Air Gap vs. M1 Single Plane For Stroker

-
cpearce said:
Having been around these strokers on the dyno, unless you have SERIOUS heads, and by that I mean 300cfm flow, plus, and a cam to match, reality says they are a 6000rpm engine. Unported Edelbrock heads with a cam in the 240-250 neighborhood is peaked in hp by about 5600 rpm, there just simply isn't enough real estate in the heads to support the cubic inches over these rpm's. I see little point in winding these engines up beyond 6000rpm on the street when they are already declining in power. A rule of thumb I've been told is shift points 300rpm higher than peak. I swear some people use rpm as a bragging concept, not a reality of best output of the package.

That said, I direct this a nobody on this forum or post, just comments on my perceptions.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you are totally right here. I'm definitely not trying to build a high rpm motor at this time. I'm under no misconceptions that the OOB eddies are a flow restriction. So most likely you are correct. However I do have a complete additional 408 that I pulled out of the car. It has a set of OOB eddies as well that I am considering porting out. Then who knows, maybe a flat tappet or roller cam upgrade? I'm trying to build the foundation to grow on here.

In the mean time I'm definitely going to bolt the AG and have a frame of reference to compare to!
 
RustyRatRod said:
That's the whole purpose of a stroker, IMO is to make power at a lower RPM.
Click to expand...
Agreed but the 383 Chevy in my el Camino with 225cc heads spins up to 7600 and makes lots of power up high with no problem. It’s a stroker. So being specific,
cpearce said:
Having been around these strokers on the dyno, unless you have SERIOUS heads, and by that I mean 300cfm flow, plus, and a cam to match, reality says they are a 6000rpm engine. Unported Edelbrock heads with a cam in the 240-250 neighborhood is peaked in hp by about 5600 rpm, there just simply isn't enough real estate in the heads to support the cubic inches over these rpm's. I see little point in winding these engines up beyond 6000rpm on the street when they are already declining in power. A rule of thumb I've been told is shift points 300rpm higher than peak. I swear some people use rpm as a bragging concept, not a reality of best output of the package.

That said, I direct this a nobody on this forum or post, just comments on my perceptions.
Click to expand...

This is kinda what I was eluding to.
 
TT5.9mag said:
Agreed but the 383 Chevy in my el Camino with 225cc heads spins up to 7600 and makes lots of power up high with no problem. It’s a stroker. So being specific,


This is kinda what I was eluding to.
Click to expand...

That's a comparison, but not a very good one. There's a 1/4" difference of stroke.

I don't really care man. I'm just throwing out the reasons people do it. To make small blocks make power like big blocks. Big blocks are lower RPM torque makers. They don't HAVE to spin hard. They can be made to. But that's a lot of weight slingin around.

You want a 4" arm motor to routinely run past 7k? Sure, you can do it. Pick your parts, pay your money. It won't be cheap.
 
TT5.9mag said:
Agreed but the 383 Chevy in my el Camino with 225cc heads spins up to 7600 and makes lots of power up high with no problem. It’s a stroker. So being specific,


This is kinda what I was eluding to.
Click to expand...

Which is basically the point I made, yet you seem to want to argue with me and agree with him. lol
 
I think we're all good dudes no need for argument. You're both correct and hell it's a web forum it's all BS anyhow
 
At least you know we are all in the same boat trying to help. Honest answers only from here.
 
Just for reference, my 251/258 @ .050 with .593 lift, gasket matched Eddy’s hp peaked at 6,100.
 
Port them babies out for another 500rpm of screamin power!
 
RustyRatRod said:
Which is basically the point I made, yet you seem to want to argue with me and agree with him. lol
Click to expand...
Na if I was arguing you’d know it. I was just pointing the finger at your blanket statement that “stokers are for low rpm power”. Never say always........or never.
 
This info about intake manifolds may be of interest. I am building a 440 that is going into a Charger & the owner does not want to use an RPM intake because of clearance issues with the hood/air cleaner. Will be using the M1 single plane.
The owner has in his collection, M1, T1, T2 & Victor intakes. I measured the plenum volumes out of curiosity. Here they are in cc, in the above order: 1332, 535, 1260, 885. What surprised me was the Victor. Has the highest rpm ceiling, but smaller plenum vol than the street oriented T2. Also, plen vol in the T2 more than doubled from the T1. Then Edel goes to a smaller vol in the Victor. The chopping & changing makes you wonder about the 'science'. I am using a 3/4" floor spacer in the M1 to soak up some of the huge plenum volume.
 
rumblefish360 said:
Port them babies out for another 500rpm of screamin power!
Click to expand...
If I go that route and not something more serious then I'd want to achieve more are under a broad portion of the torque curve not just gain a little rpm at the top.

