|
Author
|
Topic: Stroker vs. Supercharger
|
bibbs68
Gearhead Posts: 1732
From: Medina, TN
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 01-12-2005 01:56 PM
 
I know it has come up in the past in another thread but I couldn't find it. So, I'm having to ask again.I was considering building a 347 stroker but then I recalled the supercharger putting out some impressive numbers. I know the cost depends on alot of things but how do the two applications compare. Not only cost wise but HP as well? Also any pros or cons of each would be appreciated. Thanks as always.  ------------------
Jeremy
'68 Coupe
M&M Member #685
Servin' the Lord in My Ford!!!
http://www.geocities.com/bibbs76/MyMustang.html
|
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 29200
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-12-2005 02:06 PM
They both have their respective merits.
The only thing better than cubic inches is .. more cubic inches! Stroker has no belts to break, ring seals to leak and has the same power all of the time. With a blower you can change pullies and add or delete horsepower in minutes. Why not just build a blown stroker?  ------------------
Alex Denysenko
Co-Administrator and Moderator NHRA/IHRA/SRA member and licensed Superstock driver
NHRA and IHRA SS/LA & SS/MA National Record Holder '00,'01,'02,'03, '04,&'05
First SS/MA in the TENS!
IHRA division 5 Superstock Champion
Fleet of FoMoCo products including 88 ASC McLaren Mustang #28 The Barry of BarrysGrrl Quote #1: "I never met a magazine mechanic I liked."
Quote #2: "Make sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth!"
Quote #3: "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch!"
www.moneymakerracing.com
|
bibbs68
Gearhead Posts: 1732
From: Medina, TN
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 01-12-2005 02:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Moneymaker:
Why not just build a blown stroker?
Now why didn't I think of that? LOL!  I don't believe funds are going to allow for both.  I'm still trying to piece together your 1 HP per cu.in. build. And we all know how long ago that has been.
|
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 22791
From: Reno Nv M&M #1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-12-2005 02:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Moneymaker:
Why not just build a blown stroker?
Thats why your the BOSS.
You can't beat the whine from a blower. Why stop with a 347 stoker why not 408w.
------------------
SCOOP
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
|
TG
Journeyman Posts: 16
From: Chicago, IL
Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted 01-12-2005 02:25 PM
I picked up my new 331 shortblock last yr for $1300(Eagle forged crank, I beams, SRPs, stock 89 mustang block). With off the shelf parts on a low tight susp im running 11.9@114 @3000lbs. im very happy with it, have awesome power at all rpms, and is completely streetable and reliable as my 302 was, as its driven to and from the track. it cant hurt to upgrade ur shortblock 1st then toss a blower on later ull just need to go to a lower comp piston then. id love a supercharger, but the inital purchase and a good tune is mandatory(plus if ur efi ull need PMS a chip or other management) which can all get pretty pricey.
|
indyphil
Gearhead Posts: 3394
From: Senoia, G.A. USA
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 01-13-2005 10:03 AM
Im going the stroker route and agree with above comments. Blowers are great but add a level of complexity espcially if you have a carb. You can run a stroker all day and if you dont tell anyone you can call it a 289!Id love to put a blower on mine long term but funds do not allow at the moment. A blown stroker is awesome but I dont think you need the boost. for fun street action and running 12's or better the stroker is the way to go. build for 10:1 compression ish and if you want boost later you will want to swap pistons and that would be all you would need to do to the shortblock. ------------------
'68 coupe, '66 289 C code
engine, edel 600cfm carb, performer intake, dual exhaust http://www.geocities.com/ottouk_77/68mustang.htm
|
bibbs68
Gearhead Posts: 1732
From: Medina, TN
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 01-13-2005 10:09 AM
So how many run a stoker in their daily driver?
|
Moneymaker
Administrator Posts: 29200
From: Lyons, IL, USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-13-2005 11:25 AM
quote:
Originally posted by bibbs68:
So how many run a stoker in their daily driver?
