Article for you torque monster stroker dreamers

[70bigblockdodge]

Read the same article while at my local bookstore yesterday. I hate to be negative, but I am not buying the HP/TQ numbers ONLY because from what I thought I read was the heads were stock iron heads. The $1200 rebuild is about right for a good complete rebuild on stock heads - no major porting or bowl work.

If there had been some aftermarket aluminum heads flowing 300 plus CFM's, maybe. But as I recall, they were indeed iron heads?

The cam specs, and a flat tappet hydraulic at that, seem too small. I would suspect at least a roller with bigger numbers which would have pushed your RPM's figures higher up the scale. And with that, a 750CFM carb would have choked it.

The 440 Six Pack was factory rated at 390HP @4,700 RPM's and 490TQ @ 3,200 RPM's. So adding 60 more cubes and going with a smaller carb raises the dyno numbers that much?

I know the 440 stokers can really crank out some power and can achieve these numbers, but with a lot more race orientated parts.

Jim your reading comprehension is lacking or you Evelyn Wood speed read it, aluminum sidewinder heads. A roller cam would be better but makes the cost soar, over $1000 instead of $300 and that's conservative. On top of that you have constant oil pump/dist drive gear replacement with roller cam. Yes they did not price porting and yes the carb is too small for a dedicated drag car.
Why do you need race parts for a street engine? Your getting sucked in to the big $ to drive to Dairy Queen mode. I think that is the idea of the article to rebuke needing roller cams, roller rockers, dominator carbs and such to do a couple thousand miles a year and maybe a dozen or so laps at the drag strip.

 

[bajajoaquin]

Seems that a torque monster engine would be used more than an occasional drive to Dairy Queen.

 

[PontiacJim]

Jim your reading comprehension is lacking or you Evelyn Wood speed read it, aluminum sidewinder heads. A roller cam would be better but makes the cost soar, over $1000 instead of $300 and that's conservative. On top of that you have constant oil pump/dist drive gear replacement with roller cam. Yes they did not price porting and yes the carb is too small for a dedicated drag car.
Why do you need race parts for a street engine? Your getting sucked in to the big $ to drive to Dairy Queen mode. I think that is the idea of the article to rebuke needing roller cams, roller rockers, dominator carbs and such to do a couple thousand miles a year and maybe a dozen or so laps at the drag strip.

Nope, not anything to do with my 1000-a-word a minute speed reading skills. Probably need a new pair of bi-focals. I did zip through the article to get to the chase - HP/TQ. Saw the listing posted on what the heads included and price and it seemed to low to be anything less than iron heads rebuilt (unless you have a Chevy small block). I can't get a pair of bolt-on aluminum heads for my 360LA at that price, and Pontiac heads are twice that.

I did not say you needed race parts for a street engine, but those heads in my book fall into that category.

Re-read what I said, I would think you would have need what I consider race orientated parts to achieve the numbers the article claimed.

Checked out a website that has the heads, $895 a pair with valves and then you can supply the rest. Stock out of the box 255 CFM's. So for $1200, in my book, a lot of bang for the buck.

.509" lift is not much for the cubes/heads the engine has - my opinion here. But I guess the numbers show otherwise. What it lacks in lift it gains in duration - a trick used on the early factory Buick 322 nailhead engines of the day to get some good HP/TQ numbers.

I am not a fan of roller cams, aluminum heads, or fuel injection/throttle body. Extra $$ for a street engine that is actually going to be driven more than around the block or to local car shows - and if you can drive 4 hours out and 4 hours back to a car show getting 8-10 MPG, more power to you and you make a heck of a lot more than I do, or am willing to spend in gas. I feel once you start getting past 425-450HP that you are getting more into race car territory and it requires additional $$ to beef up the rest of the driveline/chassis/brakes. I know many will disagree, but its my opinion.

 

[70bigblockdodge]

Seems that a torque monster engine would be used more than an occasional drive to Dairy Queen.

What exactly do you want to build a 500" engine for, other than to say you have 500" in there. Towing? Carrying some really fat people in a already heavy car? Building a super chill A/C system to hang meat in your car? Drive to work in rush hour traffic? All of those sound like a awesome reason to spend an extra $3000 minimum rebuilding your engine.
Note to self, do not post a helpful plan as everyone has a better way already.
You know the easiest path from A to B is to follow the well marked and known road.

