78 Fairmont Wagon w/ fresh 10.5 to 1 302, & '76 Pinto wagon street/drag car .
MY WEBSITE



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just Jim - 6:42 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Kent: I've seen your previous posts on CAT products and I even have a CAT catalog,but where do you buy their stuff at the cheap prices you quote. Do you have any favorite place to get the CAT stuff? Thanks.

----------
'58 Morris Minor 289 S/S MM
'62 Falcon 351W "Just Falcon Around"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Livermore Dave - 7:33 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Try a production 351W crank with an offset rod journal that produces 3.7" stroke,use Ford inline six cylinder rods,and the piston from a Boss 302(4.060"bore) if you are using a "canted valve" head and block deck measurement of 9.48"...Livermore Dave.

Edited by: Livermore Dave



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

89 coupe - 8:10 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Just jim,
I was buying from South West Performance out of AZ but I don't think they are in business anymore(about a year ago or so) but since then, I have bought stuff for basically the same price off E-bay. When somebody is selling Pro-line or CAT stuff, the usually have a website to their business that has the CAT stuff at good prices. You have to "weed out" the retailers that sell the main guirdles for more than $90 for instance because they cost about $60 and SWP sold them for $80 and retailers are trying to get $120+ out of them. I have 2(bought 1 off E-bay) that I paid $80 for and both are for 351Ws. The same goes for the cranks, rods, rocker, etc. I will try to find in "favorites" for web sites on my computer for businesses that sell the stuff for the good prices. SBC and BBC H-beam CAT rods for the stroker cranks are $300 and the 460 H-beams are $350. The 4" and 3.75" stroke 351W stroker forged cranks are between $400-$425 and cast cranks are cheaper.

----------
--'65 Fairlane 500 wagon w/351W, '68 Falcon wagon w/289, '2000 SD F-250 V-10 crew cab off road 4X4, 01 Focus w/DOHC 2.0 4 valve, '78 Fairmont Wagon w/ fresh 10.5 to 1 302, & '76 Pinto wagon street/drag car .
MY WEBSITE



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just Jim - 8:21 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Thanks Kent,
I'll look at Ebay and see what I can find. I'm still thinking of a 393 for the Falcon but am in no big hurry.

----------
'58 Morris Minor 289 S/S MM
'62 Falcon 351W "Just Falcon Around"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave C - 8:34 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

I have a 383W stroker in my 69 Musatng drag car.

My setup is a stock crank offset ground to a 3.70 stroke. The rod journals are 2.100 (same as a sbc), also had to widen the journals by taking off .125 from the inside of each counterweight. (or you could narrow the rods. The rods are 6.125 Eagle H-beams. Pistons were custom made because I wanted a 13:1 dome. Could have used the KB with lesser comp. The bore is 4.060. A smaller 4.030 bore would make it a 377.

With a set of home ported Windsor Sr irons and a medium sized solid roller (.624/.628 262°/272° @ .050), Vic Jr, 950 Hp carb 1 3/4" headers, MSD box and dist. it makes about 590 hp at the crank.

It has lasted 5 yrs so far. I freshened it after the first 2 yrs, but everything was fine. Just put in rings and bearings since I was already in there. I attribute that to a very good balance job and a DSS main girdle. Also has a Probe stude girdle on the top end.

The car is here:
http://home.earthlink.net/~racrcole/index.html

Any other questions just ask.