Well if you really want to know........... ------------------
Alex Denysenko
Co-Administrator and Moderator NHRA/IHRA/SRA member and licensed Superstock driver
NHRA and IHRA SS/LA & SS/MA National Record Holder '00,'01,'02,'03,'04 &'05
First SS/MA in the TENS!
IHRA division 5 Superstock Champion
Fleet of FoMoCo products including 88 ASC McLaren Mustang #28 The Barry of BarrysGrrl Quote #1: "I never met a magazine mechanic I liked."
Quote #2: "Make sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth!"
Quote #3: "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch!"
www.moneymakerracing.com
|
bill haab
Gearhead Posts: 474
From: south bend in.
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 01-13-2005 05:59 PM
HOW MANY RUN STROKERS & SUPERCHARGERS, AND JUST SAY THEY GOT A LITTLE SUPERCHARGER ON ?
|
bibbs68
Gearhead Posts: 1732
From: Medina, TN
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 01-13-2005 06:02 PM
All right! You guys are crazy! LOL! I guess then if you were running a stroker or a supercharger and they got a little supercharger on, how long would it be before they blow?  Sorry. I couldh't resist.
|
bill haab
Gearhead Posts: 474
From: south bend in.
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 01-13-2005 06:10 PM
http://www.liquidaddiction.net/spacemonkey.htm 514 stroker quote:
Originally posted by bibbs68:
All right! You guys are crazy! LOL! I guess then if you were running a stroker or a supercharger and they got a little supercharger on, how long would it be before they blow? Sorry. I couldh't resist.
|
bill haab
Gearhead Posts: 474
From: south bend in.
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 01-13-2005 06:30 PM
Stroker are mean, having both I'd go stroker. But both are a blast.
|
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 22791
From: Reno Nv M&M #1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-13-2005 06:45 PM
Injection is nice but I'd rather be blown. But why a 347 not a 408w stroker ? ------------------
SCOOP
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
|
bibbs68
Gearhead Posts: 1732
From: Medina, TN
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 01-14-2005 09:52 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Fastymz:
But why a 347 not a 408w stroker ?
Isn't the 408 built off of the 351 block?
|
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 22791
From: Reno Nv M&M #1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-14-2005 01:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by bibbs68:
Isn't the 408 built off of the 351 block?
Yup, besides the buying a 351w block the build up will cost about the same. ------------------
SCOOP
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
|
63Kcode
Gearhead Posts: 281
From: Anna Tx
Registered: Dec 2004
|
posted 01-14-2005 04:14 PM
I like my paxton. I takes about 2 hours to go from mild to wild.
|
FSTBK65
Gearhead Posts: 483
From: Salem, Virginia 24153
Registered: May 2004
|
posted 01-18-2005 12:23 PM
Well I just finished putting a paxton on my motor, which is a 302. The power increase is incredible. I like having people look at my car and think its stock until I fire it up and then theyre like "Whoa!" The 302 is ok for now but by the end of the summer im sure my plans will include 347 shortblock. I like the idea of a 408, but I have this paxton under my stock hood now, with 3/4" to spare at the highest point, and I have heard that a 351 is 2 inches taller, which would eliminate the stock hood.
|
bill haab
Gearhead Posts: 474
From: south bend in.
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 01-18-2005 04:17 PM
good, I'm glad that it fit, I wonder why mine would not fit. zoom zoom !
|
FSTBK65
Gearhead Posts: 483
From: Salem, Virginia 24153
Registered: May 2004
|
posted 01-18-2005 05:03 PM
I used the Performer 289 Edelbrock intake. Using the dimensions in Edelbrocks catalog I calculated the carb pad height as 4.125". (Front dim. A=3.5"; B=4.75"; Pad height = A+B/2) I think I remember Bill saying he had the Performer RPM intake, which has a carb pad height of 4.9". The Performer 289 is actually .775" shorter than the Performer RPM intake. .775" is about 3/4 of an inch, which is what I had above the motor.
|
