|
Author
|
Topic: 351C : Worth stroking to 377 cubes?
|
'69Stang
Gearhead Posts: 205
From: Detroit, MI USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-18-2002 10:39 AM
   
Hi, new to the board and I have a 351C question: I have a 4 bolt 351C that I am going to start building, primarily for the street and some strip, and have decided on these parts for the build up: 850 Holley DP, Blue Thunder intake, 4-v ported heads with 315 CFM @ .600 lift on the intake and 210 CFM exhaust flow, 10.5:1, solid roller cam with 110 lobe seperation and 234/236 duration @ .050 with .588 lift.My question is whether or not it is worth stroking this set up to 377 inches? Is there a dramatic shift in performance to make the extra $1200-1500 worth it? Or will it be too much torque for the street anyway? I'm impressed with the level of knowledge on this board, particularly regarding Clevelands, and so I'm really interested to hear some of your replies. Any comments or recommendations regarding any of the build-up components are welcome, good or bad! Thanks. ------------------
'69 Mustang Fastback, 302, Holley 600 DP, Edelbrock RPM, GT-40 heads (54cc's), 9.7:1, headers, UD pulley, windage tray, Top Loader, 3.89 9" rear
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-18-2002 10:50 AM
Well, if you plan on using the 4 speed, in stock stroke form it will be too much for street tires to handle. But, if you are going to spend the money to stroke it, why not go to a 393? If I was to build another race motor using some new parts, thats what I would build. Also, those big ports dont like wide lobe seperations, it doesnt allow for enuff velocity in the port (at least in my opinion).And after my experiances with solid rollers in my clevelands, I'm not sold on them anymore either. My current flat tappet cam runs just as fast as my solid roller did and it cost a whole bunch less money.
IP: Logged |
'69Stang
Gearhead Posts: 205
From: Detroit, MI USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-18-2002 02:27 PM
A couple of reasons for not going with the 393: 1. that I really don't want to chisel away at the block to accomadate the extra stroke, something about taking material off of the block just strikes me as unbeneficial...2. that the 393 stroke will compromise the piston height to the point that it will "rock" the piston in the bore causing loss of effective compression, oil blow-buy, and pre-mature wear. Also, it seems that the dimensions and ros-stroke would effect the internal acceleration of the engine negatively. I'm probably just being paranoid, but it would be nice to hear from some people that have owned a stroker.kid vishus:do you currently run a Cleveland? If you do what is your set up, and are you happy with it?
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-18-2002 02:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by '69Stang:
kid vishus:do you currently run a Cleveland? If you do what is your set up, and are you happy with it?
Yes I do. I drag race a 69 fastback. It has ported open chambered 4v heads, I dont have the flow figures handy, but the intake is around 310 @ .600, and the exhuast is somewehre around 225 @.700. 11.5-1 compression, factory rods that have beeen prepped, factory crank, 2 bolt main block. Hooley strip dominator intake, BG 926 cfm alcohol carb, full MSD ignition, Crower solid cam, 266 int, 277 exh @ .050, 107 LSA, 103 centerline. Hooker super comp headers. I shift it at 7500. It has gone a best of 9.97 @ 132 mph. My car weighs 2750 w/me in it. So, basically, yes, I am happy with it, it runs extremely hard for "bolt-on" parts. And, this motor had some pretty serious internal problems when it ran the 9 second pass. I'm not positive the block will have to be clearanced for the extra stroke. Even if it did, I wouldnt have a problem grinding away on the block. And depending on what rod length you used, a 377 could have a worse rod/stroke ratio, or even a shorter piston then the 393. Also, when my motor was on gas, it worked better with an out of the box 950HP than it did with an 850 dp. And actually, a race 750 dp ran just as fast as my 850 did, but both were substantially slower than the 950HP.
