Engine SwapEverything about swapping an engine into your Third Gen.....be it V6, V8, LTX/LSX, crate engine, etc. Pictures, questions, answers, and work logs.
Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!
I am wanting to build a 334 stroker using my factory 305. My dad works at Scoggin Dickey and onen of the guys there gave him a magazine article about building this pretty powerful, yet economical engine. The specs we have are as follows:
305 block
400 sbc crank
vortec 12558060 heads
vortec manifold
5.7" push rods
kb 9.6:1 flat top pistons
I can't remember the specs on the cam
0.030 bore
The machine shop will mill the journals and the crank to fit each other. Also, they have to shave the surface where the heads bolt to the block.
According to the magazine article, this should produce about 310 hp at the flywheel, and about 260-270 hp at the wheels, all the while getting 20+mpg. Being a stroker motor, this would produce a bundle of torque also.
This sounds very good to me, and would be even better with the ported plenum from corvetteplenum.com and a set of slp runners added after the car is finished.
I would be interested to see if anyone has this combo, and what they think of it. One last thing, I searched this motor on yahoo, and found a site on car domain I believe where a guy built this combo, and his time slip showed a 13.98 @ 98mph.
...especially if you already have a 350TPI motor... Building a 334 would be totally backwards...
but yes, a few have built it, one guy with a TPI motor, and has 13.35 on a time slip. His name is 335TPI...something... and a few others. Most, if given the chance to do it again, would do a 383..
The only justification I have heard for this combo is in strict emissions inspection areas where they put you through the ringer for non-stock modifications. A 334 done properly will look completely stock with matching casting #'s to boot.
But, the #1 "strict emissions inspection area" is Kalifornia, and they have a motor change process that allows you to put other/larger engines in your car. A TPI 350 will easily pass through that process. Get that done, get the motor change sticker, then put in the 383 - they won't be any the wiser.
Of course, a 383 done right will look exactly like a 350 TPI. . .
cool motor and ive talked to a few that say they love the rev caracteristics from what ive heard this little monster has a lot of unssen potential so if you got one why not
cool motor and ive talked to a few that say they love the rev caracteristics from what ive heard this little monster has a lot of unssen potential so if you got one why not
WHAT?????? Rev characteristics? are you serious? the "rev characteristics" (if you can call it that) are just like a 305, except maybe 10x worse. ive ridden in a monte carlo w/ a *335* in it. it had all stock exh. manifolds, carb ect., and it was cool. i will say that. it was really torquey and tire spin-happy. but the money spent, its a total waste. Especially when a 350's are plentiful and cheap. sure, if you know a machinist, you've got a 305 layin around, and you have got money to toy w/ and experiment on , then ok thats up to you. But dont go telling people its this great "unseen" potent, blazing fast motor. if you want to spend money on a stroker, do a 383! all that money spent on rpob4z's 335 would cost the same, if not more than equipping a 350 w/ it. 310 at the flywheel, or 375+?
so rpob4z, the question is, what do you want; a unique, torquey, low rpm powerplant, or the most possible power for best price of the two?
hey bud all i said was i have talked to people that have done this combo and what they said about it personally i do not have this setup but ill bet the rev is alot better then a 305 and if thats what was in the car ill bet they are happy with what they got im not sayin that your better off this way money wise i went for hp but if your looking for more hp an reasonable gas mileage it must be a viable choice they are building them i wish i new of someone on here the next time i run into them on cruise night ill give them this thread another thing is i never thought id see small block competing with big blocks either but its being done with great sucess i might ad
one benefit to building a stroker 305 is that it can lend itself well to turbo/supercharge applications because of the lower compression ratios associated with it. Before everyone jumps on my back about "more power" out of a turbo 350...if you don't want a 500hp engine and you like turbos a stroker 305 turboed will easily get you into the 400hp/tq range, which isn't to shabby. Also, you have the benefit of being different too. =)
when you stroke a motor raceclean, the compression ratio typically jumps up due to the longer stroke. No reason to build a 305 into anything other than a boat anchor when 350s are dime a dozen.
__________________ 2011 chicago world of wheels placed in super street class
Best Engine '11 Thirdgenfest
Best Modified Camaro Thirdgenfest '05, '07, '11 Second place Camaro Modified '06, '08, & '10
MFBA March 2008 Featured Calendar Vehicle
A 350 block looks exactly like a 305 block, to an emissions inspector. Have your dad get you a 350 shortblock and some heads, instead.
