Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I know, it is not the normal tuning, but when it comes to orginality and the need of power, I think about some stupid things.
Has everyone ever stroked a 260 engine with a 3,25" crank.
When yes, what parts did you took for this.

Let me know what you are thinking about this.



regards

Hans
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,251 Posts
Thinking - it's a waste of time and effort. A 3.25 stroke "260" is 294, a .030 over stock 289 is a 292. 289's and their pistons are more common/chaper than a 260.

_________________

1967 Falcon 4 door w/351C - Owner built, owner abused.
70 Mustang 302 / 02 Mustang V6 rag top, 04 SuperCrew parts hauler
http://raceabilene.com/kelly/hotrod

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ckelly on 4/5/06 2:57am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,068 Posts
It would be interesting.

If you are looking for a massive power increase, it doesn't make much sense. 300 ci in a 260 block would be fun in a Tiger, but remember that you will probably be limited on valve sizes you can run in the heads and pistons might have to be custom made. Port flow on the intake side will suffer because of the small bore. Notching the cylinder skirts for rod clearance will -probably- have to be done.

That being said, if you want/need to keep your 260 block becasue of local laws, it being a 5 bolt block, or just to be different.....it would be cool.

It wont give you a massive increase in power by itself. It will give you more torque, a flatter torque curve, etc. But remember, even at .030 overbore, you are still smaller than a 302. If you put that 3.25" crankshaft in a 302 block, you would have over a liter more displacement than a stock 260.

As far as components go, the crank will work. You will have to figure out your rod length while you figure out your pistons, because I'm pretty sure you will need to have custom pistons made. As far as physical dimensions, any small block ford rod -5.090" 5.115" 5.400" etc. will bolt on. You could figure out your pistons by finding the compression height for a 331" stroker piston, then order a set of pistons with that comp. height and bore size you need.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,776 Posts
just get a 302 or you could just stroke a 302 to 331,347 or 355

_________________


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: tonys10sec306 on 4/5/06 5:58am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,520 Posts
You can ...always...pull the 260, put it in storage, put it back in when you need to. The big issue is the 5 bolt vs. 6 bolt blocks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,520 Posts
You can ...always...pull the 260, put it in storage, put it back in when you need to. The big issue is the 5 bolt vs. 6 bolt blocks.

Doesn't you "Cars" state something about already having a 331?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Beoweolf on 4/5/06 6:31am ]</font>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,908 Posts
I agree with all the above. I also would add, to my knowledge the outer dimensions of the 260, 289 and 302 may be the same, but I believe the cylinder walls are thinner on the 260 and if you try to punch out the cylinders might run into some trouble.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,950 Posts
I say go for it, why does everything always have to be with the status quo? Everybody builds and does the same boring crap all the time. It is time that people start thinking for themselves instead of like everyone else. Sure he could build a bigger engine out of something else, but he already has the 260. Why do people bore and stroke flatheads when there are bigger and better overhead valve engines out there? Where does it stop? If a 331 or a 347 is good, then wouldn't a 390 or 460 be better? Then he could stroke the 460 because it wouldn't make sense to "just" have a 460, a 557 would be the thing to do, as a matter of fact, a Tiger isn't as good as a Cobra, so.....................................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
On 2006-04-04 20:33, F15Falcon wrote:
I say go for it, why does everything always have to be with the status quo? Everybody builds and does the same boring crap all the time. It is time that people start thinking for themselves instead of like everyone else.
Fair points one and all. Just depends on what he thinks is important. If you want to be unconventional that is one thing. If you are looking to max out what you have, then stroking the 260 makes sense.
Then again, if the 5 bolt bell thing is your "non-negotiable" then why not get a 5 bolt 289 block and build a 347? It will look identical and bolt right up. That's what the "conventional wisdom" would suggest. Just because it's conventional, doesn't mean it's unwise.
The 557 on the other hand...

The wise man learns from his mistakes. The wiser man learns from others mistakes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
kinda thought about this one myself, smaller bore might lend itself to higher comp ratios...is really the only advantage I see. Of coarse a 5 bolt 289 would bolt right in, but hard to find, could be expensive.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I already have a 331 Stroker with a T5 in my Tiger

I would like to build a second "numbers matching" Tiger with the original 260 engine, and the original Toploader.
I know that I will not get massive power from the engine, but I want to build a strong 260 engine with no need of high rev.
And the other thing is, that I want to build a somewhat "other" engine whitch is not the standard.
Do anyone know the adress of a company who build custom-pistons?


regards
Hans
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,520 Posts
Lnked questions were asked: "What is wrong with being unconventional? Why does everyone need to do the same things?"

There is nothing wrong with being unconventional, building unique engine combinations, or Hot Rodding unusual body styles and configurations. That's what started and keeps guys coming back to Hot Rodding. Its the rebel aspect of not wanting to buy a "new" car to get new features or new engines - etc. It recognizes that sometimes we get attached to things and want to keep and enjoy using them.

From a hot rodding point of view, the typical consumer seems rather brain dead! Why does he feel compelled to trade in a perfectly good car every year? Just to experience the "latest' bauble, feature or styling change that Dearborn sells? There must be more to it than that. Then there is the Orphan thing; if they don’t build it, it doesn’t necessarily follow that I can’t drive it. I like the idea of the Bronco...Ford doesn't sell a 2 door off-road capable "SUV" anymore. That means either drive the existing ones until the wheels fall, or make improvements on your own to suit the uses you want to put your vehicle to.

