433 Bbc Vs 425 Sbc - Page 3 - 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
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 09:29 PM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In my 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
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.""
"Do you think the rod's length has any effect on the displacement?"

No.

But there are no dumb questions so keep going.

"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."

True, but if you consider the Callies 4.75 crank, it just wont fit in a 9.8 block no matter what piston you choose. Well if you got it to work, I would not drive it coast to coast. It will pretty easily fit in a 10.2 block tho.

"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."


I do not know of anybody who is serious about making power that is content with a 1.29:1 rod ratio. 1.29:1 is what 4.75 divided into 6.135 is. Leaving a little skinny 1.29 piston height. Lets not forget the big .9898 piston pin and all the side loading. Just say no to drugs, ok people?

    Advertisement

Last edited by Dirty Biker; 08-31-2010 at 09:56 PM.
Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 10:18 PM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 466
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BottleBaby
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.
Are you willing to run a 496? It makes your power goals cheaper and easier to obtain. The more rpm you turn the higher cost and shorter life of your engine can be unexpected. Its why most of the na prostreet crowd runs larger displacement- it just makes more sense.
Quick reply to this message
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 10:33 PM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In my van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
with a name like turbolover, you would think high rpm... sadly not so tho apparently...he too has fallen victim to the masses....



BottleBaby, I personally really like the way you are trying to approach things! Nice! If it were up to me I would do the same thing! You can get your tall deck 427 block by keeping a watch on CL, then keep on piecing it together, or else if you are in a hurry, just try the 366 dumptruck motor route. You can get them for like 400 bucks on craigslist or the junkyards, depends on where ya live. Ebay too, but you might have to go drive and get it. You could probably dump as much no2 as you want in there and not even hurt it at all! It's an indestructible motor for sure! I never heard of anyone that has destroyed one even with a roots blower running double atmospheric pressure. Of course tho as soon as I say that there is that one guy who didn't check the oil....
Quick reply to this message
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 10:34 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: 59
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Biker
I do not know of anybody who is serious about making power that is content with a 1.29:1 rod ratio. 1.29:1 is what 4.75 divided into 6.135 is. Leaving a little skinny 1.29 piston height. Lets not forget the big .9898 piston pin and all the side loading. Just say no to drugs, ok people?
If you were anywhere NEAR as clever at things automotive as you are at BS'ing, you'd realize how ludicrous a 4-3/4" crank is, in the context of a production BBC.

Funny that YOU- a self-proclaimed 'hippy' who would power a 7-ton step van w/a ~300 cid SBC, would think a 4.75" crank would fit a production block, that a tall deck made a whit of difference in the displacement, would go on to accuse anyone of drug abuse. Fact is I don't take illicit drugs. Can YOU honestly say the same??? As if.

A little of your schtick goes a L-O-N-G way.
Quick reply to this message
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 10:41 PM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In my van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I did not mean to imply that you were on drugs, I was actually saying that tio be funny and I am sorry if it hurt your feeling because I do not think that you take drugs at all and in fact I take seriously your opinions on all the things you take time to share with me.
Can we just hang out and let each other be? Like, for instance, my opinion does not need to agree with your opinion, and your opinion need not agree with mine, but we still can be friends?

Last edited by Dirty Biker; 08-31-2010 at 11:06 PM.
Quick reply to this message
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 11:09 PM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 47
Posts: 9,242
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 26
Thanked 424 Times in 388 Posts
[QUOTE=Dirty Biker]



"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."

True, but if you consider the Callies 4.75 crank, it just wont fit in a 9.8 block no matter what piston you choose. Well if you got it to work, I would not drive it coast to coast. It will pretty easily fit in a 10.2 block tho.



[QUOTE]
4.75" stroke won't fit in either block, you will need an aftermarket block with spread oil pan rails and raised cam location. This is what you don't seem to understand - the stock TD block has no more room for stroke than the short deck block does. You will hit water, and the main oil galley at the pan rail, when clearance grinding before you will get more than 4.375" stroke to fit, and even 4.375" is a risky proposition.

