Cuda416
Well-Known Member
All fair but I am talking specifically about that single change from a theoretical standpoint. Obviously there would be different parts involved with a bigger piston etc, but on paper, what would that 1.3 sq/in add.
Builders: Square engine, Over Square, or Under Square for you?
- Thread starter 318willrun
- Start date
-
All fair but I am talking specifically about that single change from a theoretical standpoint. Obviously there would be different parts involved with a bigger piston etc, but on paper, what would that 1.3 sq/in add.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
Thanks, Tom! I was under the impression all the small blocks were the same. I knew what ther Cleveland was, because I have one.
And a 400/351M is 10.297 got 4 different block heights to choose from, to put under a set of Cleveland heads.
I wasn't talking about a class with rules, just having power at your disposal
If you look at torque differences between 273/318/340 350/361/383/400 383/413/426/440 displacement was done through Bore size, kind of show what's being added.
But it you look at the 4" bores displacements 289,302,351w,m,c and 400 or 302,327 and 350 or even our 360 torque difference is mainly stroke, or engines of similar displacements but vastly different bore stroke ratios for a certain performance (efficiency level) torque to cid is also generally similar.
Why even answer him ?
Who the f do you think you are dude?
Some of the best Ford guys I know, some even restore them, can't agree on what's a big block or small block Ford
Us mopar guys never have that issue....
The 351W is 9.5. The 221-302 are all 9.2. That's what messed with me.
What is the perfect rod ratio? How is/was it achieved?
Yup. I've told a few before why they are small blocks and it goes in one ear and out the other. They'll have none of it. It's like you're tellin um they have a little dick. lolSome of the best Ford guys I know, some even restore them, can't agree on what's a big block or small block Ford
Whatever you got.
Ratio or angle ?
The small block mopars have some of the best rod ratio compared to the other brands. Must be a place a builder would love it to be.
Also, at what point does the stroke shove the piston into the cylinder wall instead of up the wall?
Best "for what"? I think that's splittin hairs. Short rods are good if you want piston speed up. Long rods are good if you want piston speed down. It all depends on what you're doin.
You won't reach that point, because nobody was stupid enough to design an engine like that.
I had one of the best engine builders I ever knew, back in my late teens/early twenties, warn me on creating a "shove" into the wall. Now we see massive stroker kits
but builders will have their preference, and they'll speak to it
I can see his concern, but I don't think these engineers who design this stuff are that dumb. Look at the Chevy small block 400. 1.48:1 ratio. They run fine.
Absolutely, just like anything else.but builders will have their preference, and they'll speak to it
I would guess for any given bore size and rpm ain't really a factor like 9-12 thousands rpms is no big deal I'm sure there's will be a point were the increase frictional hp loss will cost more than any displacement of air gain through stroke where that is?
I remember an 413/426 Max Wedge super stock racer said Chrysler found 92% Bore stroke ratio to be the ideal power/friction compromise, that was over 30 years ago I read that and based on IDK
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
but builders will have their preference, and they'll speak to it
Oils have gotten way better. So has bore geometry and surface finish.
Pistons today will take more side loading before friction goes too crazy.
-
