445 ci fe
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: idaho
445 ci fe
I am thinking about building a 390 stroked to a 445. thats the 4.250 stroke crank with 6.7 inch rods. with a 17 cc dish piston and my 80cc heads this will give me around 9.5:1 compression. I am running the c6ae-r ported heads with 2.09 1.65 valves.
The question I have is, has anyone else tried the 4.250 stroke crank? how was the build, was there any suprises? did you use the stock 390 block, if so how did the main caps do? obviously you would use arp fasteners for the main caps, but did they walk around? a good indication is what your oil pressure does at high rpm.
I am on a limited budget as are most, so I dont want to build something with so much torque and horsepower that it self destructs in a hard pull because of a weak link. I have found stats from dyno pulls and been told stats from professional parts salesman that these stroker kits generally produce a torque ratio of 1.3 per cubic inch on pump gas, for this build thats 578.5 !
The question I have is, has anyone else tried the 4.250 stroke crank? how was the build, was there any suprises? did you use the stock 390 block, if so how did the main caps do? obviously you would use arp fasteners for the main caps, but did they walk around? a good indication is what your oil pressure does at high rpm.
I am on a limited budget as are most, so I dont want to build something with so much torque and horsepower that it self destructs in a hard pull because of a weak link. I have found stats from dyno pulls and been told stats from professional parts salesman that these stroker kits generally produce a torque ratio of 1.3 per cubic inch on pump gas, for this build thats 578.5 !
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,931
Likes: 12
From: SW Michigan
stroker engine block durability
390, you'll be fine. If you stay under 650 ft-lbs/hp you shouldn't have any trouble. Its the race guys who are consistantly in the mid 600s that have block trouble. Ford 406s supposedly had cap walk problems in the early sixties on superspeedway racing, and they had a 3.78 stroke. They also ran those engines from 7K to 83-8400 rpms, and internal forces go up as the square of rpm's. Ford cured the problem by crossbolting the mains. If your rpms are kept more modest, you should be fine. If you are putting this engine in one of your trucks, I'm thinking your cam choice and cylinderhead flow will have you not gaining any more power above 6250 or so anyway, so your block will be just fine. Ford ran a 4.385 crank in a bored out 406 block to make 483 inches and did just fine. several guys have put the 4.250 crank into a standard 390 block and been very happy with the results. One fellow welded up his own crank to 4.415, IIRC, and his block is okay as well. Cubic inches make power, and stroking is an easy way to get plenty of them. What is this engine going to be wearing for an intake and headers ? Do you have parts or are you still shopping ? If you are still shopping, Rabotnik is a site sponsor and a good guy to talk to. He sells engine parts and has built several strokers already. DF, on work's old cast off 'puter
FE "Freakin Expensive"
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,461
Likes: 4
From: Smith Mountain Lake, VA
Well IF your lucky to get a 390 block to go a 4.150" bore...NOT likely!! a 4.250" crank depending on what your heads will flow after at least a stage II port.. and a heavy breathing Intake also ported...Bigger than your average street cam...and an Upgrade in valvetrian to a roller set-up...Good bottom end balance...
Bottom Line..Aint know such thing as a 600hp 445ci 575Tq stroker thats gonna stay together..On a budget build....
I think I'll have about the cheapest 463"er going on the forum "FE" not 385 series!! and I'll be into it at least $10K and I havent even figured up the small crap yet...Thats where the small change adds up!
But if your Mic-Can-Ic knows of a better and cheaper way to make big Hp and Tq out of the FE..I'am all Ears...LOL...
BTW and to anwer your first Question..I know of NO clearance problems with a 4.250" crank in the FE's....But you must check rod bolt clearance at the bottom of the cam .. Good Luck and keep us posted!!
RJ
Bottom Line..Aint know such thing as a 600hp 445ci 575Tq stroker thats gonna stay together..On a budget build....
I think I'll have about the cheapest 463"er going on the forum "FE" not 385 series!! and I'll be into it at least $10K and I havent even figured up the small crap yet...Thats where the small change adds up!
But if your Mic-Can-Ic knows of a better and cheaper way to make big Hp and Tq out of the FE..I'am all Ears...LOL...
BTW and to anwer your first Question..I know of NO clearance problems with a 4.250" crank in the FE's....But you must check rod bolt clearance at the bottom of the cam .. Good Luck and keep us posted!!
RJ
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,931
Likes: 12
From: SW Michigan
stroker engine block durability
Russ, I'm not suggesting he bore his 390 to get more inches, I'm suggesting that block strength will not be an issue in a build with ported iron heads and a pickup truck friendly cam. There is plenty of room for the 4.250 crank, and at his power levels, self destruction is not a fear we have to worry about. As to budget, where do you live that things are so exspensive ? Here in my locality you could have, if we started with the 428 block and ported C6s that you already have, your 463 incher would be out the door and running for less than 7K, maybe even a lot less. 