Stroking a 305 to make more power is like trying to pick up a turd from the clean end.
The longer stroke puts additional stress on an engine, not to mention the extra work and clearancing you have to do to fit the crank. Its just not cost effective to stroke a 305 when you have so many awesome 350 TPI combos on this board for reasonable money.
Do a search for "335 stroker" and you'll see.
I don't wanna waste my time beating a dead horse, but has anyone ever "destroked" a 305/350? Just make like a 9.6-10:1, big valved, short runner-ed, possibly boosted(I know, just to be different) engine that just spins like there's not tomorrow? I think it'd be fun to build a small CI engine that'll spin out past what the ricers do. I wouldn't put it in a F-body though. More like a boat, or a chevette.
Typically, yes, compression ratios go up. However, you can buy low compression pistons (often an option in stroker kits) and with heads around 72cc, you will drop Cr. Don't tell me this is wrong because it;s frequently done.
305 is still a junk platform to stroke, regardless of which piston he chooses, but comparing apples to apples a flat top piston will make more compression. Might as well tell me how stroking a 283 is different and a good platform too.
Typically, yes, compression ratios go up. However, you can buy low compression pistons (often an option in stroker kits) and with heads around 72cc, you will drop Cr. Don't tell me this is wrong because it;s frequently done.
What you say here isn't "wrong", but what you said originally about lower compression due to stroking was (at the very least, it was incomplete).
FWIW, I haven't seen a 305 stroker kit with low compression pistons.
IMHO, Putting 72cc heads on a 305 is about as stupid as stroking a 305.
In general, stroking a 305 so you can put a turbo on it is a waste of about $700 and a lot of clearancing work.
Being different is worth what - watching the other guy's taillights?
IMHO, Putting 72cc heads on a 305 is about as stupid as stroking a 305.
....
Being different is worth what - watching the other guy's taillights?
Being a Moderator, you should learn the difference between advice & opinions. Nobody, especially moderators, should be expressing such negative, hateful statements. You basically just called him stupid, which he isn't.
I guess all V6 owners are "stupid", huh? Sometimes I hate to see how much my site (as a co-founder) has degraded...
Being a Moderator, you should learn the difference between advice & opinions.
I did indicate I was expressing an opinion.
Quote:
Nobody, especially moderators, should be expressing such negative, hateful statements.
There was certainly nothing hateful in my response. Forceful, perhaps, in an attempt to make a point, but not hateful.
Personally, I hate wasting money on my projects - Well, okay, perhaps there was an element of hate involved. But, certainly not towards anyone personally.
I'm at a loss understanding the "negative" part.
Quote:
You basically just called him stupid, which he isn't.
I don't know him, personally. I will admit I wasn't impressed by the suggested approach.
Quote:
I guess all V6 owners are "stupid", huh?
What do V6's have to do with this thread topic?
There's a big difference between playing the hand you've been dealt, and trying to stack the deck. In this case, the player is trying to stack the deck just to get a pair of 2's.
Since you brought up V6's, I've known guys who put Roots-type blowers on 2.8l S10's back in the 80's. That gave them emissions-legal V8-like power (the blower kits were C.A.R.B. certified). I wouldn't recommend that with a 3rd gen, because 1) you'll spend as much on that as you would on a V8 swap; 2) emissions-legal V8 swaps are fairly simple to do; and 3) those blower kits weren't C.A.R.B. certified for 3rd gens. {FWIW, today you probably could get an S10 V8 swap through the California Motor Change process as long as the V8 was from and/or equiped like a same- or later-year light truck application.}
As Apeiron indicated, there's a difference between calling a person stupid and calling an action stupid. I called the action stupid.
For your sake, though, in the future I'll try to stick to "ill-advised".
Or , or .
Quote:
I think you need to edit your post.
Well, I'd have to edit your post, too, because you quoted mine.
If I did any editing, it would be to delete all posts after Aug '06 for being off-topic.
The reasons to build a 305 stroker are racing class restrictions or budgets.
That being said, I think it's a great little motor that doesn't get any respect along with the 307. For forced induction the smaller bore is a lot easier to tune. The stock tpi ported and a marginal set of heads would be a perfect match for a boat load of boost.
