Stock vs stroker video

-
Now I would like them to drop the engines in the same car and 1/4 mile them both to see if there is much difference in ET and MPH.
 
67autocross said:
Now I would like them to drop the engines in the same car and 1/4 mile them both to see if there is much difference in ET and MPH.
Click to expand...

Each engine is going to want different gearing and converter stall....with more then 50 lbs of torque the 408 is going to want less gear and less stall...so the 360 could win if the car has 4.56/4.88 gear and 5400 rpm stall...
 
Even though the 408 technically won.
Wasn't that impressed 8 hp and 31 lbs-ft for an extra 43 cid that's .19 hp per cid and .72 lbs-ft per cid. Like said before the torque would be equalled by a little more gear like 3.91 vs 3.55.

The 360 actually made more torque per cid that the 410. And the powerband carry on probably a 1000 usable rpms over the 410 which pretty much dropped off after peak rpm. Would make the 360 a stronger running engine if properly geared. And can't see the bottom end being too bad since peak torque is only 200 rpm higher and peak hp only 300 rpm higher showing how efficient the 360 is working. And they didn't say anything about idle quality but since peaks are so close can't to huge of a difference.

I'd say 450 hp or less 360 is probably the better choice unless you really want to run 3.55 or less.
 
replicaracer43 said:
What I'd like to see, is a build of 2 engines, say at 320 cubic inches, one with a large bore, like 4.100 and whatever stroke to end up at 320, and the other with a small bore and a long stroke to also be 320 inches, with the exact camshaft and heads, intake carb ect....
Click to expand...

They pretty much did that with 383 Chev vs 383 mopar obviously the parts aren't exact same but they tried to keep it closely matched.

Kind of proved it don't matter how you build cid torque output will be similar. Above 3000 rpm both engines where pretty much identical but under 3000 rpm the mopar walked away with it. Kind of opposite of how you would think it would of been.
 
The biggest tipping point for me is: does the motor need rebuilding anyway? What parts already need to be replaced? What's in the budget? If your yarding out a good motor just to make the extra 8/31. Not real smart. But if you're in need of a rebuild anyway. The price is closer to a wash, and I'd be all over it. Bragging rights, keeping up with the Jones's, something new to try. On the other side of that. How many of us can really tune a motor for maximum efficiency and don't already leave a few hp/tq numbers on the table? Be honest
 
I seen A Couple of Mopars one Stock crank ext Balance ported Cast Heads runs 12.3 constant , other car was 300lb heavier stroked 408 ported heads efi etc could only do a best of 12.8, otherwise low 13s both running 4.11 gears, 15 inch wheels , I need to do a new build but wonder is it worth going stroker
 
IRISH RT said:
I seen A Couple of Mopars one Stock crank ext Balance ported Cast Heads runs 12.3 constant , other car was 300lb heavier stroked 408 ported heads efi etc could only do a best of 12.8, otherwise low 13s both running 4.11 gears, 15 inch wheels , I need to do a new build but wonder is it worth going stroker
Click to expand...

The top end of an engine including bore and CR is what makes power. Engine size decide where that power is made (powerband) going larger requires less gear and stall and better idle quality. So if you don't have a problem with gears nothing wrong with short stroke or other wise stroke it.
 
I wasn't impressed with THAT stroker. In that particular comparison, it was not worth the money to build the stroker, IMO. Now, had the stroker included the bigger heads it CLEARLY needed, it would have been a different ball game.
 
RustyRatRod said:
I wasn't impressed with THAT stroker. In that particular comparison, it was not worth the money to build the stroker, IMO. Now, had the stroker included the bigger heads it CLEARLY needed, it would have been a different ball game.
Click to expand...
In reality isn't it all about combos ?
If you have the cubes you need the flow and cam to make it work more efficient ?
 
jimmer said:
In reality isn't it all about combos ?
If you have the cubes you need the flow and cam to make it work more efficient ?
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. That's why I said "in that particular comparison".
 
jimmer said:
I thought that's what you were getting at !!
I just continued what you started !!
Click to expand...

It's a great comparison in that it shows what "stroke only" will do. It would have been better, IMO, had they done a third test using the parts the stroker needed.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, had I built the stroker I would be upset at that result. I don't dyno much as most of my customers don't want the expense and my running stand does some of what a dyno does. What that means is I end up having to get numbers from the owners and figuring out power based on weight and mph over the 1/4 mile. I've made 480hp with a little head work and a smaller camshaft on a 4" stroke. Over 550 with more racey stuff but like they note - pumping losses stack up on the stroker combos.
I also agree on the costs. It's about 20% more overall for a non-factory stroke and you don't want to run that $340 cast crank they mention in anything but a mild build. Better cast are almost twice that. Forged higher still. Pistons are a bit more as hypers work on the 360 but are not really good for the 4" combo.
 
Why is a hyper not good on a longer strong me engine?
 
That was an intresting video and i consider the 408 being a much smarter decision for anyone wanting power considering all that tourque down low.


Regarding the posts on the previous page about shifting at 6000,why are you shortshifting? The real good stuff starts to happen on the other side of 7000 :D
Dont take the last part to serious im more than avare of the price one has to pay to keep an engine alive at those higher rpms and that not all build will make any kind of power up there,but i sure miss the sound of a that little 340 first changing its tone alittle over 3000rpm,then the next change alitle under 5000where it starts sounding oh so mean and that roar at 7000... its something that most will never experience and those who has knows what im writing about,its something different,Sorry i got alitle sentimental over here.the 408 and being able to make the power earlier is a much better choice.
 
1Fast340 said:
That was an intresting video and i consider the 408 being a much smarter decision for anyone wanting power considering all that tourque down low.


Regarding the posts on the previous page about shifting at 6000,why are you shortshifting? The real good stuff starts to happen on the other side of 7000 :D
Dont take the last part to serious im more than avare of the price one has to pay to keep an engine alive at those higher rpms and that not all build will make any kind of power up there,but i sure miss the sound of a that little 340 first changing its tone alittle over 3000rpm,then the next change alitle under 5000where it starts sounding oh so mean and that roar at 7000... its something that most will never experience and those who has knows what im writing about,its something different,Sorry i got alitle sentimental over here.the 408 and being able to make the power earlier is a much better choice.
Click to expand...

My motor first changes sound at about 2,500-2,8 then again about 45-48 and goes into that hellhound scream at about 6,500 so I know exactly what you are talking about, and it's pretty impressive and scary sounding.
Lit em up on wet concrete one night at the local sonic drive in because all the ricers like to hang out there on Thursday nights. I was dropping my Son off for work there as he is an assistant manager at that location.
Most of the guys stood there with their mouths hanging open and some of the women ran off crying with their hands over their ears.
It was funny as hell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top