Silv-O-lite Pistons
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
From: Montana
The only other choice i have is to find some 352hipo rods. The books say that the 1960 hipo352 had thicker long rods like the short ones(thicker beam) but yea right! those are probobly like a needle in a hay stack.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
If you're gonna spend the money on finding the hi-po 352 rods, then you may as well go with a custom set of rods. The long rod route would be much better than tall pistons, you'd improve the rod/stroke ratio which will improve torque, tall pistons as I said add nothing to the performance other than to raise the comp ratio and improve the quench. But one thing I wonder, if you're gonna spend all that money on custom rods and pistons, why limit yourself to the choice of two off the shelf cams, when there are far better possibilities with other grinds, custom or off the shelf ? Seems like quite a few guy's here are stuck on the same two cams and one is only marginally better than a stock cam. 
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
From: Montana
Well It was the easiest way to go I didnt want to bother with a custom grind and i dont care for the comp cams cuts. I prefer Roller cams my self, Nothing beats friction free horse power.....This motor was just a cheap idea i thought i could get away with, originally I was just going to build it with a blower.....but i thought i could get this one built for alot less. If it where blown i would just buy short rods and get pistons tall enough to get me to 8:1 and call it a day throw 5 psi in it and have a blower. Oh well maybe some day.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
On the BBC rod idea, I think it wont work. You'd end up spending more money on custom pistons for it, buying the rods, and getting the crank cut down to accept the BBC rods than if you just bought custom FE pistons. It would give you a phenominal rod ratio though.
The only thing I can think of right now is custom pistons.
The only thing I can think of right now is custom pistons.
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
From: Montana
Yea thats what i came up with too. I think I'll keep this idea on the back burner untill i have time to just tinker with a spare motor and then i'll spend the money on the right parts and it wont matter about buying custom pistons and rods and stuff. I want a blower i think that would really make up alot for the lack of stroke but i can only run 5-6 psi with the stock crank so I'll just let it ride for a while....but it will be done one way or another. I'll move forward with the 416 for now i know it will work.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
I got it!
I've come up with a number of possibilities.
1. Use .080" oversize 1960 352 pistons (.030" oversize block bore). The 4V version had a compression height of 1.85". This gives .030" deck clearance when used with standard 360 long rods. Use .020" thick head gaskets and you'll have 9.68:1 compression.
2. Use .080" oversize late 1958 332 pistons (.030" oversize block bore). They have a compression height of 1.938". This puts the piston .006" above the deck. Use a .040" thick head gasket and short rods and you'll have around 10:1 compression. This is the thing to do if you can find the pistons.
I'd head down to napa and see if you can find some 332 pistons.
1. Use .080" oversize 1960 352 pistons (.030" oversize block bore). The 4V version had a compression height of 1.85". This gives .030" deck clearance when used with standard 360 long rods. Use .020" thick head gaskets and you'll have 9.68:1 compression.
2. Use .080" oversize late 1958 332 pistons (.030" oversize block bore). They have a compression height of 1.938". This puts the piston .006" above the deck. Use a .040" thick head gasket and short rods and you'll have around 10:1 compression. This is the thing to do if you can find the pistons.
I'd head down to napa and see if you can find some 332 pistons.
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
From: Montana
Would it be wise to shave .006 off those pistons...? Or is that possible?
I found these and they say 9:1...but It doesnt calculate that for me I keep getting 8.54:1 http://kb-silvolite.com/spistons.php...tails&S_id=141
I found these and they say 9:1...but It doesnt calculate that for me I keep getting 8.54:1 http://kb-silvolite.com/spistons.php...tails&S_id=141
Last edited by EgoMan; Oct 11, 2004 at 06:18 PM.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
You wouldn't need to shave 'em. Even at .006" above deck, you've still got .034" clearance due to the head gasket.
Those silvolite pistons, #1129, might work with a .020" thick copper shim head gasket. I got 9.01 compression with that, and long rods. Use that and a 901 cam and you'd have a good 360 for your truck.
Those silvolite pistons, #1129, might work with a .020" thick copper shim head gasket. I got 9.01 compression with that, and long rods. Use that and a 901 cam and you'd have a good 360 for your truck.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
I probably sound like a broken record by now, but I like the crane selections better. Not only do they make more power in DD2k, you dont really hear stories of them breaking in two, flattening lobes, or screwing up the distributor drive gear.
For the 10:1 buildup I like the 941, for the 9:1 buildup the 901 is the way to go.
For the 10:1 buildup I like the 941, for the 9:1 buildup the 901 is the way to go.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
That cam is somewhere between the 901 and 941. I think you really want a dual pattern with the stock heads to make up for the relatively poor exhaust port flow. However, the 134052 (272 energizer) does surprizingly well in DD2k. Crane recommends 8.75 to 10.5 compression ratio for it, so you're pretty safe there.
I'd still go with the 941, as it produces more top end hp.
I'd still go with the 941, as it produces more top end hp.
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
From: Montana
Well i was planning on running edelbrock heads and intake. I guess it all depends on what compression ratio a can achieve.
Actually I think ill go with cast heads for this so i can use shim gaskets. can the c8ae-h heads be machined out for cj valves? I like the c8ae-h heads have smaller chambers....but the intake ports are short 1.93xWhatever but i would love to have larger valves. I just hate the big 75cc D chambers. I guess I could shave the heads.
Actually I think ill go with cast heads for this so i can use shim gaskets. can the c8ae-h heads be machined out for cj valves? I like the c8ae-h heads have smaller chambers....but the intake ports are short 1.93xWhatever but i would love to have larger valves. I just hate the big 75cc D chambers. I guess I could shave the heads.
Last edited by EgoMan; Oct 12, 2004 at 11:54 AM.