393 stroker heads
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
393 stroker heads
Hello,
I originally posted this in the 351w forum, but then I found this one
I am in the process of collecting parts and designing a 393 to be put in a '68 EB. My truck already has a 351w in it, so I'm not concerned with the swap issues. I will be looking to build the motor at about 9.5:1 compression, with a roller cam and rockers. I was thinking about doing this as budget as possible, so I might go with a set of rebuilt gt40 heads with a homemade port job.
I am "only" looking for about 350 horsepower, with torque to match. The engine will eventually be Mass-Air'd. Would these heads work for this combo or should I step up to some Roush 200 or Windsor SR.? Would I be better off saving my $$$ and using a flat tappet cam? Any help would be appreciated...
I originally posted this in the 351w forum, but then I found this one
I am in the process of collecting parts and designing a 393 to be put in a '68 EB. My truck already has a 351w in it, so I'm not concerned with the swap issues. I will be looking to build the motor at about 9.5:1 compression, with a roller cam and rockers. I was thinking about doing this as budget as possible, so I might go with a set of rebuilt gt40 heads with a homemade port job.
I am "only" looking for about 350 horsepower, with torque to match. The engine will eventually be Mass-Air'd. Would these heads work for this combo or should I step up to some Roush 200 or Windsor SR.? Would I be better off saving my $$$ and using a flat tappet cam? Any help would be appreciated...
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 0
From: Still under the hood in O
Just from my parts considerations for my 418W build (would work for a 393 as well);
Iron heads; Roush 180's (replaces Win Jr)
Alum heads;
Edelbrock RPM's
Edelbrock Vic Jr's
AFR 180's
I chose the AFR 205's for the added cubes and decided on using a hyd flat tappet cam (custom grind by Cam Research).
If you want to save money but have decent iron heads go with the Roush 180's.
Before buying any parts though, I suggest making a decision on what cam you WILL go with first. Then you can select parts and the machine work done to come up with the needed compression for that cam.
You could go with 9.5:1 SCR and a Comp XE268 on 87 oct gas. But.....if you found out that an XE262 would give you what performance (etc.) you wanted, with that 9.5:1 you would be using 91 oct gas. You see it's a matter of knowing exactly what you want (perfomance/characteristics/gas requirements). It's all a part of the planning.
Iron heads; Roush 180's (replaces Win Jr)
Alum heads;
Edelbrock RPM's
Edelbrock Vic Jr's
AFR 180's
I chose the AFR 205's for the added cubes and decided on using a hyd flat tappet cam (custom grind by Cam Research).
If you want to save money but have decent iron heads go with the Roush 180's.
Before buying any parts though, I suggest making a decision on what cam you WILL go with first. Then you can select parts and the machine work done to come up with the needed compression for that cam.
You could go with 9.5:1 SCR and a Comp XE268 on 87 oct gas. But.....if you found out that an XE262 would give you what performance (etc.) you wanted, with that 9.5:1 you would be using 91 oct gas. You see it's a matter of knowing exactly what you want (perfomance/characteristics/gas requirements). It's all a part of the planning.
Posting Guru
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
From: Independence, MO
Just my opinion here, but if you only looking for 350 HP, then why bother with a stroker? you can easily get 350 HP from 351 cubic inches with out going over 9-1 comp. aluminum heads on a stock botttom end 351 with the right cam will make 400 HP. DW
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
This has been my dilema. As it (the engine) is going in a '68 Bronco, I ddin't want to get too crazy in terms of HP and torque. I figure 350 will is a good number for the weight and intended purpose. I was thinking as I was going to bed last night, that if I save the cost of the stroker crank and put it to some good retro-fit roller lifters and cam, my goals, but with the stock displacement are probably easily obtainable. With the stock displacement, good roller cam, and heads, would my power curve be in the area that I want it? Thank you for your reply.
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 0
From: Still under the hood in O
For your needs, a stock stroke would be fine. As far as your cam, a hydr flat tappet will work just fine. No need to spend several hundred on a roller conversion.
What is the truck going to be used for?
If it won't see above 4500-5K RPM a stock bottom end (zero decked), GT-40 heads (or any aftermarket head) and an Edelbrock RPM Airgap intake with a Comp XE268 with your 9.5:1 compression. This is all you need to have at least 350HP with even more torque (nice flat curve).
What is the truck going to be used for?
If it won't see above 4500-5K RPM a stock bottom end (zero decked), GT-40 heads (or any aftermarket head) and an Edelbrock RPM Airgap intake with a Comp XE268 with your 9.5:1 compression. This is all you need to have at least 350HP with even more torque (nice flat curve).
Posting Guru
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
From: Independence, MO
your cam profile as well as cam timming will determine when and where you get your tork and power curves, these thing i would discus with the cam grinder alog with your intended pourpose for the vehicle,. The advantage of a rolloer cam is that it allows for a more agressive cam profile while being able to maintain streetability. hope this helps DW
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vogey
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
2
Jun 15, 2017 07:33 AM
FordMuddin'
Performance & General Engine Building
6
Jul 5, 2012 09:49 PM
SHUSTANG
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
3
Jan 30, 2006 12:47 PM
