Dumb Question
Thread Starter
|
Hotshot
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 18,488
Likes: 22
From: The Big, Oregon
Dumb Question
Out of curiosity, can a 400 crank fit in a 351C block? I have always wondered about building a true 400c. I looked around on Bubba's page, and didn't find anything either way. Also, what size are the main journals supposed to be on a 351c?
Jared
Jared
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0
Dumb Question
It's definately not a bolt in item. The 351C main journals measure 2.75" vs 3.00" for the 400.
You are likely to run into clearance issues at the bottom of the cylinders from the counterweights and the connecting rods.
You can cut the counterweights down but will have to re-balance everything using expensive mallory metal pressed into the counterweights.
The rod journals can be reduced to a smaller 2.1" chevy size journal and custom rods used to get the right length.
If it were easy everyone would be doing it, right?
I don't recommend a stroke over 3.85" for the street anyway. The rod angles become excessive and the piston heights are too short for long engine life.
See what speedomotive has for Clevelands.
http://www.speedomotive.com/
You are likely to run into clearance issues at the bottom of the cylinders from the counterweights and the connecting rods.
You can cut the counterweights down but will have to re-balance everything using expensive mallory metal pressed into the counterweights.
The rod journals can be reduced to a smaller 2.1" chevy size journal and custom rods used to get the right length.
If it were easy everyone would be doing it, right?
I don't recommend a stroke over 3.85" for the street anyway. The rod angles become excessive and the piston heights are too short for long engine life.
See what speedomotive has for Clevelands.
http://www.speedomotive.com/
Elder User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
From: Porterfield
Dumb Question
OK I agree with this statement:>It's definately not a bolt in item. The 351C main journals measure 2.75" vs 3.00" for the 400.>
As for this statement I disagree: >You are likely to run into clearance issues at the bottom of
>the cylinders from the counterweights and the connecting
>rods.
The differants between the 351C and the 400/351M is Main journal size and Deck Height, which is 1" taller.The distance between the bottom of the Cylinders and crank throws are the same.Seeing when I ordered my first stroker crank it was a 351C drop forging blank that it was made from.
And as for this statement I totally disagree:>I don't recommend a stroke over 3.85" for the street anyway.
The rod angles become excessive and the piston heights are too short for long engine life.
But I do agree with this statement:>If it were easy everyone would be doing it, right?
>See what speedomotive has for Clevelands.
>http://www.speedomotive.com/
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0
Dumb Question
Don't just totaly disagree. Explanations are needed too. The stroker kit I've seen for a 4" crank uses a 6" rod.
With the 9.206" 351C deck,
9.206"
-2.00" (1/2 stroke)
-6.00" rod
-----------
1.206" piston
Isn't this short of a piston going to have the oil ring going through the pin? I've read pistons like this turn the engines into smokers.
With the 9.206" 351C deck,
9.206"
-2.00" (1/2 stroke)
-6.00" rod
-----------
1.206" piston
Isn't this short of a piston going to have the oil ring going through the pin? I've read pistons like this turn the engines into smokers.