 

[65Fury440]

Carrying some really fat people in a already heavy car?

HEY!

to spend an extra $3000 minimum rebuilding your engine.

And another 3 or so when your drive train,fuel system, and cooling system need to be upgraded.

Not sure what a 509 cammed 440 with 60s Hipo heads and bolt-ons makes, but dollars spent VS fun factor is pretty good.

My stroker honks, but my old 440 with a 4.10 gear and a Passon 5 speed might have been a good way to go.

 

[bajajoaquin]

Wow. You really get upset when people don’t agree with you.

Why did Cadillac put a 500” motor in their cars? To say they had them? Partly I’m sure that’s true. But these are big heavy cars. Off-idle and low-end torque is important to getting them moving and keep them feeling relaxed and long-legged on the freeway.

If I’m spending several thousand dollars to rebuild an engine for a daily driver and I want to spend an extra thousand or two to make it more fun to drive, why does that offend you?

All I’m saying is that there are more uses for a big, torquey engine than rumbling down to Dairy Queen once a month. If I want 550 lb ft rather than 480 is that really something that threatens you?

 

[65Fury440]

Why did Cadillac put a 500” motor in their cars?

Ever drive one? Torque for days.
My grandfather had a 500 in his 72 Eldorado convertible. They were front wheel drive, when you floored it the front end did all kinds of funny things while it scratched out a path forward.

 

[Cazman]

Also, it’s always not such an up charge. In my case I had frozen wrist pins and a ridge on the bore. New pistons, rods (re sized at least), pins, crank turned and the stroker kit was not too much more. Plus, I was able to get the pistons at zero deck.

 

[70bigblockdodge]

Wow. You really get upset when people don’t agree with you.

Why did Cadillac put a 500” motor in their cars? To say they had them

Not upset, I cannot comprehend wanting to raise it to 500" and not using it to it's fullest potential. I sounds to me like you want to make a stock 500" engine which I camnoc wrap my head around.
Yes I think Cadillac did exactly that for marketing purposes. I think they would have made another step had the oil embargo of 1973 happened.

 

[Turboomni]

On top of that you have constant oil pump/dist drive gear replacement with roller cam.

Why is that?
My reason to want a stroker in my Fury is I want it to idle all but stock with good vacuum and have effortless torque to move the big boned gal around at lower rpms and yet really push me back in my seat. Not screaming the engine as I rarely if ever do that. There is no interest. Keep my 3.23's . Low 13's I would be happy. Happy on the highway with the rear ratio. I know many would say you can do that with a good 440 set up but my understanding the larger the crank throw [longer breaker bar] the more torque you will easily get and at a lower rpm. This seems to show that in most of the info on such engines. Unless they cam it for full blown power. Add to that some nice good flowing aluminum heads and hopefully I will have something to put a grin on my face every time I push the throttle 2/3 rds of the way down. Kinda sounds like what Caddy was trying to do with 500 cubes. But these days it will be a whole lot better. I would say strokers now are another beaten safe path if you know what you want.

 

[PontiacJim]

Why is that?
My reason to want a stroker in my Fury is want it to idle all but stock with good vacuum and have effortless torque to move the big boned gal around at lower rpms and yet really push me back in my seat. Not screaming the engine as I rarely if ever do that. There is no interest. Keep my 3.23's . Low 13's I would be happy. Happy on the highway. I know many would say you can do that with a good 440 set up but my understanding the larger the crank throw [longer breaker bar] the more torque you will easily get and at a lower rpm. Add to that some nice good flowing aluminum heads and hopefully I will have something to put a grin on my face every time I push the throttle 2/3 rds of the way down. Kinda sounds like what Caddy was trying to do with 500 cubes. But these days it will be a whole lot better. I would say it's now another beaten path the whole stroker thing.

You are correct. The larger stroke will produce more torque due to greater leverage of the piston/rod assembly pushing down on the crank throw. You can get more TQ/HP at a lower engine RPM and use a cast crank, rods, & pistons IF that was the kit you selected. If you wanted more performance, than it just takes a different mindset and you go with all forged pieces and main cap studs (or 4-bolt mains or stud girdle on some engines) to keep everything together.