IP: Logged |
'69Stang
Gearhead Posts: 205
From: Detroit, MI USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-18-2002 04:40 PM
9.97...wow. That's moving. Tha's especially impressive considering it is basically factory parts. I guess stroking for a mainly street machine isn't probably necessary. Do you think the roller cam is too small at 110 lobe seperation and 234/236 duration @ .050 with .588 lift? And do you think that a 950HP carb would be too big for my set up? Stroke it?------------------
'69 Mustang Fastback, 302, Holley 600 DP, Edelbrock RPM, GT-40 heads (54cc's), 9.7:1, headers, UD pulley, windage tray, Top Loader, 3.89 9" rear
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-18-2002 05:13 PM
I had a 10.4-1 2v headed motor that had a solid cam in it I raced in 2000. It picked up with the 950 over the 750. The 950 is basically a 750 body on the 850 baseplate from holley. And no, I dont htink it would be too big. I also had a 9.5-1 4v motor with a hydro cam in my '70 street car, it too picked up when I bolted the 950 on it, and it was shifted at 6200 rpm. When I ran the 850, I could never get the plugs to color, and I tried. I fattned it up so much the car slowwed down 2 tenths, and still no color. For a street car, that cam would prolly work pretty good although I'm not sure how that 110 LSA will affect it. The last street motor I pout together was the 2v motor I ended up having to use in the racecar after my good motor had some "internal malfunctions". The 2v motor I built for the street had a solid cam that was 256, 266 @ .050 with a 106 LSA. And it idled fairly rough. But that motor also ran 10.70's in my racer with the alcohol carb on it. As for the 9.97 pass. That was using a motor that had pistons that were undersized for the holes (too small), and the motor also had 2 of the main webs cracked , (that was part of the damage from shearing the pin off the fron of a roller cam), which I found out after I got it out of the car.(not that the pin was broke, but that the mains were cracked) [This message has been edited by kid vishus (edited 01-18-2002).]
IP: Logged |
'69Stang
Gearhead Posts: 205
From: Detroit, MI USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-18-2002 10:00 PM
It's amazing that you even ran a 9.97 with those undersized pistons, but that is a healthy cam. Your '69 seems like a full tilt race car, is it tubbed and all? What gears are you running?Hmmmm, I really don't want a radical idle but having a tighter LSA does make sense. My current 302 has a 107 LSA and it is very torquey for a little 5.0, but the idle is a tad rough. I seem to think that this roller cam I have might be a little on the small side for duration, too. Don't know. Chime in guys! Any Cleveland stroker fans out there? ------------------
'69 Mustang Fastback, 302, Holley 600 DP, Edelbrock RPM, GT-40 heads (54cc's), 9.7:1, headers, UD pulley, windage tray, Top Loader, 3.89 9" rear
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-18-2002 10:10 PM
Yep, it's a full blown racecar. You can see some pics of it here:http://www.geocities.com/slariviere/KidV.html I'm currently running a 4.86 gear. I had a 5.00 in it till about mid season when I broke 3 teeth on the pinion gear. If you already have that cam, I would use it. the tigheter LSA should smooth out the idle quality some, but the duration figures seem a bit mild to me (but remember, I like to really zing my motors [see 8000 rpm burnouts in high gear]) 
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 1341
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-19-2002 09:23 AM
I have a 372 stroker.
I would build a 393 if they had the cheap cranks when I built my motor.
Any piston pin height over 1.2 or so is OK.
I do not think you would have to clearence the block any with the 3.85 stroke crank.
If you can afford it, go for it.
IP: Logged |
'69Stang
Gearhead Posts: 205
From: Detroit, MI USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-19-2002 11:30 AM
kid Vishus: Your cars are beautiful. No car looks better than a '69 Fastback pulling its front wheels! Awesome.
I might just run with this cam I have, though I spoke with the cam grinder and he was willing to exchange it. If I go with a stroker I probably would go with a bigger cam and tighter LSA.Mpcoluv: Do you like your 372" Cleveland, is it noticably better that a reguar 351C? What is your current setup - Carb, intake, heads, cam, etc. ------------------
'69 Mustang Fastback, 302, Holley 600 DP, Edelbrock RPM, GT-40 heads (54cc's), 9.7:1, headers, UD pulley, windage tray, Top Loader, 3.89 9" rear
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-19-2002 12:28 PM
Thanks It will really stand up without the wheelie bars on it. But, that will all change this year, I really think I'm gonna try using my powerglide again to tame down the launch and maybe make the car even more consistent. If the cam grinder is willing to exchange it, you might want to talk with him and find out what he thinks. The 4v C is completely different from mos engines due to the ports being too big (but you already knew that)and therefore takes a little different thinking for cam grinds. I tried that solid comp cam (256, 266 @ .050 with 106 LSA) this yr retarded 2 degrees, it ran terrible. Wouldnt start very good, wouldnt idle under 1400 (used to idle at 1000) wasnt very consistent, it just ran terrible. Pulled itout, put that solid Crower cam in, and it ran great.