If you ask for opinions, the issue no longer is only about being unconventional. When you ask for opinions, the question implies you are seeking views to validate what you are proposing. Can't have it both ways. If you want to go off on a tangent, just do it. If you want opinions, then accept that the further out there your idea, the less likely everyone or anyone will agree with it. When there are physical limits to overcome or practical considerations to prepare for...seeking advice is great. What I cannot see is asking for alternate points of view, and then arguing when they are given.

advice doesn't have to be taken...but if asked and its given, seems to me that its just as easy to discard the stuff you don't accept, than to challenge those that freely offered an alternate or practical view.

If you want to stick a stroker in a 260, go for it! Asking whether its practical or best use; most people would tell you that it is not! Just as the question is yours, so is the decision. Your choice is to weigh your idea against the value you place on the issues brought up from exposing them to public comment, then decide if its worth completing the project (based on your resources), balanced against what you know and what you learned – if anything. All ideas are not good ideas or practical ideas or even reasonable. When you have overriding reasons that out weigh what is considered reasonable or practical then go for it!

There is no victim here. No censoring. No conflict of purpose, values or intent. there may be difference of opinion, but thats to be expected. I don't like Chevy's and those that drive them...but I appreciate a really nice '63, 409, 4-speed, Impala SS or 63 -64 Golden Commando equipped Mopar...does that make me a bad guy or mean I changed into a GM fan? Nope, just admitting that I like some weird things, has nothing to do with good sense or values.

I have an excuse...I'm a "Car Guy", I'm not perfect!

Quote Red Green: I'm a man, I can change.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Beoweolf on 4/5/06 9:31pm ]</font>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
@Beoweolf:

Did I say something wrong.
I think that you are a little angry about me. I accept all things that written in this thread, no problem. I only like to do a different think, and I thought someone in this forum could help me.

Everything is cool


Hans
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,487 Posts
Do it! Port those heads and put bigger valves in if you can although shrouding or cylinder interference could become a problem. If your going to have custom pistons made, i'd say use a 5.315 or 5.4 rod and get lightweight pistons made...why not? It can't hurt performance and it will probably help a bit to reduce internal friction and stress on the rods if you rev the begeezus out of it ( I don't buy into the longer dwell thing unless the rod length is considerably longer). Does the 260 have the same deck height as a 289/302?

Thinking out of the box is the name of the game. I built my 331 with 5.155 length rods (to eliminate the problem at that time with the wrist pin intersecting the oil ring) and ported 351w heads and the results were excellent. I lost count on how many said the 351w heads couldn't make power.

_________________
Tracy Blackford: Corona, Ca
'65 FB Mustang 331, 282S cam, ported 351W heads. T5z, 3.50 9" posi.
346 [email protected] on a warm spring day (335 RWHP SAE corr.)




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: blkfrd on 4/6/06 7:23am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,520 Posts
On 2006-04-05 11:10, tiger260 wrote:
@Beoweolf:

Did I say something wrong.
I think that you are a little angry about me. I accept all things that written in this thread, no problem. I only like to do a different think, and I thought someone in this forum could help me.

Everything is cool


Hans
No, not from my point of view. I was expanding on the subject. On occasion...People have accused me of chewing all the taste off a rib of barbeque...I figure they must be on to something.

221, 260, 289, 302...the 255 fits in there somewhere too...all the same, but different.

I was framed...
, It weren't my fault! I din't do it.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,520 Posts
On 2006-04-05 11:42, blkfrd wrote:
Do it! Port those heads and put bigger valves in if you can. If your going to have custom pistons made, i'd say use a 5.315 or 5.4 rod and get lightweight pistons made...why not? It can't hurt performance and it will probably help a bit to reduce internal friction and stress on the rods if you rev the begeezus out of it ( I don't buy into the longer dwell thing unless the rod length is considerably longer). Does the 260 have the same deck height as a 289/302?

Thinking out of the box is the name of the game. I built my 331 with 5.155 length rods (to eliminate the problem at that time with the wrist pin intersecting the oil ring) and ported 351w heads and the results were excellent. I lost count on how many said the 351w heads couldn't make power.

_________________
Tracy Blackford: Corona, Ca
'65 FB Mustang 331, 282S cam, ported 351W heads. T5z, 3.50 9" posi.
346 [email protected] on a warm spring day (335 RWHP SAE corr.)


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: blkfrd on 4/6/06 2:44am ]</font>
I hear the same thing when I tell people that E7 heads are worth building, porting....you can't make people see things your way. I figure if they want to spend more money it's not coming out of my pocket.

If you believe in an idea, do it and prove your point. Nothing quiets the waters like sucess . Then every one is your friend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
In my oppinion (since a lot are floating around already), the act of stroking the 260 totally looses all value/coolness of having the 260 to begin with. It's the same reason I built a 289... sure I could have made more power with a 331 stroker, but then you loose the nostalgia of having a 289. You said you've already got a 331 powered Tiger... no matter what you do to the 260 it's never going to perform like the 331, so you might as well just put together a good combo, port the heads, good sounding exhaust, and be happy with it that way. Then if you want more torque, you can always look into supercharging
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
336 Posts
In New Zealand these engines 221-260 are used in stock cars etc and lots of special parts are therefore keep in the market place,I would google car V8 shops in New Zealand and Australia for parts and builders,I myself can't put you onto the one best place but google it and something will come up.Down here special pistons and head gaskets are made.Try a place called segedins and ask them for a contact or builder .One thing that may be a problem is bore valve shrouding -no flow past big valves in a small bore.
I would do it though.Des Hammills book tells of where to get parts and tips etc.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top