Which way would you go and why? (SBM)

[gzig5]

Easier said than done, it’s easy to be Cavalier about it, then there is reality.

I know one member or two that scream consistently at their heads failure. Is that a future telling?
Maybe so.

But I wait for your donations. Until then, I’ll run what I have.

(Joking around here) But I’m glad you have money to throw at a (perceived) problem like the US government does at its problems.
(Real or not - )

I can spend other peoples money all day long. Just like the gubbmint.

I’d definitely go with largest bore with some room for a couple rebuilds. With the shorter 9.2 deck I think I’d stay at or under 4” stroke and use the longest rod that will work.

 

[9secRR]

I'm currently in the beginning stages of a 436ci W2 pump gas deal for my street car.
48* Race W2s ported by Joe Hornick, valves 2.10/1.60, Jesel Sportsman shaft rocker system
4.100 x 4.125
CR10.5:1
Block is a 48* R1a 9.6 deck
6.200 Chevy rod

i have heard about Joe Hornick, should be one serious stout build. please start a build thread.

 

[9secRR]

is 4'' biggest stroke that will fit in a 9.2'' deck height? might just be the 8.9'' deck height?

 

[rumblefish360]

is 4'' biggest stroke that will fit in a 9.2'' deck height?

I don’t see a problem (maybe the problem?) because a short deck is just a short deck height and not smaller in the crank area.

 

[9secRR]

I don’t see a problem (maybe the problem?) because a short deck is just a short deck height and not smaller in the crank area.

i edited my comment, might be the 8.9'' deck height that can't be over 4''?

 

[rumblefish360]

i edited my comment, might be the 8.9'' deck height that can't be over 4''?

I’d give the same answer honestly.

 

[NC Engine Builder]

I’d give the same answer honestly.

Do you have a minimum piston compression height in mind? I'd go about this from a slightly different perspective

 

[ValiantRacing]

I like the bigger bore shorter stroke

 

[gzig5]

I don’t see a problem (maybe the problem?) because a short deck is just a short deck height and not smaller in the crank area.

With he shorter deck, the closer to the top of the piston the pin is gonna be. At some point, which I don’t know what it is, you run out of room for a given rod/throw length.

 

[rumblefish360]

Do you have a minimum piston compression height in mind? I'd go about this from a slightly different perspective

I’ll give ya a ring later in the week.
I’m just doing some planning.
Thought this was a good topic to just throw out there.

I like the bigger bore shorter stroke

Myself as well.

With he shorter deck, the closer to the top of the piston the pin is gonna be. At some point, which I don’t know what it is, you run out of room for a given rod/throw length.

Yes, I know.

 

[gzig5]

.

 

[tabletop390]

I’d go with the W2’s just for the header selection alone, especially if you’re on somewhat of a budget. I’m not a fan of Hookers and TTI stopped making headers for the W5.

 

[gregsdart]

I’d go with the W2’s just for the header selection alone, especially if you’re on somewhat of a budget. I’m not a fan of Hookers and TTI stopped making headers for the W5.

The bigger the bore the better, given available rings. Keep in mind how many rebuilds you may do in the future when chosing your bore, and i would also factor in the ability to coat pistons if honing opens the bores up a lot. I had pistons coated to cover .0043 oversize, and .005 over rings of an still get proper end gaps out past .006.
On stroke, a talk with a piston manufacturer about your application would be my path. Things to consider; side thrust, ring wear, minimum acceptable rod to stroke ratio. Good luck with it, do it right and it will be q beast!
Also, bigger heads and less duration make for a wider power band,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[rumblefish360]

I’d go with the W2’s just for the header selection alone, especially if you’re on somewhat of a budget. I’m not a fan of Hookers and TTI stopped making headers for the W5.

I luckily have A body W5 TTI headers!
Not in love with the collector though.
A budget? A bit, yes. I can not throw money at this project like the IS government throws money at its problems…. Real or not! LMAO

The bigger the bore the better, given available rings. Keep in mind how many rebuilds you may do in the future when chosing your bore, and i would also factor in the ability to coat pistons if honing opens the bores up a lot. I had pistons coated to cover .0043 oversize, and .005 over rings of a still get proper end gaps out past .006.
On stroke, a talk with a piston manufacturer about your application would be my path. Things to consider; side thrust, ring wear, minimum acceptable rod to stroke ratio. Good luck with it, do it right and it will be q beast!
Also, bigger heads and less duration make for a wider power band,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Thanks for the advice. I know you have been at this a while now and I must claim rookie for sure.

 

[B3422w5]

I luckily have A body W5 TTI headers!
Not in love with the collector though.
A budget? A bit, yes. I can not throw money at this project like the IS government throws money at its problems…. Real or not! LMAO

Thanks for the advice. I know you have been at this a while now and I must claim rookie for sure.

I put a 3.5 inch racy collector on those headers years ago, over the stock 3 inch 3 bolt collector they came with, and saw absolutely zilch on the ET slip, which surprised me a little.
Car actually ran its best with stock collectors and short bullets on it.

