433 Bbc Vs 425 Sbc - Page 2 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 08:01 AM
Overdriv's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: May 2005
Location: IL
Age: 64
Posts: 740
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbolover
I respectfully disagree with that. Forced indction gets the most looks, and a roots blower is still king when it comes to stealing the show. There's also some LS, northstar, and even polished up V6's that draw far more attention than "another BBC". For the wow factor the BBC is VERY overdone and at this point boring.

Sure makes a car go fast though!
No doubt it's a personal preference thing. I would agree that the sight of a roots type blower setting on a BBC looks pretty awesome and gets the most looks. But still, the cruises and shows I go to there are so many cars with SBC engines, it's like 69 Camaros, I like 69 Camaros, but seems everyone has one, but that's off topic.

Anyway, for more than one reason, I think BBC is the better way to get to your 700HP range.

    Advertisement
Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 08:36 AM
Duntov's Avatar
Visit the NASCAR Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Near Charlotte
Posts: 411
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BottleBaby
{Fuel will be 66% Pump E-85( 96-105 octane) blended 33%with Rockett Brand E-85( octane 112).}
I) A 436 cid SBC based on after market forged components( Motown Block 4.165 bore,6 inch rods,4.0 crank, solid roller cam & lifters) expected power band (2800-7000 rpm) 11.25-12.5:1 CR
II) A 433 cid BBC based on a production block & forged aftermarket components ( +.030 bore 454 block, 6.35 inch BBC rods, 3.76 inch crank, solid roller cam & lifters) 11.25-12.5:1 CR
Sounds like you are keeping the BBC inside specific CID limitation for a reason. You didn't mention the SBC, but I got the impression it would be a 421 to 434?

With this Lynch Mob brewing I'm getting off the sbc subject myself
Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 10:20 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thank you all for your honesty.

The odd combos come from engines that I knew would Rev( N2O makes alot of TQ at the RPM it is needed), so I was looking for a shorter stroke and less than 500 CID.

Last year Muscle Car magazine had an article on the F.A.S.T. racing class of Stock appearing cars. In this article was a Corvette with a 511 CID based on a 454 BBC. It featured a 4.375 inch bore and a 4.25 stroke( the bore was a full 1/8 overbore and the stroke is common) I have also seen this in Car Craft with a 4.31 bore(+.060) and a 4.375 inch stroke.

My question is which is easier to build from the stand point of availabilty of usable blocks & commonly produced cranks( production or aftermarket)?

How many off Y'all have had a Tunnel Rammed combo on the street, is this a waste of time with the newer single plane single four manifolds?

Thanks again!
Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 11:27 AM
Duntov's Avatar
Visit the NASCAR Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Near Charlotte
Posts: 411
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BottleBaby
Thank you all for your honesty.

Was it obvious that my "Lynch Mob" comment was attempted Humor?
Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 12:33 PM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In a van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I love this thread. It has my vote. In my opinion for whatever its worth, I would go 427 tall deck because you could cram more stroke in there than a short deck bigger bore 502 if thats what you want, or use that great forged 3.766 inch stroke and long rods, great heads, dual carbs and crazy cam to turn more revs. Or, keep the 427 dumptruck motor mostly stock and slap some big heads and a roots blower on it and really burn some gas. Same piston height as the 366, I know of a guy that took a 366 school bus motor and had great luck by just slapping a supercharger on it. With a piston that thick you can handle more heat and hence boost. Heck, I might could speculate you could burn some of the top of the piston off and never even notice. Not trying to be funny. If I had a blower and a budget that's exactly what i would do, a running 366 for 400 bucks, fresh pistons and rings, blower. Or a 427 tall deck, long rods, skinny pistons for a 4.25 bore(there are lots of them for the stroker people, and lots of long rods too) and solid lifters and huge heads manifold and dual 4 barrels. Long stroke can't rev as high, you can often end up with greater peak power with less stroke sometimes. But they are right in that longer stroke can make greater peak torque. It just does it much lower in the rpm range. It really depends on where you want the rpm to be that it peaks. Merlin even makes super tall deck blocks for that very reason if money is no object. I think simply however, and to me, revving a motor of great displacement to an ungodly rpm (it has an effect on people trust me) is about the coolest thing there is. A blower is of course, very cool too. Not trying to make a joke btw. I wish I had 4 427 blocks laying around instead of 4 small blocks. With a 427 tall deck you could make a 454 that would easily beat a short deck 454 anyday you wanted to with any old crappy 454 cast crank, some 6.535 rods and some cheapie 454 pistons. But WHY???? Or yeah, I forgot. To show that the tall deck is better. Imagine a 427 that can rev just like a 327, only it is 100+ cubes bigger and has has wayyy better heads..... Rpms are where the fun is in my book and you wont find that with a super stroked mouse motor, or any super stroked big block motor either. Not saying those motors arn't cool in there own special way, they have there place. Maybe like a tractor pull or something or a massively heavy vehicle with very very tall gears and overdrive. Everybody has there own thoughts about what they think is good or best, and if nobody agrees with the angle of your attack it does not necessarily mean it will not work. You can do it anyway you want! That's what it's all about and be sure and keep us posted of the progress! After all, this is still America, land of the free, last time I checked.

