302-351W crank
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: South of St.Louis
302-351W crank
Will a 3.25" 302 crank fit a 351W? If so, what rod length would be used?
My goal is to de-stroke the 351. The reason if your wondering is that a longer rod will be more efficient and decreasing the stroke will lessen torque but cause it to reach it's peak RPM faster. I think the increased rod length will somewhat make up for the lose in torque and it should rap out faster. What do you think?
My goal is to de-stroke the 351. The reason if your wondering is that a longer rod will be more efficient and decreasing the stroke will lessen torque but cause it to reach it's peak RPM faster. I think the increased rod length will somewhat make up for the lose in torque and it should rap out faster. What do you think?
Posting Guru
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
From: Quesnel, BC, Canada
the rod journals on a 302 are significantly smaller than the 351w's 3" (2.9994") mains. However Im almost positive you can get custom bearings to space and shim in the crank. You could get the 3.25" crank, and some chevy rods with a 2.1 or 2.0" mains and offset grind the crank to 3.3" stroke and use a short compression (pin) height. I did the math on this once, I took the windsors 9.5" deck & 7" rods, leaving me with 2.5" for half stroke and compression height. With 3.3" stroke and 1.35" pin height you come to a zero deck, wich means it will work. Bore it out to 4.050" and you have a 340 with 7" rods...Top it off with AFR 185's. 165s for a lower power band. 205s/225s for +7500 rpm. Plus an advantage is you have some beefy bearings.
Last edited by pud; Feb 28, 2004 at 02:57 PM.
Freshman User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
I think you have a truck, put a 4.17" crank in it. 427ci in a 351 .030 over block, some afr 225's and you have the capability of a 650+hp truck on pump gas.. Your not building a high rpm roundy round motor.
Posting Guru
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
From: Quesnel, BC, Canada
Re: 302-351W crank
Originally posted by phattrav
The reason if your wondering is that a longer rod will be more efficient and decreasing the stroke will lessen torque but cause it to reach it's peak RPM faster. I think the increased rod length will somewhat make up for the lose in torque and it should rap out faster. What do you think?
The reason if your wondering is that a longer rod will be more efficient and decreasing the stroke will lessen torque but cause it to reach it's peak RPM faster. I think the increased rod length will somewhat make up for the lose in torque and it should rap out faster. What do you think?
351c's also have the 2.311" rod journals as the windsor, you could use some windsor 5.956" rods in place of the C's 5.778" rods. That would require a 1.5" piston heigh for zero deck. I havent heard much but I read you can shave the forged pistons 0.1", a 302's piston height is 1.6"...shave the top and flycut valve releases and youll be rolling....damn I have an idea now.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ranger1985
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
8
Jun 19, 2010 07:57 PM
Alvin in AZ
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
28
Aug 9, 2009 10:49 AM
doug1222556
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
35
Jan 28, 2008 11:08 AM
thehunterdan
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
1
Sep 15, 2004 07:58 AM
mdh627
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
17
Aug 27, 2003 08:50 AM
