306 vs. a stroker

sunil6784

Member

Mar 31, 2005

620

0

18

Boston, MA

Jan 6, 2006

#1

• Jan 6, 2006

• #1

I was working on my car till late last night...man i love that car.

Anyways, I am about to get a 302 block, and am debating between a 306 or a 331/347 stroker. My goal is to make about 400 horse at the crank, so about 350 - 375 rwhp. Which one, a 306 or a stroker kit, can *reliably* make this kind of power ? Also, from what I recall reading, 400 is about the limit of a ford 302 block, right ?

 

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.

Nov 8, 2003

2,120

2

59

windsor, Canada

Jan 6, 2006

#2

• Jan 6, 2006

• #2

306 is nothing more than a .030 clean up of the bores, there is no significant power to be gain over the 302..making 375 to the wheels will not easy N/a but the stroker is your best bet, there really is no replacement for displacement.

 

sunil6784

Member

Mar 31, 2005

620

0

18

Boston, MA

Jan 6, 2006

#3

• Jan 6, 2006

• #3

Yea, I should've added that I would like to keep it n/a for now. I would love to get to 375 at the wheels, but looking at everyone's combos, seems hard to do, especialy on a budget...

Btw, this is going to be a long-term project, probably like 2 years. I'd rather do it right the first time, and if waiting longer to save more equals more power, then I can deal with that.

 

M

mackey

Active Member

Jan 25, 2003

1,284

1

38

Beverly, Massachusetts

Jan 6, 2006

#4

• Jan 6, 2006

• #4

347
AFR 185
Edelbrock performer RPM
custom cam
LT headres.

 

Rick 91GT

Mustang Master

Nov 29, 1999

9,692

95

99

PA

Jan 6, 2006

#5

• Jan 6, 2006

• #5

If you stay NA a stroker would be the only way to go to achieve those numbers.

 

srothfuss

Last night I stabbed the same guy 7 times in a row

Oct 17, 2004

1,796

3

0

Woodward Ave.

Jan 6, 2006

#6

• Jan 6, 2006

• #6

306 w/ an S/C

347 N/A

Those are your options. In the end they will both cost roughly the same.

 

Busted07

I need my gorilla to be about an inch longer.

Nov 15, 2005

0

3

0

Jan 6, 2006

#7

• Jan 6, 2006

• #7

Or you could always do a nicely built 306 and squeeze the juice

 

M

murphmaster5

New Member

Oct 2, 2005

115

0

0

PA

Jan 6, 2006

#8

• Jan 6, 2006

• #8

this might sound stupid but ive been trying to figure out what the hell N/A means

 

timewarped1972

Member

Jun 17, 2004

642

0

16

mesa, az

Jan 6, 2006

#9

• Jan 6, 2006

• #9

nominally acceptable.......kidding, they mean naturally aspirated ( no blower, n20 etc)

 

90mustangGT

I felt sorry for girls because

Founding Member

Jan 15, 2002

2,773

17

89

Dallas, GA

Jan 6, 2006

#10

• Jan 6, 2006

• #10

A stroker does cost more to build than a standard rebuild, but when your building power, I think it's worth it. Machining of the blocks is about equal, on a 347 usually the cylinders are notched at the bottoms for the rod. Yes you have to buy another crank and set of rods, but consider having the stock rods prepped, and the cranked turned. Of course your buying pistons anyways. What really seems to bump the cost is the extra cost of another flywheel and balancer. Those extra cubes though, open a lot of doors.

 

T

tx2000gt

New Member

May 27, 2005

222

0

0

Jan 6, 2006

#11

• Jan 6, 2006

• #11

I'd personally go for a 331...less likely for problems.

 

Grn92LX

Fidanza Man!

Founding Member

Jan 14, 2001

6,819

64

129

New York

Jan 7, 2006

#12

• Jan 7, 2006

• #12

The numbers you want can easily be done with a 302-306 with a good piston and some compression. Those same numbers are cake walk for a 331/347. If you're going to build a stroker, common sense says use the 347 since its the ame price as a 331 assembly. You won't have problems unless its built by a blind monkey. I know I don't have any problems with my 347

 

S

superhuaman

New Member

Nov 8, 2004

907

0

0

Harrisburg, PA

Jan 7, 2006

#13

• Jan 7, 2006

• #13

I heard somewhere that with a stroker motor, the pistons travel further with each stroke, so this somehow shortens the life of the engine. Like a 306 would last 100k miles and a 347 would last 50k or something like that. Is this true?

 

T

tylerrocks

New Member

Oct 13, 2005

514

0

0

Big Spring, TX

Jan 7, 2006

#14

• Jan 7, 2006

• #14

There is greater lateral pressure from the pistons to the cylinder walls due to the .25 or .4 inch increase in stroke of the crank. The pistons are traveling farther down the hole, the farther they go down the more horizontal the rod will have to be @ BDC in order to get them to go back up again... get it? it all equates to greater cylinder wear.

Also the is an issue with some 347 kits that use 5.4 inch rods in which the wrist pin hole in the cylinder will intersect with the oil ring groove. This can cause a less desireable oil seal and can actually burn a little oil.

 

8

89white50

Member

Nov 16, 2004

440

1

18

central MA

Jan 7, 2006

#15

• Jan 7, 2006

• #15

a 331/347 makes t350-400 at the wheels easy set up correctly. The oil issues are gone with the 347's, but if you're using a stock block, you should stay with a 331, reason being youll get use to that power and want to slap on a little blower, which will set you well over 500 at the wheels with a 347.

 

sunil6784

Member

Mar 31, 2005

620

0

18

Boston, MA

Jan 8, 2006

#16

• Jan 8, 2006

• #16

thanks for the info guys, i've been leaning towards a 331....and like 89white50, it'll be a slow project as well. I'm sure I'll be on here quite a bit with questions.





Don't worry, I'll search first :SNSign: