|
Author
|
Topic: 393 or 408???
|
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 692
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-18-2005 03:14 AM
   
Aside from a couple of cubes what are the big advantages and disadvantages of these two strokers. At first glance I would say the 393 has the advantage of price seeing as it uses stock style rods and pistons. But if your going to H beams and forged pistons any way that should cancel the price advantage. Any other things that should be considered? Still haven't decided weather to do a 302 stroker of a 351 stroker in my wagon. I know the advantages of the 302 over the 351 stroker in my situation, but I don't know much about the 351 strokers. B-loose
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 19583
From: Reno Nv USA MEM#1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-18-2005 03:31 AM
I've read these more then a few times. I do wish I would have gone with a 393w. But I just didn't have the money to get there. Dang more power would have been nice.  https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/002169.html https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/005701.html https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/005777.html https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/006616.html https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/007044.html ------------------
SCOOP
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
IP: Logged |
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 692
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-19-2005 07:31 AM
Man, I had to read through all of those to get to what I wanted  . The last thread was pretty much what I was looking for. If using stock 5.0L pistons and stock 351W rods the 393 is cheaper, by a good amount I would guess. Other than that no real advantage to it. Now the question is, how much HP and RPM are a set of stock 351W rods good for? I'm sort of planning for the W to be more mild than my 289 but then again I'd rather build a strong foundation so I can morph it into anything I want later. Any ideas about a nodular crank and stock W rods limitations? B-loose
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 19583
From: Reno Nv USA MEM#1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-19-2005 12:38 PM
The guy that built my motor told me the stock rods and crank are good to 500hp and 6000rpm.He did recomend using all ARP bolts which I did. They do add up too $$$.
I built my motor on the mild side too. Some times I wish I would gone alittle more wild with it.------------------
SCOOP
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 19583
From: Reno Nv USA MEM#1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-19-2005 02:07 PM
Here are the numbers from my build up. These are from a desk top dyno program.This is with 10-1 compression/RPM heads and intake,600vs holley/comp 270h cam etc. rpm hp trq
2000 147 385
2500 186 392
3000 230 402
3500 275 413
4000 316 415
4500 353 411
5000 369 388
5500 370 353
6000 351 308
6500 319 253 ------------------
SCOOP
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics [This message has been edited by Fastymz (edited 01-19-2005).]
IP: Logged |
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 692
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-19-2005 09:11 PM
If I decide to stay mild the 393 may be the way to go then. But I'm thinking I'd like to build it to take 6500 even if I plan originally to stay below that. I may just bite the bullit and go with the forged crank and H beam rods. Thanks,
B-loose
IP: Logged |
steve'66
Gearhead Posts: 9104
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 01-19-2005 10:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Bloose:
If I decide to stay mild the 393 may be the way to go then. But I'm thinking I'd like to build it to take 6500 even if I plan originally to stay below that. I may just bite the bullit and go with the forged crank and H beam rods. Thanks,
B-loose
Then you might as well go to 408 inches. SteveW
IP: Logged |
mustangboy
Gearhead Posts: 833
From: Ont, Canada
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 01-20-2005 12:20 AM
The nice thing about building a stroker is you don't need to rev it to the moon because they are so torquey.I'm not sure what your plans are for the engine but if your really gonna rev that stroker you will need to feed it so be prepared to spend big bucks on heads,intake,carb headers etc.------------------
1968 mustang j-code sprint.13.69@101 306cu.in, stock ported heads,weiand exellerator,650 holley DP,hedman hedders,comp 292 Magnum cam,4-speed,8 inch 4.11 detroit locker http://mustangsandmore.50megs.com/MembersPics/mustangboy.html
IP: Logged |
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 692
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-20-2005 02:44 AM
I don't have a clear plan yet. Mostly I'm contemplating at the moment. If I do build it to withstand some RPM I will likely go the 408 route. If I decide to keep the RPM (and Budget) down I'll likely do the 393 deal. A big part of the reason that I am considering a stroker is to stress the motor less than I would have to with a small displacement motor. I'd like to keep it street friendly. Only problem is I know how it goes, mild is good for a while and then you get the bug. I am hoping the stroker can put out some good power without a huge cam and will keep me content. I've been planning on aluminum heads all along though I may go with Trick Flows over AFR's this time. Don't know that for sure yet because I really like my AFR's, but I could save some money going with something else. For now it's all just the planning and thinking stage. Trying to look at the pluses and minuses, a few what if's, and lots of arm chair driving of different setups and when the time comes I'll have a plan in my head and go with it. Thanks,
B-loose
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