Making the 575~ lbs-ft of torque is easy, and the total horsepower is up to you, depends on how big of a cam you're willing to live with. Machine work is less exspensive here than in some other places, but bussinesses don't pay very well here either, so the cost of living is relative to how much you are earning. 
Those of us who are still working in this economy consider ourselves lucky. But about that 463 of yours..... you're running ported aluminum heads aren't you ? What're you gonna do with your ported C6AE-Rs iron heads ? If you donated them to the DinosaurFan, there is a std bore 427 block they would have a very happy home on ! 
DF, on work's old discarded 'puter
Making the 575~ lbs-ft of torque is easy, and the total horsepower is up to you, depends on how big of a cam you're willing to live with. Machine work is less exspensive here than in some other places, but bussinesses don't pay very well here either, so the cost of living is relative to how much you are earning. Those of us who are still working in this economy consider ourselves lucky. But about that 463 of yours..... you're running ported aluminum heads aren't you ? What're you gonna do with your ported C6AE-Rs iron heads ? If you donated them to the DinosaurFan, there is a std bore 427 block they would have a very happy home on ! DF, on work's old discarded 'puter
FE "Freakin Expensive"
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,461
Likes: 4
From: Smith Mountain Lake, VA
Aww Dino!! LOL... I was typing that at the same time you were typing your's...So I didnt know what you said til after my post..LOL..
Oh I had the The Les Schmader Ported C4'G's and they have been long gone!! Kinda wish I had kept them for some standby heads...They were nice...If I ever needed another set of Iron heads done? I would go bacl to Les..The Man does crazy good work for what he charges!!
Yeah for what I'am trying to get out of the 463 , the Heads are the Edheads from KC with stage II CNC porting and I'll be using the Erson Rocker set-up.... and a 248/254* @ .050" .700" lift roller cam.. The heads should flow about 330cfm @ .700" according to KC..? LOL
Russ
Oh I had the The Les Schmader Ported C4'G's and they have been long gone!! Kinda wish I had kept them for some standby heads...They were nice...If I ever needed another set of Iron heads done? I would go bacl to Les..The Man does crazy good work for what he charges!!
Yeah for what I'am trying to get out of the 463 , the Heads are the Edheads from KC with stage II CNC porting and I'll be using the Erson Rocker set-up.... and a 248/254* @ .050" .700" lift roller cam.. The heads should flow about 330cfm @ .700" according to KC..? LOL
Russ
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 355
Likes: 1
I've done a couple 445s......
Unless it REALLY swoopy you're not going to see 1.3 TQ/cube - - that's approaching what I had from my Engine Masters Challenge 434 - - and that had full smoking $4000+ CNC ported BT heads and every trick in the book.
Realistically you can expect between 1.1 and 1.2 TQ/cube and HP around the same or a touch lower - 500ish on both sides is an honest target fro a stout street motor. You won't have any block issues at that power level - unless something was wrong beforehand. The 4.25 kits assemble like stockers - easy!
Unless it REALLY swoopy you're not going to see 1.3 TQ/cube - - that's approaching what I had from my Engine Masters Challenge 434 - - and that had full smoking $4000+ CNC ported BT heads and every trick in the book.
Realistically you can expect between 1.1 and 1.2 TQ/cube and HP around the same or a touch lower - 500ish on both sides is an honest target fro a stout street motor. You won't have any block issues at that power level - unless something was wrong beforehand. The 4.25 kits assemble like stockers - easy!
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: idaho
thanks guys, your input is appreciated. I am not trying to get big horsepower out of this engine, but big torque. I will be happy with anything around 500 lbs-ft of torque, the torque is what is gonna get me up that hill. the horsepower is a given with all that torque, rpm being the limit to the hp of coarse. I am trying to be optimistic about the torque numbers when comparing them to how my block will hold up. after all if I fell short with the comparison and asked you if it would hold up at say 450 lbs-ft and if the limit of the block was 550 then if I hit 578 I would not have asked the question properly.
now that you have put into perspective the forces under rpms, I understand that it will be up to the task, since I plan to keep it under 5000 rpms. after all I am not racing the thing.
sorry guys, actually the cubs are 435. I finally did the math myself and proved the darned salesmen wrong. 4.08X3.1415X4.250X8=435.7
4.15 no I dont want to bore the thing out that much. I have a block that will go but two of the walls will have an inch wide strip that is .140" thick. I have been told that will cause a heating prob, so I wont use it in this application.
now that you have put into perspective the forces under rpms, I understand that it will be up to the task, since I plan to keep it under 5000 rpms. after all I am not racing the thing.
sorry guys, actually the cubs are 435. I finally did the math myself and proved the darned salesmen wrong. 4.08X3.1415X4.250X8=435.7
4.15 no I dont want to bore the thing out that much. I have a block that will go but two of the walls will have an inch wide strip that is .140" thick. I have been told that will cause a heating prob, so I wont use it in this application.