Pontiac GTO offered the hi-performance Ram Air IV engine which was really more of a race engine than street and was only available with 3.90 or 4.33 gearing. The engine was last offered in 1970 - 366HP @5100 RPM/445TQ @3600 RPM. The same year, 1970, the optional 455 was available on the GTO - 360HP @4300 RPM/500TQ @2700 RPM with optional 3.55 gearing. RAIV 1/4mile- 14.60 @99.55 MPH with 3.90 & close ratio 4-speed. 455 1/4mile- 14.76 @95.94 with 3.55 & TH400 automatic. Passing times from 30-70 MPH - RAIV 5.0 seconds, 455 5.3 seconds. RAIV car weight - 4230 lbs. 455 car weight- 4455 lbs with ice cold AC.

RAIV engine would spin to 6,800 RPM's as tested by the driver at the drags while the 455 was good for 5,200 RPM's.

Pretty good side-by-side comparison done by Car Life magazine where Pontiac offered the GTO with the factory optional RAIV engine set-up for street performance with 4-speed & 3.90 gears, while the other is set-up for comfort cruising with AC, automatic, and 3.55 gears. One engine has to really work hard into the upper RPM's while the other torque monster loafs along at lower RPM's - and yet they actually perform the same taking into account the weight differences.

This is one reason why the best bang for your buck with regards to Pontiac is the 400CI block with a rotating 461CI stroker kit. The Chevy guys go with the 383 stroker, the Ford guys the 347 stroker, and small block Mopar the 408. Strokers work when all things are matched. You can get gobbs more torque along with HP at lower RPM's than an engine that has to be built for higher RPM's to accomplish the same objective. Higher RPM's also means greater wear on parts.

So choosing to go with a stroker kit can make sense.

 

[twostick]

Why is that?
My reason to want a stroker in my Fury is want it to idle all but stock with good vacuum and have effortless torque to move the big boned gal around at lower rpms and yet really push me back in my seat. Not screaming the engine as I rarely if ever do that. There is no interest. Keep my 3.23's . Low 13's I would be happy. Happy on the highway. I know many would say you can do that with a good 440 set up but my understanding the larger the crank throw [longer breaker bar] the more torque you will easily get and at a lower rpm. Add to that some nice good flowing aluminum heads and hopefully I will have something to put a grin on my face every time I push the throttle 2/3 rds of the way down. Kinda sounds like what Caddy was trying to do with 500 cubes. But these days it will be a whole lot better. I would say strokers now are another beaten safe path.

The material that the roller cam distributor gear is made from doesn't play nice with the iron gear on the distributor so you have to use a bronze distributor gear which wears out quickly.

If you don't change the bronze gear when you should, the gear will strip and the distributor stops turning which means the oil pump stops turning and it makes knock, knock, come out noises.

Kevin

 

[Turboomni]

If you don't change the bronze gear when you should, the gear will strip

And when is that? Timing light gets whacky? Are all roller cam distributor gears made of different material than flat tappet cams?

 

[bajajoaquin]

I think I have seen roller cam blanks that are compatible with factory distributor drive gears. Not 100% on that.

Regarding torque, the long stroke doesn’t give you more torque directly. There’s a longer lever, sure. But torque is a function of the lever length, cylinder pressure and area of the piston for the pressure to push on. For a given displacement, cylinder area will go down as lever arm goes up. It’s a wash.

There are lots of secondary effects, dwell, valve shrouding, and lots of other buzzwords I don’t fully understand. They play a role. As does the fact that a long stroke motor can’t spin that fast so they had better be torquey because they sure couldn’t be revvers!

 

[MEV]

My stroker 505/512 has gobs of torque and horsepower and revs like a prostock motor. So far it has been everything that makes the stock 440 great, but many times more everywhere. The throttle response is like a 2-stroke dirt bike, it is absolutely instant. I personally feel a roller cam is a valid and necessary expense. I have seen too many flat tappet lifters fail. Usually they fail on startup, even with zinc additive, and breakin-oil.

