stroker kits

90lxcoupe said:

I read a couple good articles after this thread on rod to stroke ratio.

Click to expand...

You were right... that was a very good article. It is right in line with several discussions I've had with CP when they were putting together the plan for my custom pistons. See, most people get stuck on the rod:stroke ratio and side-loading when, at least to me, the most pertinent effect is the effect that increasing the stroke has on the compression height of the piston. This isn't a big deal with the n/a motors, but it's a huge deal with the very high powered boosted motors.

Jog my memory...? I can't think of any off the top of my head. I could probably guess a couple, but I'd rather hear what you have to say first.

Click to expand...

No.. it was my memory that needed jogging. I didn't realize that this discussion happened 4 years ago.

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/713445-331-347-stroker-2.html

I dug this old thread up while looking for it, too: http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/719569-302-stroker-information.html

I guess he liked the post I was thinking about.

I always wondered about long-rods vs. short rods... When I read this, I dismissed the necessity of long-rods in street motors:

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/770961-so-you-think-long-rod-motors-way-go-huh.html

you guys go on on an on about no replacement for displacement , 331/ 347 strokers , why dont you just go with a 351W an call it a day , give lrs a call they will sent you a complete 351W short block for a grand , sounds like a better deal to me. sorry just my opinion

Why stop there? Why not go with a stroked/bored 460?

id say the same thing , but considering the weight of a big block compared to a small block , you'd need stiffer springs in the front an everything else , id go with a 351 , knowing everything but the intake an headers will swap over from a 302 , but thats just me

Has anyone here ever seen a 351w fit under a stock hood with efi? I've got one on a stand I'd love to use, But I don't want to lose my stock hood. I've got some dropped motor mounts, but still don't think that would do it.

SSeater said:

Has anyone here ever seen a 351w fit under a stock hood with efi? I've got one on a stand I'd love to use, But I don't want to lose my stock hood. I've got some dropped motor mounts, but still don't think that would do it.

Click to expand...

I read a couple of guys did it over on the Corral. I don't know how they did it though.

well if you can fit a 5.4 mod motor under a stock height hood , it should be able to be done with a 351w , id love to put a 351w in my mustang but im having a hard enough time with the 302 i have , but that's a different thread

SSeater said:

Has anyone here ever seen a 351w fit under a stock hood with efi? I've got one on a stand I'd love to use, But I don't want to lose my stock hood. I've got some dropped motor mounts, but still don't think that would do it.

Click to expand...

its doable with the right intake, box intakes are a no, but i THINK the normal tfs-r works w/o a spacer, and if you have the right combo to need it, the carb-style super vic works. theres also k-member spacers now, not really too sure how well they work.

as to the 331/347 longevity thing, i would bet the biggest difference is the power potential difference. a 347 will make block splitting power a bit easier than a 331, add to it that the 347 is more "common" nowadays, and youll hear a lot more about broken 347's over 331's.

FastDriver said:

You were right... that was a very good article. It is right in line with several discussions I've had with CP when they were putting together the plan for my custom pistons. See, most people get stuck on the rod:stroke ratio and side-loading when, at least to me, the most pertinent effect is the effect that increasing the stroke has on the compression height of the piston. This isn't a big deal with the n/a motors, but it's a huge deal with the very high powered boosted motors.



No.. it was my memory that needed jogging. I didn't realize that this discussion happened 4 years ago.

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/713445-331-347-stroker-2.html

I dug this old thread up while looking for it, too: http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/719569-302-stroker-information.html

I guess he liked the post I was thinking about.

I always wondered about long-rods vs. short rods... When I read this, I dismissed the necessity of long-rods in street motors:

http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/770961-so-you-think-long-rod-motors-way-go-huh.html

Click to expand...

Haha, compression height and dished pistons in boosted applications is actually exactly what I was guessing you'd point out. I'd say it's a valid subject, but I think the thermal properties and considerations in piston design might be a little beyond my knowledge base.

I forgot all about those rod length discussions we had back in '08! That's back in the day.

jhr302 said:

you guys go on on an on about no replacement for displacement , 331/ 347 strokers , why dont you just go with a 351W an call it a day , give lrs a call they will sent you a complete 351W short block for a grand , sounds like a better deal to me. sorry just my opinion

Click to expand...

Because a well built 347 is WAY better than a cast piston 351 any day of the week. 408 vs 347 is a no brainer, but the 347 vs 351 debate is a dead horse that's been beat over and over. The 351 block is stronger, but it's a moot point with those junk cast pistons. Also, not only is the weight of the 351 greater, but the 351's rotating assembly is heavier, making it (theoretically) slower to accelerate, all else equal.

SSeater said:

Has anyone here ever seen a 351w fit under a stock hood with efi? I've got one on a stand I'd love to use, But I don't want to lose my stock hood. I've got some dropped motor mounts, but still don't think that would do it.

Click to expand...

There are a bunch of tricks to make it happen. Drop motor mounts, tubular K member, milled intake manifold, etc.