 

[gregsdart]

I'm currently in the beginning stages of a 436ci W2 pump gas deal for my street car.
48* Race W2s ported by Joe Hornick, valves 2.10/1.60, Jesel Sportsman shaft rocker system
4.100 x 4.125
CR10.5:1
Block is a 48* R1a 9.6 deck
6.200 Chevy rod

I'm currently in the beginning stages of a 436ci W2 pump gas deal for my street car.
48* Race W2s ported by Joe Hornick, valves 2.10/1.60, Jesel Sportsman shaft rocker system
4.100 x 4.125
CR10.5:1
Block is a 48* R1a 9.6 deck
6.200 Chevy rod

Just a possible combo, for a 9.20 deck to keep r/s ratio at 1.5. rod, 6.00. piston, 1.20 ch. Stroke, 4.00
I am no expert at what works best, hence my suggestion to call piston makers, etc to get best feedback and make this build a standout. It can be the little things, like narrow rings (how narrow are rings in modern 4.0 bore motors?) the best head prep, minimal valve pockets, great quench, friction reducing coatings, the list is big. But by listening to some of the best and brightest, i was able to ring 926 hp out of a 550 inch, 440-1 headed bb. So i hope to hear back from you in a future post, where less knowledgeable folks will scream HAPPY DYNO#S, because they can't accept how good your motor truly is!

 

[BVoelzke]

Just a possible combo, for a 9.20 deck to keep r/s ratio at 1.5. rod, 6.00. piston, 1.20 ch. Stroke, 4.00
I am no expert at what works best, hence my suggestion to call piston makers, etc to get best feedback and make this build a standout. It can be the little things, like narrow rings (how narrow are rings in modern 4.0 bore motors?) the best head prep, minimal valve pockets, great quench, friction reducing coatings, the list is big. But by listening to some of the best and brightest, i was able to ring 926 hp out of a 550 inch, 440-1 headed bb. So i hope to hear back from you in a future post, where less knowledgeable folks will scream HAPPY DYNO#S, because they can't accept how good your motor truly is!

I am not a fan of TTI headers , I ran Tubular Automotive headers for years I like the fact that I could just change plates and run the same headers with my W2 heads or standard heads like a " J " Or " X ". The TTIs are heavy and I don't like how close they are to the trans , I have learned to live with them especially now that I had a custom aluminum exhaust built around them. A few years ago I purchased a brand new set of Tubular Automotive headers and they fit poorly they hung so low I couldn't get the car in the trailer , I ended up selling them . I like the American Racing stainless headers but they don't offer them for with a W2 exhaust bolt pattern

 

[rumblefish360]

I put a 3.5 inch racy collector on those headers years ago, over the stock 3 inch 3 bolt collector they came with, and saw absolutely zilch on the ET slip, which surprised me a little.
Car actually ran its best with stock collectors and short bullets on it.

Great info, thanks.
I thought the collectors were a bit short.

I am not a fan of TTI headers , I ran Tubular Automotive headers for years I like the fact that I could just change plates and run the same headers with my W2 heads or standard heads like a " J " Or " X ". The TTIs are heavy and I don't like how close they are to the trans , I have learned to live with them especially now that I had a custom aluminum exhaust built around them. A few years ago I purchased a brand new set of Tubular Automotive headers and they fit poorly they hung so low I couldn't get the car in the trailer , I ended up selling them . I like the American Racing stainless headers but they don't offer them for with a W2 exhaust bolt pattern

Have you thought about sending them a W2 flange?

 

[B3422w5]

I am not a fan of TTI headers , I ran Tubular Automotive headers for years I like the fact that I could just change plates and run the same headers with my W2 heads or standard heads like a " J " Or " X ". The TTIs are heavy and I don't like how close they are to the trans , I have learned to live with them especially now that I had a custom aluminum exhaust built around them. A few years ago I purchased a brand new set of Tubular Automotive headers and they fit poorly they hung so low I couldn't get the car in the trailer , I ended up selling them . I like the American Racing stainless headers but they don't offer them for with a W2 exhaust bolt pattern

Not a fan of TTI either. I think it was Brian from Indio machine( OU812 on here I think) who tested 1 7/8 TTI’s against either the tubulars or Headman’s, and the difference in power was quite astounding.

 

[BVoelzke]

Great info, thanks.
I thought the collectors were a bit short.

Have you thought about sending them a W2 flange?

I thought about seeing if they would sell a set minus the flanges and have a W2 flange welded on by someone else or see if they could do it

 

[rumblefish360]

I thought about seeing if they would sell a set minus the flanges and have a W2 flange welded on by someone else or see if they could do it

I don’t think they’ll do it but what the heck, you’ll never actually know unless you ask.

The OEM port window and the tube coming off the header flange can be a bit tight and IMO, you’ll need tube bent the same to replace the flange end.

 

[rumblefish360]

Not a fan of TTI either. I think it was Brian from Indio machine( OU812 on here I think) who tested 1 7/8 TTI’s against either the tubulars or Headman’s, and the difference in power was quite astounding.

Yes, Brian H. I’ll probably spell it, but..

Halflinger????

I can see a stepped header out performing a single tune size but I’m still wondering in the collector. Which I have noticed can be a finicky item or a numb one.

 

[rumblefish360]

Considering I’m thinking about the short block usage, I’m probably better off with the 3.79 stroke and save a 340 block for big cubes.

Taking note about piston selection and possible skirt issues….

 

[gregsdart]

Yes, Brian H. I’ll probably spell it, but..

Halflinger????

I can see a stepped header out performing a single tune size but I’m still wondering in the collector. Which I have noticed can be a finicky item or a numb one.

Brian worked with me and shipped the parts needed to build a great 408 in 2919. 10.5 compression, the good EQ iron heads, 235/249/107 Thumpr cam, those two step TTI 15/8 to 1 3/4 headers. Made 518 Tq at 4600, 504 hp at 4700, stayed above 500 ho past 6000.

 

[StreetSleeper]

I don’t see a problem (maybe the problem?) because a short deck is just a short deck height and not smaller in the crank area.

What is your consideration for crankshafts?
Upwards Towards 4.17?” Or as little as 3.79”
Is this for quarter mile racing?