Later,

David Cole




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

89 coupe - 8:47 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Just jim,
Here is a link but the prices are too high. Still trying to find which sites have the "good" prices but this is for reference. DYNO-FLO

----------
--'65 Fairlane 500 wagon w/351W, '68 Falcon wagon w/289, '2000 SD F-250 V-10 crew cab off road 4X4, 01 Focus w/DOHC 2.0 4 valve, '78 Fairmont Wagon w/ fresh 10.5 to 1 302, & '76 Pinto wagon street/drag car .
MY WEBSITE



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

89 coupe - 9:23 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Here is a link to E-bay where Dyno-flo is auctioning for much lower prices than their website advertises for CAT products.
Dyno-Flow on E-bay

----------
--'65 Fairlane 500 wagon w/351W, '68 Falcon wagon w/289, '2000 SD F-250 V-10 crew cab off road 4X4, 01 Focus w/DOHC 2.0 4 valve, '78 Fairmont Wagon w/ fresh 10.5 to 1 302, & '76 Pinto wagon street/drag car .
MY WEBSITE



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just Jim - 9:30 pm on Dec. 2, 2001

Thanks Kent. I usually look up Falcon or Morris stuff on Ebay and haven't seen much else. I'll check them out.

----------
'58 Morris Minor 289 S/S MM
'62 Falcon 351W "Just Falcon Around"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

R Code - 3:59 pm on Dec. 3, 2001

Dave C, thanks for the post on the 383. Good to see a stock offset ground crank at the heart of your combo. 590 HP eh? Wow. What kind of ETs and RPMs are you doing?
I think the stock crank is getting less credit than it deserves with all the aftermarket prices coming down. Used to be the only way, I think it is still a viable option. IMHO of course.

Edited by: R Code



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave C - 9:03 pm on Dec. 4, 2001

I did the offset ground stocker before the low cost aftermarket cranks were available. Back then it was either offset grind one or buy an $1800+ custom crank. I didn't (and still don't trust) the 4.00 cranks that are made from cut down 400 cranks. Too hard to balance. I have seen many of them break even though there not abused.

My 590 hp is based on a computer simulation. Don't know how accurate it is, but it has also predicted my best ET to within .02. So prob pretty close.

The car is run on the 1/8 mile only. I live only 15 minutes from a great 1/4 mile track, but all the organized racing is 1/8. So it is geared for that. 5.43 gears.

Best times so far is a 6.76 @ 100 mph w a 1.47 60 ft. I leave at 3500 (two step/transbrake) the converter flashes to 5500. Shift at 6800. Cross the line in high (powerglide ) at 6500. I can rev it higher. It will spin to 7200 without a problem, but it isn't any faster. My heads are done before then.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
--- 377 or 392 stroker?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ville Sievers - 3:30 am on Jan. 31, 2001

Guys with experience about 351 W strokers,help me out.
I am building either a 377 ( stock crank ,Mopar 6.125 rods, milled 302 pistons) or 392 ( Scat crank)for my 1980 Fairmont Futura.Icannot decide which way to go... Few questions:
1.I want to use forged pistons instead of hypereutectic( I have got broken KB pistons 3 times in 3 different 351 Windsors),problem being damaged or broken top ring land).
If I go to 392 which piston to use( milling small amount from piston top is no problem. I am aiming for a compression of 10.5 to 10.8-here in Finland we still have good 95/98 octane gas available from every gas station.
2. I want to use floating pins.Which rods to use ( Chrysler 6.125 are fine for the 377 but how about 392)? Piston?
3.General specs:heads are iron GT-40, home ported,1 5/8" shorties,straight thru 2 1/2" mufflers, hpipe. Z-7003 T5, 4.11 gears 9" traction lock.Weight 3300 lbs with driver.
750 Vac Holley.RPM limit 6500.Street use with nice driveable power.
4.Intake. Have planned to use Performer RPM / Stealth. Which one?
5.Cam. I will go to full roller set-up.Have thought something like 225 I / 232 E at 0.050",like Comp Cams Extreme Energy 274 HR.
The block is a 1983 with taller lifter bosses,even though came with a flat tappet cam originally.Cam + related components suggestion? Will Crane conversion kit fit?
Do I need to use small base circle cam and are they normally cheaper than std base circle cams?
How good are stock Ford hydraulic lifters for 6000-6500 rpm bursts?
Ps. I will purchase all the parts from Summit
so any parts you recommended should be available from there.
Thanks for your help guys.Ford High Performance lives also outside US !!






