Pros and Cons of a 393 stroker

I thought they resolved the issue with the 347 years ago. I think people are running safely past 10k miles with no oil issues......

Cwalk said:

I thought they resolved the issue with the 347 years ago. I think people are running safely past 10k miles with no oil issues......

Click to expand...

this is what I have read and an engine builder also told me.

86bluecobra said:

this is what I have read and an engine builder also told me.

Click to expand...

I thought they resolved that issue a long time ago. But I could be wrong. I just havent heard people complain about it in a while.

the ringland issue on the 347 is well past resolved from what i have been told

As with any engine build it is all in the details. Some people can screw up anything. I have seen some old school stroker motors with the wrist pin/oil ring land intersection "problem" not burn an ounce of oil. I have seen the newer design without the intersection burn oil all day.
Sometimes the problem is the indian not the arrow.

Just keep the pin out of the oil ring and you have nothing to worry about for performance side of things.

Steeper ratios do play a role in loss of power (at a certain point, which you will not see) and piston wear (typically more piston speed). Again you won't need to worry...

The 'problems' can occur, but you will not have to worry about it...

302RollinHard said:

As with any engine build it is all in the details. Some people can screw up anything. I have seen some old school stroker motors with the wrist pin/oil ring land intersection "problem" not burn an ounce of oil. I have seen the newer design without the intersection burn oil all day.
Sometimes the problem is the indian not the arrow.

Click to expand...

Correct!

The pin through the oil ring has ZERO effect on reliability Like with anything, as long as its done correctly.

Take a 100,000 mile piston (w/ oil ring intersection) and one without. Driven the same...

I promise you the one with the oil ring intersection will have a greater chance of blowby...

Just take a look at the piston...pretty simple really.

Rod ratio doesn't have to much to do with anything for most enthusiast. It is part of engineering and can not be ignored.

The 331 for example has an offset wrist pin to improve the rod ratio. They wouldn't design it that way if there was not a reason.

In my opinion it is literally unethical to prescribe to someone the 'longer rod' with a wrist pin that goes up into the oil ring land area of the piston unless they plan to race it. The shorter rod with the same cubes would be a better fit for a true street car.


From CHP referring to 331's and 347's.
:
Why a 331 instead of a 347? CHP's Chris Huff says the company originally developed the 331 in response to the early 347's reputation for consuming oil and wearing out prematurely--fine for racing but not so great for the street. Early on, the long rod used with the 347 mounted high up on the piston, requiring a wrist-pin hole that protruded into the oil-ring lands. These early pistons were also race-only, with more piston to-wall clearance than typically used on the street. Although CHP has improved the street 347's shortcomings by designing its own piston with off-set wrist-pin mounting and a slightly shorter rod, which doesn't need the wrist-pin holes in the oil-ring lands, it still offers the 331 for builders who continue to be gun-shy of the 347. According to Huff, you'll get great oil control and 100,000 miles of service from either of the CHP 331 or 347 street engines.

Go to the web site ( s b f tech . com ). It has some of the best tech Ive found. Go the tab that is labled strokers/strokers/strokers. Every pro-con of every combo you can think of is there. There is an old saying ( you dont know what you dont know )

The Pros: You pass everything on the road...
The Cons: .. except for the gas stations.

Biggeley said:

The Pros: You pass everything on the road...
The Cons: .. except for the gas stations.

Click to expand...