IP: Logged |
DRAGSTANG351
Journeyman Posts: 67
From: FLORIDA
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-19-2002 02:55 PM
kid vishus, your car looks sweet pulling the wheels up, i only wish mine could do that, maybe someday
what crower cam did you go with? my pistons are .030 trw flatops 10.7.1 w/ block 0 decked and 4v heads shaved .005 i should be around 11.1 on compression, i have a solid comp cam in now 270/276 648/641- 106, in a post i had you guy's said i didn't have the compression for that cam, what crower cam would you recommend for me to get? i want to run the juice in the future 150-200hp shot, i haven't really run it hard yet only made 4 runs and shifted @7400rpm on my best run so far
7.98 @ 90.30 in the 1/8 which is weak but not bad considering car weighs 3,300 w/ driver and 10" converter stalling @ 2500 rpm leaving the line and 4.10 gears, i'm getting a 8' converter and 4.88 gears and new TFC intake, my torker is holding me back along with the port plates, i'm going to take my heads off and weld in the floors and polish the combustion chambers and work on the exhaust ports, i have read your post on porting the heads and seen your cars, you definately can make a cleveland run no doubt
so a cam recommendation would be great. thanks
kelly
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 1341
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-20-2002 09:24 AM
quote:
Originally posted by '69Stang:
Mpcoluv: Do you like your 372" Cleveland, is it noticably better that a reguar 351C? What is your current setup - Carb, intake, heads, cam, etc.
I like it. I am still sorting out the rest of the car right now. (clutch linkage woes at the moment)
It has 10.4:1 compression, ported 4V heads with Milodon Megaflow valves (never run factory Ford valves), A custom Isky cam 224/232 @ .050 with .545/.565 lift and 108 LC. BTW the 108LC makes this seeming small cam fairly lopey. I am borrowing Dan Jones Strip Dominator at the moment, and using a Predator carb.
I highly reccomend the predator and strip dominotor for low end boost.
I hope to have it on a chassis dyno in a few weeks.
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-20-2002 09:50 AM
Kelly, (dragstang)If you dont mind twisting the motor, that cam would be fine, although it could probalby stand to be advanced 4 degrees. And if you were wanting to buy a different cam, I owuldnt go very much smaller. I have run some pretty big cams without much compression, and then put them on alcohol too and had it work fine. My Crower cam came from their garage sale, it is a flat tappet with 266 in, 277 exh @ .050, .628,.625 lift, 107 lsa with a 103 centerline. My motor has 11.5-1 compression. I ran a solid roller with 10.4-1 compression, and the roller was 264/272 with .650 lift on both, but I did advance it 4 degrees. That convertor is realing holding you back. My granada, running a 5.00 gear, a custom 8" convertor, and weighing 3500 lbs, ran 6.90's.
I also got down to 7.30's in that same car using a torker intake, so it's not that bad of an intake.
IP: Logged |
'69Stang
Gearhead Posts: 205
From: Detroit, MI USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-22-2002 01:31 PM
Kid Vishus: The cams that you have run don't seem streetable.....is that true? Are they real window rattlers?
IP: Logged |
rd400d
Journeyman Posts: 7
From:
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-22-2002 04:54 PM
nice to see some cleveland fans out there. My father's best run is a 8.70 at 150 in a dragster. We use pretty much stock parts, iron 4v open heads, I believe it is .30 over (357) edel. torker intake. the cam is relatively small.580i-.600 ex and 108c herbert grind I believe. I know it is somewhere around there. i know we only run 1 set of the port plates just don't which ones. He built this when i was around 14 and wasn't into building motors so i missed alot. But we use ron's f.t. for alky injection and it runs pretty good for what it is.
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-22-2002 10:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by '69Stang:
Kid Vishus: The cams that you have run don't seem streetable.....is that true? Are they real window rattlers?
That depends on your version of streetable. To me, I dont mind if it idles at 1000 rpm in gear.  You also need to know that my version of "streetable" at one time included a 4800 rpm 8" convertor and a 4.71 gear. But that has changed, now its only a 4.11 gear, (and a trans with a 'brake in it)
IP: Logged |
'69Stang
Gearhead Posts: 205
From: Detroit, MI USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 01-23-2002 06:05 PM
I guess by streetable I mean that it pulls some vacuum - like 12", and that the engine doesn't seem like it is going to stall every three seconds and shake the fenders off the car  However, since I have a 4 speed I don't mind a choppy, rough 1000 RPM idle. I just can't remember being around an engine cammed with 260 to 270ish duration. I guess one of my tests for streetable is could I hand the keys to my wife and let her go to the store with the car............
IP: Logged | |
Mustangsandmore Forums