The TD block has no more room for capacity than the standard deck block has, just room for longer rods, a fact of which you place WAAAAYYY too much emphasis on. When talking high rpm, the long pushrods that will need to be used with the tall deck block will lead to more bad harmonics in the valve train than the long rod will ever make up for even 10% of. This is why current high rpm BBC applications like Pro Stock are using shorter than factory stock deck height BBC blocks, and relatively short rods compared to stock rods.

Last edited by ericnova72; 08-31-2010 at 11:20 PM.
Quick reply to this message
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-2010, 11:27 PM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In my van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
here is a 4.375 a 4.5 and a 4.625 stroke cranks... You mean to say none except the 4.375 will fit the stock block? What if I grind with my tools!!! C'mon is there any who have done it? why do you think it will not fit? Hitting the cam?

As if we needed more or something, like 700 ft/lbs just is not really getting the job done. Sorry old motor, but we have a new 1200 ft/lb motor now that claims the same pounds per hour fuel consumption as you, so.. don't make this any harder than it has to be ok? mmh'kay,now off ya go okay now.. good luck k see ya!

I, sir, do not want a stroke larger than 4 inches, nor do I need one. In fact, if I were able to for free, I would downgrade to 3.766 stroke. All this power I have is completely nutzoid. I have no use for it at all and I am pretty sure it is costing me more fuel. However certain members of the tribe seem to think it actually helps my mileage. Why, I can not know at this point. I however see no reasoning in there judgement on the matter, and can conclusively say that I would rather trade volumetric efficiency, such as in a smaller motor working at near full capacity, vs. a big motor barely ticking over. But then again, I have mouths to feed.

Last edited by Dirty Biker; 08-31-2010 at 11:50 PM.
Quick reply to this message
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 12:10 AM
BigRoy1978's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Hugoton, KS
Age: 25
Posts: 338
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
wow biker...ive ran 366 in grain trucks...two words BOAT ANCHOR!!! make about 110 horsepower.

I have on one picture for you biker....kinda explains all this new miracle technology being thrown around...

Quick reply to this message
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 12:46 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 196
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 10
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BottleBaby
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.
I was thinking of building a 427 BBC or bigger bore 4,5" short deck block and 3,76 stroke with maybe 6,535" rods and AFR heads,but is there a crankshaft other than Eagle in the market(in affordable price?)Summit only has Eagle cranks with short stroke,GMPP has short stroke crank,but it is for a one piece rear oil seal block.
Quick reply to this message
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 12:48 AM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 47
Posts: 9,242
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 26
Thanked 424 Times in 388 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Biker
here is a 4.375 a 4.5 and a 4.625 stroke cranks... You mean to say none except the 4.375 will fit the stock block? What if I grind with my tools!!! C'mon is there any who have done it? why do you think it will not fit .
If you knew anything about the BBC stock block and where the main oil galley is, and where the water jackets are, you wouldn't need to even ask this question.
Those bigger stroke cranks are sold to go in aftermarket, DCRE or Bowtie blocks with spread oil pan rails and revised Priority main oiling systems.

Just because the salesman will sell it to you doesn't mean it will fit, it is your responsibility to know what will fit in the block you are working with. Just because a crank is listed as BBC doesn't mean it will fit in every block, just that the main and rod journals are BBC size and spaced to fit in the standard BBC location. Does not mean that it will clear the bottom of the crankcase or main bulkheads.

Like I said, you need to do a little more learning and a little less advising about things you don't have a clue about.
Quick reply to this message
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 12:54 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 TimoFinn
I was thinking of building a 427 BBC or bigger bore 4,5" short deck block and 3,76 stroke with maybe 6,535" rods and AFR heads,but is there a crankshaft other than Eagle in the market(in affordable price?)Summit only has Eagle cranks with short stroke,GMPP has short stroke crank,but it is for a one piece rear oil seal block.
I use Ebay to get an idea what's out there. Is everyone down on Eagle? I was disapointed with my first Eagle crank for clearance but was told by a good machinist they had improved.
Quick reply to this message
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 01:03 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 196
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 10
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duntov
I use Ebay to get an idea what's out there. Is everyone down on Eagle? I was disapointed with my first Eagle crank for clearance but was told by a good machinist they had improved.
This is the reason i am asking,i know that chinese will learn to do good parts,but they need 5-10 years to do so
Quick reply to this message
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 01:13 AM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In my van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@timofin

if you can make spacer bearings you can use the "w" motor crankshaft. They are made from forged steel and will fit. The journals are smaller and i did not try it but maybe line bore a normal mkIV block with the .060 bearings installed to the cradle size of the "w" motor. Then just install regular "w" bearings. It still may not be enough as I did not do the math. With a 348 crank and a 454 block you could rev to the moon and still have nearly 370 cubes. They also make them in 3.5 and 3.65 strokes. There was one 348 crank on ebay for a long time, http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...=STRK:MEWAX:IT
maybe he will relist it. It has been on there since spring tho.