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RPM - 11:39 am on Jan. 31, 2001

Ville,it seems to me the 377 would be a good choice for you. Check out the the classifieds, a guy is selling mopar rods for your application. Good luck



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

btc - 6:56 pm on Jan. 31, 2001

reply to question 2- 393's (4.03" x 3.85") use stock length 351W rods with stock height 302 pistons.

A couple pros of the 393 is that it requires no modifications (like off-set grinding) and a brand new crank should be stronger than a crank that has been ground 0.200" under.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ford Man - 7:27 pm on Jan. 31, 2001

I thought that in the 393 stroker kit you had to maching the block for rod blot clearances?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

460 Tom - 9:04 pm on Jan. 31, 2001

Ville, A couple of points. I have had no problem with KB pistons breaking like you have. I have to wonder was the top compression ring gapped as suggested by K.B? If there was insufficient gap the rings will butt together and break the piston just as you have described. And I can't believe I keep hearing people say that a stock FORD crank turned down by .200 is sooooo weak! Do we here them say the Mopar small block crank or the Chevy crank which is 2.10 is weak?NO NO NO so lets stop this nonsense! No one ever sez the Scat 514 crank is weaker than a 460 crank because it uses big Chevy 2.20 size rod journals. So Ville build either you choose and if you wish to use free floating pistons on the 393 buildup you will still use stock 351w rods and have your machine shop drill and bush the small ends for whatever size pins your pistons will have. The 377 will be somewhat cheaper to build. And yes you will have to grind on the 351 block if you build a 393,the grinding is however minimal,you'll need to grind on the cylinder walls for rod clearance (go about .125 min) and the block at the oil pump base, and the oil pump base as well.

----------
Nothing worth doing is easy...




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stanley Superior - 10:04 pm on Jan. 31, 2001

Ville,definately go with the bigger motor,theres just no substitute for displacement! You can use 302 size pistons with 351W rods and the Ford crank! You may find out,however,that the GT-40 heads may be a bit on the small side. If you can afford a better flowing head like TFS,Canfield,Edelbrock RPM,etc. go for it! you will be rewarded with even more power. P.S. Not too many FE's in Finland,right?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ville Sievers - 3:30 am on Feb. 1, 2001

Stanley Superior:
You are right,FEs are rare here in Finland. In the country we have 5 million inhabitants and estimated 2500 US "hobby"
Fords. Out of this 2500 is perhaps 1500 Mustangs, rest is Fairlane,Galaxie, Torino Etc.
Most cars are equipped with moderately modified small blocks, big blocks being mostly 460s.
I estimate number of FE equipped cars to be around 100, most naturally being 390s.
Here in Tampere where I live we have one
beautiful 67 XL 428 with 427 crank.
My friends cars are 72 Mach 1 with a 600 hp
460, 1983 Thunderbird 2.3 Turbo,72 Pinto STW Streetrace 351 W dynoed at 470 hp,80 Mustang(low 10 second even hi 9s!) naturally aspirated 331.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FasterDamnit - 12:26 pm on Feb. 1, 2001

Ville,
I will be travelling to Uppsala, Sweden for training in the next month or so (2 weeks long.) Is that far from wher you live? I would love to see you project.
Jim Langley

----------
Technical Editor, Fordmuscle.com
65 GT, 289, T5. '92 LX, 5.0, AOD.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