Big stroker motors are ok, but you better have the gears and you are still going to burn more gas all the time especially if they are not tuned to low rpm. You can get some real velocity going with rpms and a properly tuned intake and exhaust is key. Trying to make a super long stroke motor breath well at high rpm can make it very inefficient at low rpm because of the huge runners you would need, and that slows velocity and inertia at low rpm. But that's the range it is naturally good at! Defeats the purpose kinda to me at least. But a shorter stroke motor can still make decent power at low rpm but at the same time rev up like crazy if you would like to feel very afraid and make your hands tremble. Or at least make your passenger freak out.


Think: a short stroke motor can be made to have a pretty flat power band and can double the rpm 3 times over. 1000-2000-4000-8000 But a super long stroke motor can double its rpms like twice maybe. 1000-2000-4000.

With the right heads, cam, valve train, and exhaust etc. a 427 at 8000 rpm can breathe the same as a 854 inch motor at 4000 rpm! Yikes!

Last edited by Dirty Biker; 08-31-2010 at 12:59 PM.
Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 01:40 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,036
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
OK- but how high do you have to spin a 427 to equal a "854" at a lazy 5500 rpm?

The TD production truck block doesn't fit a bigger stroke, it has 'room' for longer rods.
Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 01:45 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 466
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Watchout cobalt327, don't get sucked in! That guy knows just enough to be dangerous... He's on a with hunt to find a connecting rod long enough to move the world off its axis.
Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 01:59 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,036
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbolover
He's on a with hunt to find a connecting rod long enough to move the world off its axis.
That's OK- I had a 462 Pontiac that didn't spin the tires- it spun the earth beneath them.

I could ONLY race at tracks in perfect alignment w/the equator!
Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 03:05 PM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In a van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobalt327
OK- but how high do you have to spin a 427 to equal a "854" at a lazy 5500 rpm?

The TD production truck block doesn't fit a bigger stroke, it has 'room' for longer rods.
No such thing as a 854 turning 5500 lazily!! That is completly absurd! Try it!!! C'mon!

"The TD production truck block doesn't fit a bigger stroke, it has 'room' for longer rods."

Where the heck did you hear that?
What makes you think that??? What does that even mean? It isn't making sense to me.

It is the same bottom end as a short deck only with more cylinder height on the top! Theoretically it could allow for even more stroke than a short deck with same rods!!! If you really wanted a super long stroke motor without dishing out serious dough for a extra tall deck merlin block what other choice is there than a 427 truck block with 10.2 deck? C'mon you guys.... You can do better than that... hehe

Last edited by Dirty Biker; 08-31-2010 at 03:15 PM.
Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 04:31 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,036
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
If you already have it all sorted out, why do YOU not just do it already!

How do you think that a higher deck would make for any larger clearance inside the crankcase for more stroke? Have you ever even seen a TD BBC? Or ANY BBC?? Only if the stroke was to the extent that a pin couldn't be fit to a piston would the deck height come into it. The physical dimensions inside the engines are identical AFA clearance for counterweights and rod to rail or cam clearance goes.

Do you have any clue for what it takes to run a 427 @ 8KRPM, reliably? More to the point, do you have a clue, period??

FWIW the IHRA P/S "Mountain Motors"- 900- PLUS cid- turn just a tiny bit more than 5.5K RPM- reliably. How about 2070 HP @ 8100. 932cid. NA. Carbureted.

Last edited by cobalt327; 08-31-2010 at 04:38 PM.
Quick reply to this message
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 05:12 PM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In a van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobalt327
If you already have it all sorted out, why do YOU not just do it already!

How do you think that a higher deck would make for any larger clearance inside the crankcase for more stroke? Have you ever even seen a TD BBC? Or ANY BBC?? Only if the stroke was to the extent that a pin couldn't be fit to a piston would the deck height come into it. The physical dimensions inside the engines are identical AFA clearance for counterweights and rod to rail or cam clearance goes.

Do you have any clue for what it takes to run a 427 @ 8KRPM, reliably? More to the point, do you have a clue, period??

FWIW the IHRA P/S "Mountain Motors"- 900- PLUS cid- turn just a tiny bit more than 5.5K RPM- reliably. How about 2070 HP @ 8100. 932cid. NA. Carbureted.

"If you already have it all sorted out, why do YOU not just do it already!"
I do not have the money. However that has not stopped me from thinking about it! Have you the money to prove I am wrong?

"How do you think that a higher deck would make for any larger clearance inside the crankcase for more stroke?"

I did not say it would. I simply stated that you could have a bigger stroke with the same rods if you read my post.

"Have you ever even seen a TD BBC?" Yes I have. They are nearly the same looking. Easy way to tell without looking at the casting number is the space above the water pump bolt.

"Or ANY BBC??" You are clearly taking this way too seriously and making a post based on your emotional reaction rather than a logical argument here. But to answer your question: Of course! I have a 454 in my van now.

"Only if the stroke was to the extent that a pin couldn't be fit to a piston would the deck height come into it."

