440 -> 505 Stroker advice

[coloradodave]

I think the reason you see that is: What's the point of building a 500+ engine and then dumb it down (choke it up? lol) and make a totally mismatched combo?? I mean, if this guy really is going to drive it every day, why even build a stroker? To get a 500+ engine to drive like your mommas buick, you'll have such a mismatched combo that you've cheated yourself out of anything that you gained by going with the stroker in the first place. Build a mild 440 and just tell everyone it's a 505 and save yourself a ton of grief and cash. And Dave, if you really think anything mentioned in this thread is big, bad race parts, then you don't get out much. We street drive F2 Procharged 427ci small block fords, tons of 416ci nitrous engines, big cube nitrous hemis and twin turbo combos around here that use crank triggers, EFI, racepacks and everything else that make this stuff look like small potatoes.

Which one of those cars you mentioned HAS to be driven to work everyday? I agree that they're 'driven on the street', but that doesn't make them a 'street car' or a 'daily driver'. Anyway, it's a non point now as the OP now says that he's going to drive it occassionally, completely voiding my point...And, having run an NHRA Super Gas car and a Procharged Chevy pick-up, I do get out now and then...

 

[Kern Dog]

Is it just me or is it that everytime somebody asks for recommendations for their 'daily driver' but mentions the word 'stroker' that all the posters start recommending the biggest/baddest race parts? Seriously, does anyone here know what it costs to drive one of these 'almost race' motors to work everyday?
When you get radical on a daily driver, you create a part time job trying to get and keep it running right. If you have to drive it to work everyday, the car won't be fun for very long. As IQ52 said, a motor this size, with a mild build will produce all the smoke you want.

At first I felt this same way. After looking at some of the many threads on this topic, THIS is what I have noticed:
1) A 500 inch engine built with 9.5 compression and aluminum heads can be a great street engine using a mild camshaft for a smoothe idle and reasonably good economy. The ratio leaves a little wiggle room in case the owner finds himself at a gas station the only has regular fuel. This ratio also allows for the inevitable carbon buildup that leads to the need for MORE octane to stave off detonation.
2) A 500 inch engine that was built by a newbie who didn't do enough research ( Like me...10.7 comp) can be a pain in the *** when the rest of the combination isn't matched to the compression. The wrong cam, the wrong spark timing curve or an incorrectly tuned carburetor can make the owner feel pissed off and discouraged. In THIS case, Monday morning Quarterbacking is common.
I made the mistake of thinking that I could just assemble the engine and tear up the street. I've learned that while assembling an engine takes skill, it takes MUCH more talent to fine-tune the combination to reach its potential.

 

[2Luke2]

At first I felt this same way. After looking at some of the many threads on this topic, THIS is what I have noticed:
1) A 500 inch engine built with 9.5 compression and aluminum heads can be a great street engine using a mild camshaft for a smoothe idle and reasonably good economy. The ratio leaves a little wiggle room in case the owner finds himself at a gas station the only has regular fuel. This ratio also allows for the inevitable carbon buildup that leads to the need for MORE octane to stave off detonation.
2) A 500 inch engine that was built by a newbie who didn't do enough research ( Like me...10.7 comp) can be a pain in the *** when the rest of the combination isn't matched to the compression. The wrong cam, the wrong spark timing curve or an incorrectly tuned carburetor can make the owner feel pissed off and discouraged. In THIS case, Monday morning Quarterbacking is common.
I made the mistake of thinking that I could just assemble the engine and tear up the street. I've learned that while assembling an engine takes skill, it takes MUCH more talent to fine-tune the combination to reach its potential.

I agree with you Gregory, but you wouldn't have learned anything if you didn't make the mistakes and your pocketbook would most likely be much lighter. While a 9.5 compression engine would be great for the street car at sea level I had no idea what it would be like at 6000ft so that's why we tried to do some research and then came here to ask others who have been there and done that.

Some people are intimidated by things that seem complicated, but you chose to give it a shot and learned a lot along the way. That's what we are doing. We are definite noobs when it comes to fine tuning a motor, but so were the expects when they started. Everyone has to start somewhere. That's what I tell everyone when they say "I could never do that." when I tell them what I do for work.

Thanks for the replies Gregory, the information is of great help.

 

[Kern Dog]

If I don't know the correct answer, I can always serve as a BAD example!
There are some really sharp guys on this forum. We are fortunate to have their help. I wish I was more internet savvy in 2004 when I built my engine.

 

[rumblefish360]

Thanks IQ52, the woman wants a rougher cam than I do lol, but she isn't going to be driving it daily like I will. I'm not looking for anything crazy on the end I just don't want to leave a ton of power on the table just because I want to drive miss daisy around. I would definitely prefer getting something a little too rowdy than tame. Though I do like when I can crank the engine over pretty easily.

- - - Updated - - -



So you think I should drop the compression down from 11.5:1 that my current setup would give me now? The dynamic is somewhere around 9.56 if I did my math right with the comp cam.

Yes, IMO, no matter the cam size, you should build a pump gas engine with what was said earlier as having "Wiggle room" so detionation isn't an issue. IMO, if you (could or had the abilty and would) drive it from sea shore to mountain top, there should be no issue of fuel requirements and pinging. You'll be happier with a car/engine this flexable and easy going.

A radical idle is in the cam design, not size!