Everyone talks about spending the same amount on a 350 would net you more. They are correct and incorrect. That only comes in terms of machine work on the block. That cfm wall comes on quicker with more cubes. You'll need a good set of heads, a better flowing base and runners sooner in search for more power. You cannot just keep turning up boost, eventually the components cannot flow anymore air.
It's a kin to putting the stock TPI on a 406. You'll have a lot of tq down low and you'll have the rev range of a diesel.
That's where the budget comes in to play, the stock home ported tpi will flow whatever the 305 needs. A well ported production 350 head should do the same. If you wanna make power with the stock stuff that doesn't cost you much and you already have it, go ahead and use it.
It comes down to your money, time effort.
Opinions are like *******s everyone has em and they all stink. Do what you want to do....
Dealing with Buicks you learn that at a certain boost level the power flatlines. Adding 5 or 10 psi of more boost gets you no more hp than leaving it where you were.
The main thinking is as with the Buick stuff the stock equipment under boost will make more power than you'll need whether you use the 350 or 305. remove the restrictions in airflow and turn the boost up! either will make enough for 99% of the people here..........
Everyone talks about spending the same amount on a 350 would net you more. They are correct and incorrect. That only comes in terms of machine work on the block.
The difference in cost between 334 pistons and 383 pistons is also significant, unless you're trying to build a short-rod 334 using stock 305 pistons and 400 rods.
I agree custom forged pistons cost some coin, my J&E's in my last buick motor were over $600. Not to mention I dont know how many people wanna use the small 400 rod in they're kit.
Hypers are a lot cheaper and as long as you do not abuse them will last just as long as forged. Detonate on high boost and yeah they're gone! So the cost could be kept down a bit using them.
For a meager budget the 305 can be made to perform well enough to satisfy almost everyone.
Wouldn't it be funny to see the masses ride in a 305 turbo car, but to be told it's a 350....
It's just a number.......
Good info on the rods to help educate people......
__________________ 1989 Turbo Trans Am #656
SOLD!
1989 Turbo Trans Am #1240
SOLD!
1994 MB RX7 5.3L heads, cam, headers, 1 7/8 long tubes and maybe a shot. Build almost complete
Let's get back to the original question posed and address the issues one-by-one:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpob4z
I am wanting to build a 334 stroker using my factory 305. My dad works at Scoggin Dickey and one of the guys there gave him a magazine article about building this pretty powerful, yet economical engine.
I would hope there is enough technical prowess at S-D to understand the pitfalls of this build. Maybe not, though.
Quote:
The specs we have are as follows:
305 block
400 sbc crank
vortec 12558060 heads
vortec manifold
5.7" push rods
kb 9.6:1 flat top pistons
I can't remember the specs on the cam
0.030 bore
The machine shop will mill the journals and the crank to fit each other. Also, they have to shave the surface where the heads bolt to the block.
Vortec heads is a big jump right there. Without cam specs, the details of the rest of the build are pretty much moot.
Quote:
According to the magazine article, this should produce about 310 hp at the flywheel, and about 260-270 hp at the wheels, all the while getting 20+mpg. Being a stroker motor, this would produce a bundle of torque also.
310 HP at the flywheel is a pretty simple matter with Vortec heads (hopefully shaved to reduce the 64cc chamber size), Performer Vortec manifold, and a simple Comp cam such as an XE262 or XE268. The former would produce more low-RPM torque, the latter more power. This is assuming proper exhaust (headers), and proper carb (q-jet or Holley such as a 600-650). 20+ MPG was easy with my steroided 305 (of course, I'm getting the same MPG with my over 1-sec faster 350 now).
Quote:
This sounds very good to me, and would be even better with the ported plenum from corvetteplenum.com and a set of slp runners added after the car is finished.
If we're talking about a TPI build, that is harder to make power and more expensive. I have never heard of a magazine article about a stroker 305 TPI build, but if that's what this was, that may explain the low HP output. The Vortec intake base is around $400, runners another $350-$400. There alone you already spent more than a carb intake and carb would run. Porting the plenum is a do-it-yourself job - no need to pay someone for it. If you're running a SD system, you'll need to do some PROM tuning. If you're already running TPI, it makes a lot more sense to just use the stock heads, install 1.94" intake valves, do a clean-up porting job on them, and run them instead. You'll still have to do something about the base and runners, but you won't have spent as much on the heads as buying Vortecs that are either capable of handling the aftermarket cam lift, or are made capable of it.
