strokers anyone?

[kb6677]

In no particualar order..................
-A stroked 5.0 makes enough pwr in my opinion when done correctly to justify the build. We are on that thought process as the recipiant of the 331 does not have enought room for a 351 based anything.....
-I am a bit surprised at some of the replys to this but I respect people's opinion.
-CAM,CAM,CAM-I will not reach the hp and tq #'s I had hoped for because of the cam we are using in this application. We HAD to make pwr-1800-4800 NOT 2500-6500.
-Price has blown me a way on this build- approx. $6300 in parts and the machine shop-NO labor on assembly/dis. We did start with a blank block which meant I had to buy EVERYTHING including fuel rails, reg. etc..........
-IF the planets line up the engine and rig will be on a chassis dyno in late April and I will post a photo of the results the day I get back this time-still have not found the sheet on the white 392-a buddy wants me to take it back the the c.dyno with 35s on it instead of the 40s.............

 

[cesco]

I just did a stroker in my car and ended up with stupid money in by the time I was done with everything to make it run properly. I tried to tune it myself with a programmable computer but ended up taking that system off and having a chip burnt for it. I am happy with the dyno numbers, I have 360hp 340tq at the wheels and when the torque converter decides to lock up once in while I will gain around 30hp more.. and it was easier to put the stroker motor in than to make extra room for the 351 and everything else that would go along with it.

now I have another motor waiting to go in the bronco and it is a stock crank with longer rods and shorter pistons bored .030 over with a cam that is supposed to be 1700-5500rpm range, the machine shop is telling me that I should have around 300-350hp 325-375tq at the flywheel. I am not sure about his numbers but hopefully by may of this year I will be able to find out for sure.
just my .02

 

[357Bronco]

I dont understand?

About once a month the " 408C.....no such thing as a 400M.......wheezers suck.........351M's suck.......Dark Side.......only canted valve motors make power........I'd rather just stroke a real big block, and go way over 500CID......C heads flow more then an inline valve W head ever thought of......" thread comes up, and I thought this is where you were going;D ....see you again the end of March;D

 

[tasker]

302 2v baby! the only way to fly!

 

[justinoshea]

go all the way and do a 460 based 806ci stroker. then you can put some cool 13.2L badges on your bronco.

 

[Broncobowsher]

Cam profile plays a major role in this also.

Yes, it takes more cam on the 330" engine to make the same peak numbers as the 351 has. The 351 was much easier to get the numbers and at a much better RPM. Swap cams between the two engines and the 351 would make way more power (on paper and the dyno). Cam them the same, the 351 would still beat the 330.

In the 60's the small block as we know it started with less then 3" of stroke. By the late 60's Ford needed more cubes to keep up with the others. Ford figured the best they could get out of the small block was a 3" stroke. So they got it in '68. Then they needed more. Knowing the small block was not up to it, they beefed everything needed to sufvive and came out with the 351W block. Bigger bearings, bigger rods, bigger bolts and all they really needed to do was raise the deck height a little. Presto, the best 302 stroker backed by (at the times nearly unlimited pockets) corporate background. You have teh 351W.

 

[bax]

About once a month the " 408C.....no such thing as a 400M.......wheezers suck.........351M's suck.......Dark Side.......only canted valve motors make power........I'd rather just stroke a real big block, and go way over 500CID......C heads flow more then an inline valve W head ever thought of......" thread comes up, and I thought this is where you were going;D ....see you again the end of March;D

Oh now I get it. You should be proud of me. Mad touched on it and I did not run with it. The end of March does sound promising. "Et tu, Brute?"

 

[Viperwolf1]

Yes, it takes more cam on the 330" engine to make the same peak numbers as the 351 has. The 351 was much easier to get the numbers and at a much better RPM. Swap cams between the two engines and the 351 would make way more power (on paper and the dyno). Cam them the same, the 351 would still beat the 330.

In the 60's the small block as we know it started with less then 3" of stroke. By the late 60's Ford needed more cubes to keep up with the others. Ford figured the best they could get out of the small block was a 3" stroke. So they got it in '68. Then they needed more. Knowing the small block was not up to it, they beefed everything needed to sufvive and came out with the 351W block. Bigger bearings, bigger rods, bigger bolts and all they really needed to do was raise the deck height a little. Presto, the best 302 stroker backed by (at the times nearly unlimited pockets) corporate background. You have teh 351W.

It's a shame they didn't put more engineering into the head design back then. Oh wait, they did...351C.

 

[bax]

Again! I did not start it.

 

[bmc69]

In the late 60's the Cleveland as we know it started with 3.5" of stroke. By the early 70s Ford needed more cubes to keep up with the others. Ford figured the best they could get out of the small block was a 3.5" stroke. Then they needed more. Knowing the small block was not up to it, they beefed everything needed to sufvive and came out with the 400 block. Bigger bearings, bigger rods, and all they really needed to do was raise the deck height a little. Presto, the best 400 backed by (at the times nearly unlimited pockets) corporate background.

Great synopisis..thanks! ;D

 

[KyleQ]

I'm looking at building a 331 for the simple fact that it will fit like stock and be a little different the 90% of all the rigs out there. 351 seems nice, but I don't want to deal with making it fit without a body lift.

 

[FordFanStan]

351 seems nice, but I don't want to deal with making it fit without a body lift.

Is this the only issue with a 351/408 install; the deck height casuing the intake and topend to be too tall and clearance interference? Is it only interference with the hood or possibly the firewall too or?? TIA, FFS

 

[av bronco]

I had no issues with the firewall with my 351 install, I have a cowl hood so the hight isnt a issue ether.