ENGINE BUILD REVISED - COMMENTS WELCOME

problems

let Storlein spec the motor.

is this a street motor? if so, compression is way off, let cam grinder spec compression for intended fuel. Compression is not a big power maker.

Rods too long for 9.2 block.

Why are you choosing comp to grind the cam? Better grinders out there. Let Storlein handle that for you.

What's up with the BBC rockers?

I guess you never plan to rebuild the motor, you've left no room for boring.

and what's up with the King bearings?

gotta go, George

Storlein is specing both the rods, cam, and rockers.

I too am concerned about rod length as this will put the pin well into the oil ring and require a pancake of a piston. Storlein is specing this package and says that this is not a problem. What rod length would be better? 6.00?

Storlein has selected Comp as the cam grinder.

The BB Chevy arm is a Storlein selection and he says that this based on a better geometry for the valve train based on the positioning of the pushrod cup in the Chevy rocker arm vs the Ford rocker arm.

Block is good for 1.850 total bore so there is room for rebuild(s)

The King bearings have far superior wear and embedability characteristics as compared to Clevite. (My choice here)

Is Storlein wrong? Am I being steered down a bad path?

I forgot to mention that I intend to use a Weiand 2V X-Celerator manifold and an 850 Demon Annular carb. This should fit under the screen, barely.

That is very similar to my 434. CHI said compression of 11:1 for street motor with that head has been fine. Do you have the cam specs?

Gary

Have you mounted the ehads yet? The 3V heads flow slightly less at lower rpm due to some restricitons around the exhaust valve. That can easily be opened up. It is a little more restrictive there then on the 2v heads.

Gary

I have not purchased anything yet. Just trying to finalize the details.

This guy is doing my engine. He is also a dealer for the CHI heads. He knows how to open up the exhaust port if you want that:

http://www.tmeyerinc.com/400stroker.html

Gary

Why would you not use the CHI intake? You will give up quite a bit of power with the Wieand.
Who really cares if it fits under the screen?!
Have you thought about an exhaust system for this beast? All of the "bolt on" systems for the Pantera will be a huge cork for a engine like this.
It is also going to make a huge amount of torque.I hope you have thought about the axles,clutch,halfshafts,etc.....

Ron

DJEZC,

I disagree with the 6.2 rod on the 9.2 block, that only leaves 1.00" for the ring package, & part of that is of course the big side notch in the piston for the Cleveland's intake valve relief. I don't understand what can he be thinking? The 6.00" rod leaves 1.20" for the ring pack, which is marginal, especially for a Cleveland. As far as stroke to rod length ratios go, the 1.5 ratio of the 6.00" rod is adequate for a hard running street motor. How far into the rev range this motor will rev with a 6.00" rod I can't say, the stroker motor scene came along after I stopped building hot rod motors. Dan Jones was planning on a 6.00" rod in his 4.00" stroker, I used his name intentionally hoping by using his name he'll pick up on this post & comment. Scat is building 4.00" kits for the Cleveland using a 6.00" rod. You could place a call to Bob at Scat and speak to him about the 6.2" rod & ring package, the man sells stroker cranks for a living & knows his business.

Outside of my comments about the rod length I do not like being put in the place of commenting on another mechanics work.

Problem with bearings with good "embedability" is they don't stand up to abuse, the babbit peels off them like ribbons. You'll find it in your oil pan during the first tear down, honestly & literally. I've seen it many times. You want the tough bearings. You'll avoid scoring your journals by changing the oil regularly & running a good filter.

you're welconme to e-mail me at gp_fillmore@yahoo.com. If you'd like to discuss looking out for what's best for you outside a public forum.

your friend on the DTBB, George

I doubt you will loose that much HP with the Weiland intake. The CHI intake is more of a high rpm intake and the Weiland is more of a torqer intake so it kind of depends on your rpm band.

BUT.....I don't think the Weiland will fit. That was what I got for my build but the intakes on the CHI are high port. I had to get a high port intake such as the CHI:

http://www.tmeyerinc.com/400stroker.html

And It will stick up ALOT higher I am afraid.

Gary

DJEZC & Gary,

The 2V X-celerator will bolt on using spacers sold by CHI. The X-celerator with the CHI spacers will raise the carb height about 1 1/4". Things will be too tight. If the carb doesn't have a choke horn, that will allow the air filter assembly to sit lower over the carb & give you some breathing room, otherwise I predict the carb will be about 5/8" too high.

talking about getting high with my friends on the DTBB, George

Plus the height from taller bore.

I didn't care about my car but I know some do.

Gary

Let me refrase that, I don't mind about my #1905 because it's a bit more out there. When I do my pushbutton #1280 I will keep the screen and the 351C.

Gary

Gary,

my turn to explain myself better! lol.............

DJEZC is considering a 9.2" deck block, same as a Cleveland, that's why the 2V X-celerator works on his engine & not yours, your 10.3" deck block throws everything off.

The 9.2" dck height is also why the carb will only sit 1 1/4" higher.

George