460 Tom - 6:10 pm on Feb. 1, 2001

Ville,Since your friends have such hi-po cars you will need to build the 393. Build it with 10.5-1 static compression ratio, or as close to that as you can get. On the stock 351 rods get a die grinder and de-burr the beams, then file them smooth,then fine polish them with a 240 grit cartridge roll,buy a ton of these!have them rebuilt and drilled and bushed for free floating pins,have the machine shop shot peen the rods this will toughen them up for you,and install ARP wave lock rod bolts. Have them balanced to within 1 gram of each other.Get the KB piston for this motor,they make the correct one.Trial assemble your motor,make sure you have ZERO deck height! You may have to have a small amount machined off the pistons to get ZERO deck.GET a windage tray and a 9qt pan.I would run the COMP CAMS XE282HR CAM,IT MAKES THE MOST POWER FOR THIS 393 AND IS STILL STREETABLE.Buy A SET OF A.F.R. 185 HEADS.Run a Weiand Stealth and a Speed Demon 750 cfm carb. Built very carefully measuring all the machine shop's work and assembling very carefully you should see 537 HP at 5900 RPM and 450 ft lbs at 4500!THAT IS SERIOUS FORD MUSCLE! Run the Comp Cams rollers not the stock ford,ALSO get a good set of roller rockers always a good idea! With studded tires I guess you can drive it year round?

----------
Nothing worth doing is easy...




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ville Sievers - 5:13 am on Feb. 2, 2001

460 Tom:
Thanks for your reply,the engine you described sounds totally awesome! Unfortunately financially it looks like I need to stay with my iron GT 40 heads and stock crank and 377 ci. Good point is that the engine will use the longer Mopar 6.125" rod to make up the difference in cubic inches(the missing 16 cubes).
Wouldnt resizing the stock 351 rod small end for floating pins weaken the rod too much?
In a Mopar rod this isnt a problem since the rod is originally equipped with a floating pin and the pin diameter is also greater- no need to increase the hole diameter like with 351 W rod?

I agree with you that the GT 40 heads are the power restrictor with this engine.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

R Code - 4:54 pm on Feb. 2, 2001

Build the 377 with confidence. Torque Man Enterprises said that the offset ground 351W crank will be safe to 6500 rpm due to the generous overlap of the crank journals. They have been building them since the mid '80s. On the piston thing, you can use any piston you want,you just need the right compression height. With a 3.658 stroke and a 6.125 rod you will need a 1.490 to 1.500 compression height. Probe, Ross, KB and others can supply a 4.03" piston with the ch and dome configuration of your desire. But please keep in mind that detonation will cause the top of any piston to overheat leading to the top ring butting and causing the land to pull off. Careful there. Project 11.99 runs the KBs with no problem.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RPM - 3:55 pm on Feb. 3, 2001

Ville, as I once said, it seems to me the 377 would be a good choice for you.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RPM - 4:09 pm on Feb. 3, 2001

Ville, another school of thought. Since you had a Fairlane with a 460 in it, why not build one for that shoebox Futura? Other than the extra 200lbs that is.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ville Sievers - 2:54 am on Feb. 5, 2001

RPM:
I would but the legislation does not allow it in Finland. Car building rules and laws are quite strict in here. When I started my Futura project 1991 I submitted a 25 page application to the MOT authorities in order to get that permit with " 200 hp.." 429 big block.No way. Only way possible would drop the 460 in and tell the inspectors it is a 351, 90 % of them wouldnt know...






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timo - 12:33 pm on Feb. 5, 2001

Ville,

Sounds like your going to have a real nice car when your finished (when are we really finished?). Maybe you could post some pics. I live in Toronto Canada & I find trying to fix up my 66 Mustang expensive, I can't imagine how much it must cost in Finland.

Cheers, Timo.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

460 Tom - 12:59 am on Feb. 6, 2001

Ville,How did your friend ever get that 460 authorized for his mustang if the rules are so strict?

----------
Nothing worth doing is easy...