Last edited by 390cobrajet; Mar 1, 2007 at 11:02 AM.
Trending Topics
New User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
I would just build a 410 and cam it for torque. 428 cranks aren't that hard to find. My 415" once had an Isky 262 in an otherwise stock rebuild (carter 4V too) and the "parts breaking" torque was not lacking in any way!!! (And started right off idle...)
FWIW,
Dennis
BTW, bore carefully! If you want "big holes" get a 427 in the first place! I'd be leery of a 390 that's bigger than 4.10" or so...
FWIW,
Dennis
BTW, bore carefully! If you want "big holes" get a 427 in the first place! I'd be leery of a 390 that's bigger than 4.10" or so...
Last edited by Bucks Owin; Mar 1, 2007 at 11:25 AM.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 355
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by 390cobrajet
sorry guys, actually the cubs are 435. I finally did the math myself and proved the darned salesmen wrong. 4.08X3.1415X4.250X8=435.7
Its bore
divided by two,
squared,
times PI,
times stroke,
times number of cylinders
You end up with 444.69
!["Beemer Nut"'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%23bc5285' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
Post Fiend
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,658
Likes: 4
From: "Islander"
I do bore squared x .7854 x stroke x number of cylinders.
Why make it harder?
On the above motor build and by the math x .7854 vs Pi
the difference is .001039475 ci difference.
445.5177676 (Pi) vs 445.518807 (.7854).
Why make it harder?
On the above motor build and by the math x .7854 vs Pi
the difference is .001039475 ci difference.
445.5177676 (Pi) vs 445.518807 (.7854).
Last edited by "Beemer Nut"; Mar 1, 2007 at 07:58 PM.
New User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Do you necessarily have to bore the cylinders at all when swapping out the rotating assembly?
I got a 360 I'd like to do something with, but I don't know where to begin.
I got a 360 I'd like to do something with, but I don't know where to begin.
Last edited by Zeke71250; Mar 1, 2007 at 10:04 PM.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: idaho
yes, I found the formula since my last post. thanks guys, I feel dumb now! well, If I buy a 428 crank from somebody for say 400 bucks and end up with one thats probably gonna be .020 under at best. I could buy the whole stroker rotating assembly thats internally ballanced and with new longer rods and longer stroke for 500 dollars more than what I can do for the machine work and the parts for a 390 rotating assembly and thats with my 390 crank and rods.
it would apear I could save a hundred bucks, but what about the flywheel/dampner I need for the stock 428 crank, so I may end up paying more for a stock half used up crank shaft. thats my logic behind going with the stroker.
I dont know all the piston options for the stroker kits, but I am going with a 4.08 bore piston, thats .030 over bore on a 360/390.
it would apear I could save a hundred bucks, but what about the flywheel/dampner I need for the stock 428 crank, so I may end up paying more for a stock half used up crank shaft. thats my logic behind going with the stroker.
I dont know all the piston options for the stroker kits, but I am going with a 4.08 bore piston, thats .030 over bore on a 360/390.
Last edited by 390cobrajet; Mar 2, 2007 at 12:30 AM.
Post Fiend
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,658
Likes: 4
From: "Islander"
With your 428 crank in hand, 390 rods with standard 390 damper and flexplate or flywheel you'll still need pistons and balance job, internal is better than external for balancing.
Remember longer stroked 410's compression was 10.5:1 back in 66-67, not gonna happen with todays crap called gas. Dished pistons with a tight quench area plus large chambered heads will lower compression to run pump gas unless your building a weekend race fuel only toy.
Go with large valve big port heads to help with deep breathing of your stroker motor.
Allow more for overcosts as it will surprise you it never comes in under budget, trust me.
Remember longer stroked 410's compression was 10.5:1 back in 66-67, not gonna happen with todays crap called gas. Dished pistons with a tight quench area plus large chambered heads will lower compression to run pump gas unless your building a weekend race fuel only toy.
Go with large valve big port heads to help with deep breathing of your stroker motor.
Allow more for overcosts as it will surprise you it never comes in under budget, trust me.
Last edited by "Beemer Nut"; Mar 2, 2007 at 12:51 AM.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: idaho
ya, its already over budget! ha ha ha I am expecting more over budget, I dont know if my wife will like it though.
I was happy with a stock 390 untill I put an eleven foot camper on the back and was pulling four thousand pounds behind me! then it did ok still, but really was over working a bit, I think that was its demise, oops!
I didnt build that one.
I was happy with a stock 390 untill I put an eleven foot camper on the back and was pulling four thousand pounds behind me! then it did ok still, but really was over working a bit, I think that was its demise, oops!
I didnt build that one.
Last edited by 390cobrajet; Mar 2, 2007 at 01:31 AM.