and according to these guys in this thread i should be able to rev well past 10,000 rpms then right...LMAO......

 

No. If you know about piston speed (which obviously a lot of you don't) then you'd know that it could safely rev to 8,000 RPMs and the bottom end would hold up, within reason.

I gotta honestly say that normally I shrug **** off like this, but to listen to people act like this is no big deal is annoying as hell.

Some of you will argue for months about something as stupid as using synthetic oil and whether or not Ram air is real, but when it comes to ACTUAL engine data you act like it's meaningless.

 

guess youve never heard of sarcasm now have ya

man just relax its only the internet not like someone is at your job looking you in your face calling ....

there is more than one way to achieve a said goal ......both could work in theory and both brobably have but that doesnt make one absolutely the only way to acheive said goal now does it ?

no it doesnt there are many ways to get a small block chevy to rev to and beyond 8000 rpms reliably and there are plenty of guys out there that can do it without a problem with very little done to thier engines ....not much more than a good heads valvetrain and a properly installed bottem end and will not have a problem at 7500 rpms all day long .....

i personally enjoy the sound of a 350 with balanced internals and a nice sound valvetrain that will redline around 8500+ all day without a problem i just dont happen to like a destroked engine i think its pointless to do that to one ....it makes as much sense to me as takeing a 350 and installing sleeves small enough to make it a 305 ....

 

Now that the 305 has been brought up again, If you had a (say L-69) 305, and then you built a 4in bore 305 and everything else was identical, I'm going to say the 4in bore 305 will be the HP winner due to the fact that it can use larger valves, and if the valve size was identical, it would still be better because if of the (lack of)shrouding. It also (IMO) has a better bore to stroke ratio. If EVERYTHING (cam valve springs compression) were the same it would still not be abig revver due to the stock cam, but I believe it woud still see it's HP peak higher than the stock L-69. Certainly, if you could also change the valvetrain, the 4in bore 305 would kill the L-69.
Any comments on that one?

 

A 4" bore 305 is a 350.

RBob.

 

Dude, relax, we are all friends here

The point being made is that no matter what the stroke the valvetrain is the limiter in a SBC engine. Math computations will prove, as you have said, that a shorter stroke engine has the potential to achieve higher RPMS, but all of that is pointless without the proper valvetrain.

To make my point, without math, look at these situations. A DZ302, can rev till the moon, and run perfectly. Its the classic example of the short stroke - high revving engine. But what about the guy down the road from me with a SB400 who's redline is around 8K? It definately is not a short stroke engine, and it has no problem. Because of the proper valvetrain that he has. Same applies to my engine. When I run hard, I shift at 6800-7K. Thats a lot of RPMs. Definately higher than a lot of people here spin too, on a regular basis. It has nothing to do with my stroke, or bottom end. In fact, its all stock. The valvetrain was where I put all the cash when I built the engine.

There are lots of schools of thought, and as you have shown that you can prove your point with computed figures and scientific facts, I can also prove mine with real world examples. Who's right? Probably everyone.

 

He's talking about a 4.**x3.** motor that measures 305cid, so really just a 302.


Nicely said!

And yes most of us are correct!

 

This is hilarious.

Now that I've stated the fact, contrary to your comment about stroke having nothing to do with an engine's RPM limits, you're now trying to make it sound as if I said the valvetrain doesn't have any effect on it.

I never said anything more that what I typed. I also know the valvetrain comes into effect. I never said it didn't.

It doesn't matter. The whole reason I posted was to point out stroke does have an effect. I improperly used the words in the correct spots (which I apologize for) but it turns into more than what it needs to.

Typical miscommunication. Nothing more.

Let's let it die, please.

 

Whats hilarious is that you get all bent out of shape because people refuse to take your word as fact. Sorry. Thats just not how it works.

In the mathematical world stroke may make a big difference. In the real world, it doesnt matter. Any engine can be built to take any RPM. Thats just how it is. Maybe someone will come in here and lock this thread, so that you can quit arguing with the rest of the board.

 

My cats breathe smells like cat-food.

 

So, do you...like...stuff?"

 

I've stated nothing but facts, besides my error of using the wrong term in my first post, which I appologized for.

And I never said a 400+ engine with 3.75"+ stroke couldn't be built to handle high RPM. NEVER SAID IT!!!

My point is, and has been, that it's CHEAPER to build a short stroke engine for high RPMs because of piston speed.

That's a fact.

 

Hey guys, you sound like you know what your doin, so I got a question for ya.

I picked the 383 route and this is my setup

350 .030 4 bolt main With ARP bolts
Scat cast steel 9000 3.75" crank
5.7" Scat forged rods
KB hyper flat tops
Internaly balenced

Valve train will be a Solid roller setup with a Compcams 300AR magnum cam and Compcams 1.52 pro magnum roller rockers

Will I be able to rev to 7000 rpms??? or even 7500 max??

 

this is not true you would spend just as much to build a short stroke engine as you would a long stroke .....

they would both need to have a solid valve train in order to reach those rpms..

machine work costs would be identical

it would cost exactly the same to build one as the other and the effect would be the same.

 

Has it been said that a 350, 383 0r 400 or 427 don't want to spin as high as a 327 because since they have a longer stroke they are generating more torque and leverage to make breaking a rod or crank easier?

There is also a lot of talk about "doing the math." I would love to see this equation. What would it be? Logarythmic, exponential, linear? It has got to be hairy. It would also seem that there would have to be a diferent equation for any minute change (octane, bolt torque, advance, etc,.). I have not gotten to finite mathmatics yet, give me another semester.

Has anyone mentioned that that 50 whatever chevy might go faster because of something other than the jornal length or diameter?

It was said in another post that we belive that a 350 and up can sustain high rpms (or whatever) just like we belive that ram air and other stuff was not real. In another post ram-air was proved incapable at driving speeds by mathmatics, and here someone is saying that they can prove 327 can ___ better by using mathmatics. They argue that it is wrong in the ram-air case but right in theirs.

 

Wow this got out of hand quick. Anyway you look at it the 327 rocks the party. I pulled a 100,000 mile motor out of a '68 truck(2 bolt) put in 270 dur., .468 lift, stock vortecs,air gap,750 holley. And put it in a 87 S-10 Blazer. Like I said before, its a monster. 6500 Rpms with little effort. It ran a 13.3 on street tires and NO tuning. With some jetting, some timing adjustments, we are expecting mid to low 12's. Oh yeah, friday I'm picking up a NOS kit for it. I always heard stories about 327's. All the old timers swear by them, now I know why.:rockon:

 

Look away for a couple days and all hell breaks lose.
Im lost here, you confused me. Are you agreeing with the short stroke thing, or disagreeing?

None of that has anything to do at all with it being a 327. None of it. YOu foudn a decent motor in a junkyard, big deal. Nothing about the 327 makes it rev any better. My 350 does the exact same thing. Bring some proof in here that will contribute to the argument, not the 327 rocks cause all the old people say so.

 

Glad to hear you like 327s. I do too.
Even if the strokers do beat em in a race.
It takes a bunch more cam for a stroker to make the equivalent power @6500 rpm as a 327.
Don't let anyone tell you that you were only imagining that you were having fun.