Just for clarification I would send the heads off to someone not be doing it myself.
 
Bewy said:
This info about intake manifolds may be of interest. I am building a 440 that is going into a Charger & the owner does not want to use an RPM intake because of clearance issues with the hood/air cleaner. Will be using the M1 single plane.
The owner has in his collection, M1, T1, T2 & Victor intakes. I measured the plenum volumes out of curiosity. Here they are in cc, in the above order: 1332, 535, 1260, 885. What surprised me was the Victor. Has the highest rpm ceiling, but smaller plenum vol than the street oriented T2. Also, plen vol in the T2 more than doubled from the T1. Then Edel goes to a smaller vol in the Victor. The chopping & changing makes you wonder about the 'science'. I am using a 3/4" floor spacer in the M1 to soak up some of the huge plenum volume.
Click to expand...

I wondered that too on the victor plenum, a team G has twice the plenum volume <guessing at that .
I have had both on a flow bench while cleaning and debuggering ,and gasket matching to cnc standard port heads, the victor flows about 25 cfm more with a smaller plenum , 350ish to 325ish --------?? that being said the victor seems to really like a carb spacer, only went with a 1/2'' because of linkage and bracket problems . ???
 
Mean416 said:
If I go that route and not something more serious then I'd want to achieve more are under a broad portion of the torque curve not just gain a little rpm at the top.

Just for clarification I would send the heads off to someone not be doing it myself.
Click to expand...
The comment was actually directed @tjpatte with regards to the cam he listed. TJ, who’s cam is that?
 
Mean416 said:
Stroker? That's higher than I would have expected actually.
Click to expand...
Yep on my 410, Go-fish was going to go for a ride today, but my kid got exposed to COVID yesterday at school so have to regroup.
rumblefish360 said:
The comment was actually directed @tjpatte with regards to the cam he listed. TJ, who’s cam is that?
Click to expand...
It’s a Comp Cam custom grind from Brian at IMM.
 
tjpatte said:
Yep on my 410, Go-fish was going to go for a ride today, but my kid got exposed to COVID yesterday at school so have to regroup.

It’s a Comp Cam custom grind from Brian at IMM.
Click to expand...

what intake and carb are you running in that ?

I have smaller cam in my 416, with M1 single plane and 750 BG silver claw carb. Great throttle response. Don’t know if that’s carb or intake or both.

I have a RPM intake. Never courage to try it when current setup seems pretty good.
 
Last edited:
autoxcuda said:
why intake and carb are you running in that ?

I have smaller cam in my 416, with M1 single plane and 750 BG silver claw carb. Great throttle response. Don’t know if that’s carb or intake or both.

I have a RPM intake. Never courage to try it when current setup seems pretty good.
Click to expand...
Running an Airgap with a Quick Flow HR850. Thanks to many of your threads I’m working on leaning out the cruise.
 
Man that was a pain in the butt. Anyhow before:

IMG_20210821_135355.jpg


And after:

IMG_20210821_194005.jpg


Forgive the temporary wiring. I wanted to be able to monitor oil pressure, water temperature, AF, and rpm during initial startup so I have some things wired up for that purpose.
 
Mean416 said:
Hey guys, I have both an M1 single plane and an Air Gap on hand. Just trying to figure out which one will be faster. I'm kind of thinking the Air Gap.

This is primarily a street toy, go to the coffee shop, Friday drive to work kind of car. Will see very occasional strip duty but not that often.

So, which intake wins?
Click to expand...
If it’s a street ride then no question go with the AG. I think you would never be able to tell the difference between the two at the upper rpm’s where the M1 would theoretically make more power. With that cam your peak power will likely be at an rpm that you could run either intakes and notice little difference. Won’t be as big as you might think, if anything noticeable, all that IMO. Running around with a stroker at higher rpm’s is pointless anyway. You’ll probably be shifting at around 6200-6400 I’m thinking. The AG is strong as it heads upstairs. Down low, mid range and entering the higher rev range run the AG. Forget spacers or notching the divider in search of theoretical power increases. Tune and get a baseline and work on traction/throttle control (on the street) as that will be the issue. Drive it, do some runs, get it to hook, get some 60’, 330’ etc times. Then if you think there’s more to be had swap on the M1. Don’t be surprised if those 60’s, 330’s drop off slightly though. I’m one that likes to climb the ladder starting at the first step and work my way up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top