|02-20-2007 03:00 PM|
|machine shop tom||
|02-20-2007 11:31 AM|
Yes Junior Stocker; the pistons were farther down the hole than I would have expected, I was even considering using a 6" rod.
I'm just going to try and build up the short block to the Z-28 specs, use the 64cc heads I got with roller arms/cam and get an Offenhauser cross-ram. I don't really want to go over a 10:1 ratio because of gas prices for high octane.
As for using Ford parts in a Chevy; I think my truck would gag, not to mention the cost of all the machining involved. Come on guys, I think mixing Chevy and Ford parts could be a felony in Detroit.
|02-18-2007 10:54 PM|
|baddbob||I've got a 3.1" large journal crank in storage waiting for a rainy day. It's out of a 262 or 267 I believe. It'll fit in a 400 block with spacers or the thick bearings and there are pistons available to work with a 6.125 rod. But I'm sure the rpm capability is low considering it's a cast crank. Sure would make for an odd combination though... I wonder what it would run like|
|02-18-2007 08:54 PM|
|02-18-2007 08:42 PM|
|junior stocker||TechInspector1, The problem with the 5.94 rods would be the journal size;265-283-302 small journal crank and 327 small journal block, and spacers are only made for the mains if I'm correct. I still think based on his own discription of "hodge-podge" parts and mismatched heads the "327" piston was down in the hole. He never addressed that issue however; and, he seems pretty dedicated to the idea of building a 301/302. Can Howard come out and play? BUTCH.|
|02-18-2007 06:54 PM|
This was still buggin' me about the 327 pistons until I searched out a thread from 2002. It seems that Chevy built a 264 Gen II small block for the '94-'96 Caprice. The motor had a 3" stroke and 5.94" rods. Maybe the guy hyarbour got the motor from was trying to make a hermorphrodite 302 using 327 pistons and the 264 rods. If the block was 9.025" and the pistons were rebuilder types with a fairly short compression height, it could have worked out pretty close on the piston deck height. Depending on how much the piston popped out of the deck, a guy could run a little thicker head gasket to set the squish at 0.035".
Sorry Tom, more bench racing BS.
|02-17-2007 02:33 PM|
|junior stocker||See; what Machine Shop Tom said ,and what I said in my last post. I still think there's creativity left in this hobby and we all need to step out of the box once in a while. That's what HOTRODDING's about. BUTCH.|
|02-17-2007 08:59 AM|
|machine shop tom||
All this talk of using Ford pistons and oddball rods and such is just bench-racing BS. Make a small-journal 327 out of it. Find some 1.84/1.50 305 heads (depending on chamber size you will get between 9 and 10 to one compression.
|02-16-2007 08:08 PM|
If you are going to build a twister, you need lots of compression because of the long cam duration.
Watch out for pistons with more than .125 dome. The dome has a tendency to act like a fence and block the flame front of the combustion burn.
So deck height is important, squish/quench is important, and head cc's gives you your compression.
Yes you are going to need gear to get it going because the low rpm torque will be nil, but the power will also be peaky, so wide ratios might not be too good unless you spin it high before shifting. Calculate your rpm drop between shifts before you buy.
|02-16-2007 01:24 PM|
I was thinking of going to a wide ratio 5 speed tranny to compensate for the 302's lack of low end and my 3.73 rear end should help, that and an offy cross-ram would diffinately be something nice to look at.
As for the pistons; I'll just get the right ones and some forged rods and proceed from there. I came across the pistons for $250-300, forged full floating type, still have to decide on what final compression ratio I want.
Thanks for everyones input
|02-16-2007 11:37 AM|
|junior stocker||I'd just get a small journal 327 crank and go from there;cheaper overall and would require "less" in the way of drivetrain components.|
|02-16-2007 08:44 AM|
I guess I'll start saving up for the right pistons. Anyone want a set of 327 pistons and rods? If I got to go that route I'll get full floating.
|02-15-2007 11:35 PM|
|junior stocker||Yes, but his engine was thrown together with whatever parts could be scrounged up it sounds like. It even had a 60cc head on one bank and 70cc on the other; used 327 rebuilder pistons. How would anyone find a one off set of small journal rods to put this together. I still think it sounds like the piston was way down in the hole but this has'nt been confirmed yet. Those Ford FE 352 pistons I was refering to do have 4 valve reliefs; but are they correctly spaced to work with SBC heads? Then if they had to be flycut differently there goes some compression. I've got enough SBC projects going on and I'd like to see someone else try this budget 301/302. BUTCH.|
|02-15-2007 11:19 PM|
Any chance the rods might be 5.85"? It seems to me it would make a 327 and a 283 crank work together.
1.5" crank (283) + 1.675" piston (stock 327) + 5.85" rod = 9.025"
|02-15-2007 09:42 PM|
You can't mix roller parts with flat tappet parts. period
I've read of people putting hydraulic flat tappets on a solid flat tappet cam, for a dyno test only, for a true back to back test,
but generally I would advise against such antics as you will not know the outcome until toooooo late.
If you put a flat tappet on a roller cam, the edge of the lifter would dig into the lobe and the cam would not even turn one round. In fact, if you tried it, the lifters sit up soooo high the push rods would be 1/2 inch too long on the upslope and 1/2 inch too short on the base circle. Look at one and study it out.
If you put a roller on a flat tappet lobe, the lift and duration would be waaaay short of the specs. Lose maybe 70* duration and lift all the way around except at the top of the lobe.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|