Taken from wiki ok:

, the Mark IV shared many dimensional and mechanical design similarities with the "W" engine. The cylinder block, although more substantial in all respects, used the same cylinder bore centers of 4.84" with a larger 2.75" main bearing dimension, increased from the 2.50" of the older engine (in fact, the shorter stroke 348 and 409 crankshafts could be installed with the use of "spacer bearings" without modifying the crankshsft). Like its predecessor, the Mark IV used crowned pistons, which were castings for conventional models and impact extruded (forged), solid skirt types in high performance applications.
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrol....22W.22_Series





@other two

I never wanted the guy to build a stroker, i never claimed to know about strokers, I did state a simple fact tho that if you wanted to stroke an engine and actually get it to rev, then you need to start with a tall deck block. How can you argue that? You guys are so silly, I do not like strokers, i do not think this guy wants to build one, I would not build one even if I had all the gas that was spilled in the gulf by bp. Crickey! I wanted to share what little I know about things and those things happen to be short stroke long rod revving machines!

Last edited by Dirty Biker; 09-01-2010 at 01:34 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 01:33 AM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 196
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 10
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Biker
if you can make spacer bearings you can use the "w" motor crankshaft. They are made from forged steel and will fit. The journals are smaller and i did not try it but maybe line bore a normal mkIV block with the .060 bearings in to the cradle size of the "w" journal and then install regular "w" bearings. With a 348 crank and a 454 block you could rev to the moon and still have nearly 370 cubes. There was one on ebay, http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...=STRK:MEWAX:IT
maybe he will relist it. It has been on there since spring tho.

Taken from wiki ok:

, the Mark IV shared many dimensional and mechanical design similarities with the "W" engine. The cylinder block, although more substantial in all respects, used the same cylinder bore centers of 4.84" with a larger 2.75" main bearing dimension, increased from the 2.50" of the older engine (in fact, the shorter stroke 348 and 409 crankshafts could be installed with the use of "spacer bearings" without modifying the crankshsft). Like its predecessor, the Mark IV used crowned pistons, which were castings for conventional models and impact extruded (forged), solid skirt types in high performance applications.
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrol....22W.22_Series
We don`t have w engines lying around here in Finland,and zero 366 or 427 tall deck engines,so it is difficult to get 3,76 used cranks in here,and think i will use only new parts for this engine,because used 454`s are a bit expensive too and machining and inspecting old used parts cost too I read in one magazine,that some guy put 396 crank in 348 w engine,but that`s another story.
Quick reply to this message
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 09-01-2010, 01:40 AM
Dirty Biker's Avatar
Bold As Love
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In my van, down by the river.
Age: 38
Posts: 378
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimoFinn
We don`t have w engines lying around here in Finland,and zero 366 or 427 tall deck engines,so it is difficult to get 3,76 used cranks in here,and think i will use only new parts for this engine,because used 454`s are a bit expensive too and machining is and inspecting old used parts cost too I read in one magazine,that some guy put 396 crank in 348 w engine,but that`s another story.
What do you want? I could maybe mail you something for the cost of shipping it to you, do you already have a big block motor? dirtyrottenstinkingbiker@yahoo.com
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:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
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 08:41 AM
sbc to bbc therealbobinator Hotrodding Basics 4 01-15-2009 07:36 AM
SBC to BBC powerline808 Engine 1 03-25-2006 05:49 AM
Do SBC and BBC mount in the same position? 70bird Engine 3 11-06-2004 07:16 PM
is a 429 an SBC or a BBC? solowookie Engine 16 10-23-2002 05:01 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:12 PM.


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.