Quote:
I would be interested to see if anyone has this combo, and what they think of it. One last thing, I searched this motor on yahoo, and found a site on car domain I believe where a guy built this combo, and his time slip showed a 13.98 @ 98mph.
If you had searched this Board, you would have known there is a member running a 334 TPI set-up that runs in the 13's. Even he has admitted it wasn't the best use of performance dollars.
This is by no means the least expensive way to get to 310 flywheel HP. You can do it with a 305 for less money (although it won't have quite the low RPM torque of the 334), and you can certainly do it for less money with a 350 - rebuildable core, rebuild kit, then add to it the cam, heads, etc., a lot less than what it would take to buy the parts and do the machine work for the 334.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PETE
The reasons to build a 305 stroker are racing class restrictions or budgets.
Can you name a racing class that would allow a 334 stroker engine and not a 350?
Budget is certainly not a reason. How many times do we have to say it? A 334 will cost you more than rebuilding a 350, and will have 21 fewer cubic inches!
My comment way back about emissions was based on reports of California smog inspectors checking block casting numbers when suspicions of engine modifications were raised. You would need to use an internally balanced crank to avoid the tell-tale external evidence (weighted damper) of the longer stroke. Even more $$$'s to get that done.
Other than the very remote emissions issue, there is absolutely no justification for stroking a 305.
That being said, I think it's a great little motor that doesn't get any respect along with the 307.
Don't let anyone think that I am a 305 basher. I built one, and don't apologize for it. I also am a lot faster with the 350 shortblock with all of the previous 305 stuff on it.
I have said time and time again that you can make a 305 faster for the money spent than you can swapping in a 350, because everything you have to do to make the 305 faster you have to do to make the 350 as fast, and you don't have the extra cost of the 350 shortblock to add in. But, the 350 will be faster with the extra money spent on the 350 shortblock, every time. And, the 305 build must stop at the point where $$$'s are spent on the 305 shortblock, because that's where the return on investment starts going south on you - and a 334 certainly fits in that category!
The 307 was never a performance build from the factory. The limitations were carb, intake, heads, cam, and exhaust. Hmmm, sounds a lot like the limitations of a 305, doesn't it? Put better induction, heads, cam, and exhaust in/on a 307, and it will come alive. It has more high-RPM power capability than a 305 because the valves won't be as shrouded by the cylinder walls. But, it would hardly be worth it to rebuild a 307 shortblock and put it in place of a 305. Why? Because it would cost you as much (or probably more) to rebuild than a 350 would. Again, a poor choice for the spending of performance $$$'s.
305 is still a junk platform to stroke, regardless of which piston he chooses, but comparing apples to apples a flat top piston will make more compression. Might as well tell me how stroking a 283 is different and a good platform too.
lol or better yet a 267 lol throw a pair of aluminum heads on it and you got a fancy paper weight
3.7xx and 3.8xx bore sizes aren't a whole lot different when speaking of unshrouding the valves. My arguments are if using the components you already have are cheaper than laying out the money for additional parts for the 350(including the engine core itself) and that is why you are building the engine go ahead.
Why is it everyone bashes small cubic inch motors on this forum? No engine is right or wrong here. There are plenty of small cubic inch motors out there making a lot of power. In fact most production motors are shrinking their bore sizes and increasing stroke due to the development of cylinder head design.
The debate goes on and on.
The heads and intake and their ability to move the air serve a far greater purpose on an engine than the bore and stroke. If using the TPI that was designed around the 305 you have an intake that will provide enough cfm for whatever the 305 needs. Once you start making power and increase the displacement, the TPI intake system will become a restriction and choke the motor. As I said if he was to use the TPI set up.
If someone wants to build a 334 and you have the info to assist him great if not don't bash his ideas, let him make his choices......
So explain to us how buying a 400 crank, a set of rods, and a set of "custom" pistons, and THEN doing a bunch of "custom" grinding on the block and everything else to get it to fit, fits the usual definition of "using the parts you already have".
You can go to the junkyard and buy a 350 core for A FRACTION of the price of that "kit".