So let me see if I understand what you asked.. if you had a long stroke crank you wanted to use and the pin height of the piston was too short to use with any rod that would work, then you couldn't use the crank right? Well a tall deck block might let you use that crank and rod combo you wanted. So a tall deck block would let you run a longer stroke in that case.

"The physical dimensions inside the engines are identical AFA clearance for counterweights and rod to rail or cam clearance goes."

Did I not say that earlier that they were the same?

"Do you have any clue for what it takes to run a 427 @ 8KRPM, reliably?"

I would say that to run any motor reliably at 8000rpm is pushing it unless you have a purpose designed engine like nascar or F1. I was using it as an example, but to run some short bursts up to that speed is not above the realm of possibilities for a 427 tall deck with solid lifters, long rods, stock 3.766 stroke and great heads with huge carbs.

"More to the point, do you have a clue, period??"

I think that is some kind of attack on me, even tho I clearly stated I was simply saying my opinion, you had to throw that in there to try to make me feel bad somehow. I feel sorry for you man, you must have had a rough day, or a rough life, to have to to try to make others feel bad about themselves. Misery loves company maybe true, but it didn't work this time guy.

"FWIW the IHRA P/S "Mountain Motors"- 900- PLUS cid- turn just a tiny bit more than 5.5K RPM- reliably. How about [u][B][I]2070 HP @ 8100. 932cid. NA. Carbureted"

How much did they spend on that motor is my question? That may be an exception, but I do not think that kinda performance is what this post is about. Why I bet with unlimited budget I could completely design a entirely different motor that beat that. What about the GMC Big Block V6/V12 somebody mentioned earlier? I bet with its short stroke and forged crank I could even make it spin alot of rpms.. Might take some super porting on the heads, custom cams... custom lightened pistons and custom rods... Anything is possible with enough CASH. Dude. C'mon.
Quick reply to this message
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 05:18 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,036
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Biker
"How do you think that a higher deck would make for any larger clearance inside the crankcase for more stroke?"

I did not say it would. I simply stated that you could have a bigger stroke with the same rods...
Want to explain this?
Quick reply to this message
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 05:23 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,036
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 598 Times in 547 Posts
Do you think the rod's length has any effect on the displacement?

The rod length and the deck height has NADA to do w/how much crank physically fits inside of a production-based BBC block- be it pass. car or TD.

A TD BBC will not make a bigger engine than can be made from a passenger car-based block. All that would be different is the rod/stroke ratio.

Pat Musi:

"Pat Musi, a long-time East Coast engine builder and racer, specializes in 555 cid big-block Chevys for everything from street cars to hardcore drag racers weighed in on the short- versus tall-deck aftermarket blocks this way. "Ideally, in a race engine you'd like to have a 1.8 rod ratio. A stock 427 Chevy is 1.6. With the 4.25? stroke crank that we use in our 555s the rod ratio is around 1.55. We just live with that instead of going with a tall-deck block because I prefer to keep the rotating mass low, and I want to take the flex out of the valvetrain.""
Quick reply to this message
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 05:24 PM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 48
Posts: 9,826
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 51
Thanked 612 Times in 546 Posts
Biker, you are the one who is clueless. Point is that the space in the bottom end of the BBC casting, tall deck or short, does not have an unlimited room for stroke and are in fact the same, the tall deck engine can't be built any bigger than the short deck engine using a stock 4.25" bore GM block.

Your V6/V12 idea holds water about as good as a screen door works on a submarine.

You can speculate about engines all you want, but stop offering advice, 85% of what you are posting is pure crap and will confuse those who are trying to learn here.

You need to join those learners.
Quick reply to this message
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 05:46 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ok Gents lets all play Nice NOW!

Lets keep it to the facts.


The original intent of this post was to establish a game plan for a smaller 433 CID BBC with forged components matched to a Solid Lifter Cam, Single 4 or Tunnel Ram( Edelbrock or Weiand), High Compression Pistons 11.25-12.5:1( but a 13.1:1 might be better), operating RPM range 2500-7000(shift point 7500).

Fuel should be Pump E-85(96-105 octane) spiked with 25-30% Rocket Brand E-85(112 octane).

Desired output at the flywheel is 600-700 HP with another 175-400(single or dual foggers).

Rear Tires 31-18.5-15 ET Streets, Dana 60 rear 4.88 gears with ARB or Detriot Locker, Transbraked TH400 trans.

If I could accomplish this with lower priced components like Patriot or Procomp heads, a 427 tall deck production block over AFR heads & World Blocks then I'll be ahead in the long run.

I just want to be eyes wide open and see the true costs I will need to pay.

Thank You all for your Honesty.
Quick reply to this message
Closed Thread

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BBC Fan Clutch on a SBC ? early68 Engine 1 08-16-2010 09:41 AM
sbc to bbc therealbobinator Hotrodding Basics 4 01-15-2009 08:36 AM
SBC to BBC powerline808 Engine 1 03-25-2006 06:49 AM
Do SBC and BBC mount in the same position? 70bird Engine 3 11-06-2004 08:16 PM
is a 429 an SBC or a BBC? solowookie Engine 16 10-23-2002 06:01 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.