300 6 stroker kit
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by jwtaylor
Theres enough room to make a few extra cubes. Check out the inline section, there is a fella now posting about his stroker, titled something to the effect of "My 300 build".
What do you have to start with as far as a longblock? What is your HP and TQ goals? Whats the budget look like?
What do you have to start with as far as a longblock? What is your HP and TQ goals? Whats the budget look like?
Postmaster
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,496
Likes: 0
Well if hp is what your after the 300 will cost you a fortune to get you to 400hp naturally aspirated. Not because its not capable but the fact you would need somone that really know what they are doing to work the head over, to get it to breathe. On the other hand, that sucker can make some real nice torque.
If you have the 460 laying around and a bellhousing or tranny, depending on year of truck, to go along with it, then that sounds like a winner. A larger (stock) cubic inch engine will be more reliable. It would IMO be a lot easier to port your 460 heads and cam it a little, vs stroking the 351w and purchasing heads that are capable of letting it breathe.
Who knows? It really depends on you, its gonna cost you either way you go. It really depends on your resources, cost to get the initial longblock and how much the machinsit wants to do the work, more importantly what you wanna build.
If you have the 460 laying around and a bellhousing or tranny, depending on year of truck, to go along with it, then that sounds like a winner. A larger (stock) cubic inch engine will be more reliable. It would IMO be a lot easier to port your 460 heads and cam it a little, vs stroking the 351w and purchasing heads that are capable of letting it breathe.
Who knows? It really depends on you, its gonna cost you either way you go. It really depends on your resources, cost to get the initial longblock and how much the machinsit wants to do the work, more importantly what you wanna build.
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Well last time i checked, the 300 is a stroker of a 240, and is basically 4 inch bore 4 inch stroke. I mean if you could stroker more, it would be cool, but i dont know that its worth it. If youve done everything else to a 300 but stroker it, you should have bought a 351 or even a 460
Post Fiend
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 14,947
Likes: 6
From: Topsfield, MA
I'm currently assembling a 393ci stroker off a 351 block. I got the shortblock from Coast High Performance, has a mild cam, 1.7 rockers, edelbrock intake, msd dist, GT-40Y heads (got them cheap), desktop dynoed at 400ish in HP, a little over 430ft-lbs of torque. It's built to be a daily driver engine, there is still a lot of potential left in the motor. The DD program isn't 100% accurate but it's relatively close. With the AFR185 heads (everything else unchanged), it put out about 485hp and almost 500 ft-lbs of torque. I bet that motor could easily see 550-600hp if I put more $$/effort into it (before power adders). If I'm not mistaken, stroker 351s are capable of about 700 hp naturally aspirated, but thats professional racing territory there.
The 300 is a nice engine, but just belongs in wood chippers and work trucks where high performance is not necessary. They're just made for low end torque and that's about it. It is difficult to get the 300 to make some good power above stock. I do like the 300, I had one, but it doesn't hold a candle to even my stock 302 in performance. It would only beat my stock 302 in longevity/durability, and low end torque. Everything else the 302 would be the sucessor.
I did see a 300 performance head in the 04 ford racing catalog, but it has no water jackets....I was kind of scratching my head on that one because there are no other 300ci parts but some random drag racing head in the middle of the catalog.....
The 300 is a nice engine, but just belongs in wood chippers and work trucks where high performance is not necessary. They're just made for low end torque and that's about it. It is difficult to get the 300 to make some good power above stock. I do like the 300, I had one, but it doesn't hold a candle to even my stock 302 in performance. It would only beat my stock 302 in longevity/durability, and low end torque. Everything else the 302 would be the sucessor.
I did see a 300 performance head in the 04 ford racing catalog, but it has no water jackets....I was kind of scratching my head on that one because there are no other 300ci parts but some random drag racing head in the middle of the catalog.....
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Ive actually heard of a kit for them, cant find it but heard of them. I did see the 351w kit to make 454cu. Nasty nasty nasty.
If you think about it the inline makes a perfect candiadate for a stroker engine. Theres no side loading at all but you might come to the point where adding mass might slow you down and lets not forget the rods are long to begin with.
If you think about it the inline makes a perfect candiadate for a stroker engine. Theres no side loading at all but you might come to the point where adding mass might slow you down and lets not forget the rods are long to begin with.
Postmaster
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,496
Likes: 0
That kinda makes me wonder.
The SVO blocks that are usually used with the 454 kits have a 9.5 deck height. Some of the first 351w blocks produced, also used a 9.503 deck height, if a person could sonic check the bore walls and confirm a .125 overbore were to be okay (might spend some time trying to test different blocks), it just might be possible, would have to pay attention to the main thickness but that would have more to do with what crank is used. Would be crazy wouldn't it?
The SVO blocks that are usually used with the 454 kits have a 9.5 deck height. Some of the first 351w blocks produced, also used a 9.503 deck height, if a person could sonic check the bore walls and confirm a .125 overbore were to be okay (might spend some time trying to test different blocks), it just might be possible, would have to pay attention to the main thickness but that would have more to do with what crank is used. Would be crazy wouldn't it?
Last edited by jwtaylor; Nov 28, 2004 at 07:59 AM.
Senior User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Hey guys, back on topic please?
I really want to find out about stroking a 300.
When you look at it, even if we could only get 200-250 hp, we're probably talking over 400 lb/ft of torque. Put a ZF 5 speed and 3.55-3.73 gears behind that engine and turn it loose on the trailer pulls!
The 4.2 V6 only has 200 hp and 260 lb/ft torque. All the extra torque that the inliner brings in will give even our heavier trucks some good pep.
Am I just dreaming or does anybody else agree with me?
Greg
I really want to find out about stroking a 300.
When you look at it, even if we could only get 200-250 hp, we're probably talking over 400 lb/ft of torque. Put a ZF 5 speed and 3.55-3.73 gears behind that engine and turn it loose on the trailer pulls!
The 4.2 V6 only has 200 hp and 260 lb/ft torque. All the extra torque that the inliner brings in will give even our heavier trucks some good pep.
Am I just dreaming or does anybody else agree with me?
Greg
Post Fiend
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 14,947
Likes: 6
From: Topsfield, MA
my cam specs are at the very end of this thread...https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/s...d.php?t=272689
Senior User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
From: vancouver bc
i would highly recomend swaping to a 351. ive built a hopped up 300 for a friend and it gets half the milage, makes half the power, and cost twice as much as the small block v8 i would have specked for that application. if you want insane tourque build a 393 stroker