Do yerbasic 2-column analysis. Down the left side of the page, add up the costs of the 334; block at $0, "kit" at however much, machine work at whatever, etc. Down the right side, add up the costs of the 350 build: junk short block at $50, set of pistons (stick with the equivalent to whatever the 305 "kit" ones are, for the sake of fairness and honesty), machine work, just like you did for the 334. Then come back and post the results, and be sure to tell us all about what a great deal it is to spend AT LEAST $300 more and get 21 CID less.
Comparing a 305 with SBC heads to a modern engine with different heads is not a valid argument.
The debate only goes on and on because people who can't add continue it. The rest of us, who DID pass junior high school arithmetic, have long since moved on.
"Assist" someone who wants to build a 334 consists of talking them out of it. Just like "assisting" a drug addict DOES NOT consist of finding them more drugs at a lower cost; "assisting" someone who is about to make a mistake, amounts to keeping them from making the mistake. Talking someone out of doing something stupid and counter-productive and wasteful of money is not "bashing", it's common sense.
__________________ Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate. — William of Ockham, from Quaestiones et decisiones in quattuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi
Roughly paraphrased into modern English, and applied to figuring out what's wrong with your car:
The simplest explanation that fits all the facts is probably the right one.
Junk 400 crank from the yard just like your 350, as someone else pointed out to do it on the cheap, 5.565 rods standard pistons. Yes it can be done for the same or less money.$50 bucks for a 350 core, damn where's your boneyard I'll pick up a few.
Custom grinding???
Anyone with air compressor and grinder can do it. And yes you are the math genious to point it out you'll still have 21 cubes less, thanx!
It's been a long time since junior high math, how is junior high these days???
Why is it so hard to understand.
IF HE WANTS TO DO IT GIVE HIM THE INFO ON HOW TO DO IT!!!!!!!
Here try this.
"IMHO I would rather do a 350, but to do it you'll need a 400 crank turned to 350 mains, a set of rods either using the 5.565 400 rods or the 5.7 rods. However using the 5.7 rods will necessitate custom pistons. Also grab the 400 balancer and felexplate"
"Then put down you'll have a torquey little motor that'll make decent power for it's size, doing a 350 would prolly give you a little bit more power for the same or a little more money, it is your choice and your money"
Now that isn't that hard is it?
__________________ 1989 Turbo Trans Am #656
SOLD!
1989 Turbo Trans Am #1240
SOLD!
1994 MB RX7 5.3L heads, cam, headers, 1 7/8 long tubes and maybe a shot. Build almost complete
Hard to turn down the journals on a 400 crank to fit a 305 block with a die grinder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PETE
"Then put down you'll have a torquey little motor that'll make decent power for it's size, doing a 350 would prolly give you a little bit more power for the same or a little more money, it is your choice and your money"
Actually it would be more like "You'll have a motor no more or less torquey than anything else of similar size, that cost you more money and/or took you more effort to build than a more powerful engine of larger size.
So explain to us how buying a 400 crank, a set of rods, and a set of "custom" pistons, and THEN doing a bunch of "custom" grinding on the block and everything else to get it to fit, fits the usual definition of "using the parts you already have".
Wow! Hey are there any seats in the reading comprehension class at that school, we have a candidate!!!!!!
Good one though grinding the journals down
Good luck with your build rpob4z.
__________________ 1989 Turbo Trans Am #656
SOLD!
1989 Turbo Trans Am #1240
SOLD!
1994 MB RX7 5.3L heads, cam, headers, 1 7/8 long tubes and maybe a shot. Build almost complete
So explain to us how buying a 400 crank, a set of rods, and a set of "custom" pistons, and THEN doing a bunch of "custom" grinding on the block and everything else to get it to fit, fits the usual definition of "using the parts you already have".
For most people "parts they already have" to put towards a 335 would be... a 305 block, and either a set of 5.7" rods or a set of 305 pistons.
Not many people have a disassembled 400 laying around to take a crank and rods out of. At some point they're going to be buying something.
Right; glad you mentioned that. That's of course just one extra bonus bit of machine work that might be required (more $$$$) to build the inferior motor.
If you use a stock 400 crank, then NOT ONLY do you have to grind on the block to get it to fit, BUT ALSO you have to grind the 400 mains down to "large journal" diameter. However, most of the "kits" that you buy, would have the crank already sized properly.