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ville Sievers - 2:32 am on Feb. 6, 2001

460 Tom:
Basically you can install an engine in a car if that car or platform was originally available with that series engine.To that the law allows a + 20 %.In other words 1966 Fairlane was originally available with a 427,hence making a 460 installation possible.
A 1980 Fairmont was originally available with a 302 making 351 installation possible...And really,those inspectors do not know what engine you have , whether it is a 255 or a stroker 408/426...
And Timo,yes, car building is quite expensive in here.All the parts are naturally imported from USA, to the purchase price you need to add freight and about 30 % taxes.All in all getting your parts costs roughly 1,6 times what you pay in US.Anyway, the hobby is well and alive here.Nothing will stop us hearing and feeling the raw power of a well built V8, especially a Ford one..By the way Timo,do you have relatives
here in Finland?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
--- 351w stroker article...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 1:57 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

Hey guys, don't know if any of you get Mustang & Fords but they just did a 427w buildup. I personally love any kind of buildup article, read and analyze them all the time to figure out the best combo. This one was real interesting, I'm not looking to build one of these motors in the near future but will do one before I die. Only thing that pissed me off is they wouldn't give the cam specs, just a solid roller, it wasn't in a competition vehicle so I don't see the big deal in giving the specs. I guess I could call Coast and beg for the specs. Anyway, the thing pulled 510hp at 5500 and 530tq at 4400, quite the nasty street motor. Interesting thing is they ran a victor jr with the Performer RPM heads with 2.02's. From what I read on the 392w when they replaced the GT40x's with AFR 185's they gained a TON of power and torque at all RPM's. Now, with the added displacement of the 427, you'd have to think the Performer RPM's are way too small for that motor, they're roughly the same "size" as a GT-40x, although a little better flowing. Imagine what the motor would have pulled with better heads to feed the displacement? And, they only ran a 750cfm, the 392 picked up quite a bit with an 850cfm with the AFR's if I remember. I know Stanley loves these motors and will have good commentary.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Bad 88 GT - 5:31 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

For a mild daily driver the TW's would flow alot more than the RPM's or X heads and a bit more than the AFR's. For a more strip oriented motor the TW R heads would be the cats ass.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 6:02 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

I kind of agree with you. The TW would be a definite step up from the RPM's with no drawbacks, the AFR 165's provide roughly the same performance as the TW's. I have heard that the TW's are more open to port work. I think the AFR 185's may be better a step up in performance from them both but not kill any lowend torque, unlike the TFS R's that would pick up the hp quite a bit at the expense of some lowend. I've also heard Canfields are a nice head for this sized stroker, maybe a bit more racy than the AFR 185's?

Edited by: chilly460



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Bad 88 GT - 6:08 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

I merely mentioned the R's for a strip version of the 427. Then again the standard TW's do quite well on a stock 5.0 so maybe the larger R's would do equally well with 125 more cubes? At the least the TW's or 185's need some porting to work efficiently on such a large motor. How about a nice set of Roush Racing's ported and prepped Yates heads from their 2000 Nascar engines?

Edited by: 1 Bad 88 GT



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eld3stang - 6:18 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

I'd vote for the R's, a heavily ported Canfield or a set of Vic Jr's. With 400+ cubes, you'll need big block airflow. I had a 432 kit that I ended up selling because of the expense involved with the parts that a 400+ inch motor would need to perform.

----------
Bill Elder Jr.
Too many Project Cars to list...



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 6:38 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

Now, how about a cam? I'm thinking they're running 240/.565" on a 110LSA, or thereabouts. Kind of hard to tell, the Victor Jr. intake and RPM heads weren't designed with anywhere near the same powerband in mind. The torque peak seems a touch high compared to the hp peak, probably the effect of the heads choking it off?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Bad 88 GT - 8:56 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

The heads are holding the combo back quite a bit. By changing to the R or Victor heads you can pick up nearly 60hp and 40#tq with a 280*/290*adv duration and .570" lift on a 110lsa spec cam. It shows 440+#tq from 2000-6500rpm.