 

[IQ52]

One item was briefly touched on by Hemirunner and then dropped by the wayside.

On the original post it was mentioned OOTB RPM cylinder heads.

There are three secrets to making horsepower, be it with 8:1 compression or 15:1 compression, the first two secrets are cylinder heads, and third and most important is cylinder heads. Ported 906 cylinder heads are the reason the 9.5:1 451 made 697 HP. Ported A460 cylinder heads are the reason the 10.5:1 515 Ford made 781 HP and ported RPM cylinder heads are the reason the 11.7:1 451 made 500+ LB-FT of torque from 3000 rpm to 7000+ rpm and 787 HP. All of these three examples were with 91 octane pump gas. The stock RPM head is far superior to the stock iron head, but with a OOTB RPM head you'll leave a bunch on the table.

 

[Kern Dog]

Very interesting. I understand you port them yourself? What sort of numbers are we looking at in terms of power difference? Do you have a pricing structure for the level of porting?

 

[Garys1969RR]

Hi 2 Luke 2, I am right up the road from you in Denver. And I built a 451 with 13.3 to 1 compression ratio. Using Ross 14 cc dome pistons, 915 ported heads with 2.14/1.81 valves. 509 cam, Holley 780, auto trans. 3.91 gears. So far, it runs great! Lots of torque, and a best of 12.91 @ 108 1/4 mile at Bandimere. 5600 feet elevation. No problems with detonation so far. 3600 pound 69 Road Runner. I drive it on the street sometimes, and oh yea, I use 100 octane Sunoco. Lol. Also running a snug .037" piston to head (squish) clearance. This is an important area to consider when running your C/R to the limit. There are so many factors involved here. Intake closing point, altitude, jetting, octane of fuel, timing, squish distance, even gear ratio. Change 1 factor and the engine will run different. I recently tried a 50 50 mix of 100 octane with 91 octane and still no pinging. I believe that it came out to about 96 octane. For a hot street set up, 11 or 11.5 to 1 C/R would be good at your altitude. Also could try a mix of av gas, 91 octane premium, a little E 85 (which is 105 octane I believe), and 100 Sunoco, in different combinations. Or just a couple of them. I like a lot of C/R at this altitude, so have to be prepared to use alternative fuel mixes to make em run good. But as IQ 52 said, airflow is the most important factor to produce a lot of power.

 

[Jimmy Jakobsson]

Good Lord, why take this poor thing right to the edge? I think its going to rattle like a tambourine at lower elevations. I mean, yeah, I run 93 octane, 11.9:1 compression with 906 heads at 250' elevation and 91 octane 5000" elevation.......for a dyno contest! I don't recommend anyone else do it! Its a street car with a 4.25" stroke, it will boil the hides at 9:1.

Hi! I have build a 493 stroker 10,04:1 compression ratio, Eagle 4,150" crank, Eagle 6,760" H- rods, Mahle forged flattop pistons, 0,040" under deck with Felpro 0,039 compressed thicknes gasket so its no quech to talk about, Edelbrock e-street 84cc cylinder head, Edelbrock rpm intake manifold, Comp cam xe275hl flat taped camshaft(231/237@050") wich gives me a theoretic dynamic compression of 8,05:1, its running great on the street here in Sweden at sea level without any detonation at all on 93 octane(98 in Sweden is like yours 93 octane), idles great on 900 rpm and has 15 hg/inch of vacuum. It has tremendous torque like i want it on the street, 2400 stall converter, 8 3/4 with 3:55 gears and Eaton tru trac helical differential

 

[andyf]

I've never driven or tuned an engine at that altitude so I don't have any experience on the best compression ratio. If it was my engine I'd probably stick with 10:1 since I know that works but perhaps 11:1 works okay as long as you stay at altitude all the time. If you ever drive the car down at sea level you'll have issues with pump gas at 11:1.

If you have any computer or electronics knowledge I'd highly recommend putting a Holley Sniper setup on there with a Hyperspark distributor. That gives you full computer control of the fuel curve as well as the ignition timing. It is so much easier to tune an engine with a laptop than with a screwdriver. Unfortunately it looks like you already spent money on a distributor and a carb. If you start from nothing then EFI costs about the same, but when you buy the parts twice it does get more expensive.

 

[biomedtechguy]

IQ52 has built numerous engines with RIDICULOUS power output, and he has admonished people who want to push CR to the limit. It just isn't that important in the overall power making equation. IQ52 said in one sentence 3 times that cylinder heads are where the power comes from, and I'll add that the cam is what "operates" the heads, moves your HP and torque up or down the RPM range, in conjunction with the heads.
In one thread you've had 2 of the BEST minds in MOPAR engine building chime in.
IQ52 and AndyF and I recommend doing EXACTLY what either of them say to do!
And Jim, I hear you saying to find a builder, and go with that ONE source for design, and I understand that. I tried taking the best aquarium advice from 3 of the best saltwater aquarium people in my area. Ultimately I decided that I had better pick one, the only exception being if all 3 said the same thing.
When YOU are the "one source" I agree 100% and I see how anyone should pick and stick with their builder, but knowing the depth of knowledge and experience that you, AndyF, and others bring to us and this forum, well I like to hear what all of you have to offer. Please don't back away from offering your advice!! It's not our fault that we can't pick you to be that one builder!