My reading comprehension is just fine, thank you PETE (nice all-caps there d00d!!). Better than your arithmetic evidently.
I hope I've done a good enough job laying out the real facts and numbers and costs so that you don't waste your money foolishly on a 334, rpob4z.
__________________ Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate. — William of Ockham, from Quaestiones et decisiones in quattuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi
Roughly paraphrased into modern English, and applied to figuring out what's wrong with your car:
The simplest explanation that fits all the facts is probably the right one.
I quit building 283s and 327s in the mid 70s, about the time we started being able to get 350s cheep and easy. The reason was real simple: if I built a 327, IT GOT BEAT, by a 350 that cost the same. Sure, I could build a faster 327 and beat a 350; but then it cost more. And if somebody else built a 350 that cost the same as my 327, or even that used the same parts, I got beat again. Sooner or later, I or my customer would run out of cubic pocketbook, and at that point the race was over... with the 350 the winner. So I learned my lesson, same as everybody else. People that don't have the BTDT, I guess might have to learn it the hard way.
I don't think I've built a 302 or a 327 for at least 25 years now, except for a couple of "bone stock" "numbers matching" situations.
__________________ Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate. — William of Ockham, from Quaestiones et decisiones in quattuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi
Roughly paraphrased into modern English, and applied to figuring out what's wrong with your car:
The simplest explanation that fits all the facts is probably the right one.
Take a look at the origin of the reputation of those two engines, though.
The only reason Chevrolet built the 302 was to meet the 5 litre class limit for SCCA. It was purpose-built as a racing engine.
While the 327 was in production, it was the largest small block available. When Chevrolet decided they could use a larger stroke to make a 350, they very quickly discontinued the 327.
Today both the 302 and 327s have historical/nostalgic value, but in terms of absolute power, cubic inches still dominate.
Why is it everyone bashes small cubic inch motors on this forum? No engine is right or wrong here. There are plenty of small cubic inch motors out there making a lot of power.
It would appear that you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. I just finished saying I wasn't bashing the 305. However, a 334 is not a small inch motor but a bad attempt at making a small inch motor a little bigger.
Quote:
In fact most production motors are shrinking their bore sizes and increasing stroke due to the development of cylinder head design.
As already stated, comparing current head technology to 30-year-old 305 technology is downright silly. Yes, the LS1 was smaller bore and longer stroke than the Gen I SBC with great heads to feed it. But, that doesn't explain why they went with smaller bore and longer stroke - it's the same reason they haven't gone OHC, and that is "envelope". But, have you noticed what they're doing now with LSx engines? Hmmm, more cubic inches. . . I guess small inch motors weren't all they cracked up to be. And F*rd, with their 4.6 - yep, supercharger. So much for head technology.
Quote:
The debate goes on and on.
The discussion continues, but the debate was over a long time ago.
Quote:
If someone wants to build a 334 and you have the info to assist him great if not don't bash his ideas, let him make his choices......
As already indicated, sometimes the best thing you can do to assist someone is to stop them from doing what they are intending to do.
----------
I believe this has gone on long enough. The originator hasn't chimed in since August.
If the originator would like to continue this discussion, or update what you actually did, PM me and I'll consider re-opening it.
Last edited by five7kid; 03-13-2007 at 03:34 PM.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Building a 334 would be totally backwards...
WHAT??????
are you serious? the "rev characteristics" (if you can call it that) are just like a 305, except maybe 10x worse. ive ridden in a monte carlo w/ a *335* in it. it had all stock exh. manifolds, carb ect., and it was cool. i will say that. it was really torquey and tire spin-happy. but the money spent, its a total waste. Especially when a 350's are plentiful and cheap. sure, if you know a machinist, you've got a 305 layin around, and you have got money to toy w/ and experiment on , then ok thats up to you. But dont go telling people its this great "unseen" potent, blazing fast motor. if you want to spend money on a stroker, do a 383! all that money spent on rpob4z's 335 would cost the same, if not more than equipping a 350 w/ it. 310 at the flywheel, or 375+? 
, or 
.
I guess small inch motors weren't all they cracked up to be. And F*rd, with their 4.6 - yep, supercharger. So much for head technology.