Edited by: 1 Bad 88 GT



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

460 Tom - 9:41 pm on Mar. 5, 2001

What continues to amaze me is that so many of these buildup articles leave out so much information. Why tell you what the HP and TQ ratings are and omit the cam specs? Most of the time I find that these articles are NOT true journalism but rather soft advertising for a company that has a "relationship" with the magazine. You need to compile a ton of these articles to get enough info to begin a stroker project,and then you will learn how much "intellectual property" was left out. This I believe is why FORD MUSCLE should take a different path and have some of these truly sharp members write a comprensive article on their stroker engine buildups! Why read an article from the marketing dept. of some rag when you could read an article from an honest member?????

----------
"Your ignorance is their power"




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 9:38 am on Mar. 6, 2001

I'm with 460 Tom. You can kind of determine if an article is "subsidized" by a company by how much they concentrate on the parts within. By this I mean, in the article they went on and on about the Ebrock heads (I do agree they're a good piece) and also went into how good they'd be on a 302. Who cares, isn't this about a 427w? Anyway, I imagine they omitted the cam specs because it wasn't an Ebrock cam. They also didn't give the rod ratio and other important specs when talking about a stroker motor. I also messed up, it made 520hp (not 510hp), not that it's significant. I do think these dyno #'s were accurate, based on what a 392w pulled and adding the additional cubes. Makes me want to break out the checkbook thinking about building one with Canfields, making 560hp, 550lb-ft at streetable levels.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mike - 11:52 am on Mar. 6, 2001

My own experience with the small block stroker Fords is this, they love big cams. Thats if you install a set of decent heads to match the combo. Don't be afraid to install a solid flat tappet or solid roller cam. They DO make more power than a hyd. roller. Plus the lifter is much lighter.
Ultradyne makes some great little solid flat tappet cams that have ramp rates near a solid roller.
Try this one, 277 advertized duration, [email protected], 102 centerline, 108 lobe separation, with a lift of .562in.
If you have a 302 or 331 this cam works like gang busters. It idles at 800rpm in gear and work the power brake booster with no problems.
For the bigger strokers I've tried a solid roller with these specs, 294-300 advertized, 254-262 @.050, .620-.638 lift. The lobe center is 108, and the intake centerline is 104. In the 375 that I built, this cam made 554hp. This is a street/strip type engine. It also runs on pump unleaded gas. My nickels worth.

Edited by: mike



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 12:52 pm on Mar. 6, 2001

Thanks Mike-
I read on another post that you've built a 408, any insight on that build? What rods, pistons were you using? Any longevity problems with the strokers we should know about? If I were to build one of these big windsors, I'd want as much info. as possible about durability of a 408 vs. 427 with the shorter piston and any problems that creates. What are your opinions on going with a short rod motor to keep the pin holes out of the ring lands?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mike - 1:40 pm on Mar. 6, 2001

The 408 uses a 6.2 Eagle rod. This is a Chevy part CRS6200B3D that has had the big end narrowed to the Ford width.
When looking for a stroker kit that uses a reworked stock crank, ask the person if they narrow the rods to the Ford width, or grind the crank to fit the Chevy rod width. I personally would stay away from the widened crank. I have used Ross pistons with a 3mm oil ring to keep the pin away from the ring package. This is a custom piston, but they do make them. This engine is almost 5 yrs. old. That should tell you something about the longevity.
I think that the 393 would make an excellent street/strip engine. It shouldn't have any problems due to the rod/stroke ratio. Just be realistic about the rpm. Remember to pay attention to the details, and search out for the best machine shop in your area.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chilly460 - 1:48 pm on Mar. 6, 2001

Thanks. I'm a fan of the SCAT crank kits, they're usually close to the same price and I like the idea of a new crank vs. a reworked 400 crank. I know the 400 cranks are plenty strong, but want to get the best parts for the $$. The engine builder I use is mostly into Chevy short track motors, so he's accustomed to many stroker combos depending on class. Although not a Ford guy, he does work with me on them. I looked forever to find a guy that wouldn't turn his nose up when I mentioned an FE that I needed machined.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top