 

[Cazman]

Here is what Dwayne Porter said that I should buy - and only these. Apparently, most of the lifters, no matter what the name on the box is, come from one or two places. These are old school USA and according to Dwayne they have the only original spec big block MOPAR lifter. You can tell because the part numbers are the same for small block and big block everywhere else.

Lifter Basics – Topline Automotive

Also, something must be going on with quality these days, because I have heard of too many cam / lifter failures at start that cannot be accounted for just because of oil changes.

 

[MEV]

I only have 1st hand experience with the comp roller lifters, and Morrel roller lifters. The comps failed, the morrels have not. Just my experience.

 

[70bigblockdodge]

RAIV engine would spin to 6,800 RPM's as tested by the driver at the drags while the 455 was good for 5,200 RPM's

Right about the time the cast connecting rods let go.

And when is that? Timing light gets whacky? Are all roller cam distributor gears made of different material than flat tappet cams

Less than 5000 mi with bronze gear. The roller cam blanks are made from steel. I believe the latest tech for this is a iron gear on the cam.
The long arm gives you more displacement, which equals more air and more fuel, the more fuel the more power, in theory. The more displacement, can make use of larger ports, ie. max wedge heads are popular for over 470" range, which is all the standard port head can support efficiently. Standard port heads will work on a large displacement engine, but the torque and hp number will never come in line with each other, both in number and rpm, because of the mismatch. However this will make a engine that tends (depending on cam selection) to make more torque down low, due to good intake tract velocities and cylinder filling at lower speeds.
Again I thought the article was interesting because of the use of more "regular parts", or budget parts, than you usually see in magazine article, hydraulic flat tappet stamped steel rocker arms.
The guy made some good numbers, lying? Who knows. He did it using a cam most of the conservative types around here would consider racey. It would have been nice to see some vacuum numbers, but his phone number is there if your that curious.
I do believe it is a well thought out build without giving up all of his "secrets".
If you put a too much smaller cam in it you will make a pig that won't move when you boot it in passing/kickdown gear. A bigger carburetor and you run the risk of losing it's manners, with little top end gain. A bigger cam, maybe even the one in there with exhaust manifolds and it will suffer.
Choose your parts as you will, but that article is a fairly decent map.

 

[PontiacJim]

twostick - "The material that the roller cam distributor gear is made from doesn't play nice with the iron gear on the distributor so you have to use a bronze distributor gear which wears out quickly.

Listen to this video on YouTube. Composite is what you want. Other factors will cause a gear to wear out quickly, not just because it is bronze. Higher oil pump pressures and that good 'ole 20w-50 weight racing oil used for street engines are contributors.

bajajoakin - "Regarding torque, the long stroke doesn’t give you more torque directly. There’s a longer lever, sure. But torque is a function of the lever length, cylinder pressure and area of the piston for the pressure to push on. For a given displacement, cylinder area will go down as lever arm goes up. It’s a wash."

WHAT???? LOL

bajajoakin - "As does the fact that a long stroke motor can’t spin that fast so they had better be torquey because they sure couldn’t be revvers!"

Huh? You must be talking about a factory cast iron engine.

MEV - "I personally feel a roller cam is a valid and necessary expense. I have seen too many flat tappet lifters fail. Usually they fail on startup, even with zinc additive, and breakin-oil."

OK, photo of the lifter shows a result, but what was the cause? People are all to quick to fault the lifter when in fact it was something else. Then they blame the oil. "While having an adequate level of ZDDP content in the oil is important, examination of those engines with camshaft and lifter failures finds that those failures are more often the result of other issues not related to the Zinc/Phosphate levels in the oil. Current available oils if properly selected based on the information in the API bulletin do still have adequate amounts of Zinc/Phosphate for the older flat tappet camshafts. The key here is to know which oils have had the Zinc/Phosphate amounts reduced and which have not. This essentially means reading beyond the first paragraph of the API bulletin to get that information."

READ this long list of some causes that can damage a lifter & cam- Camshaft and Lifter Failure Causes | Eaton Balancing

 

[Turboomni]

Thanks for that PontiacJim. Now the gear wear and it's causes makes sense along with the video. Thick oil and high psi and high rpms + the video of application of different type gears to the cam material all contribute big time. Seems by the video and the possible problems this applies to both roller and flat tappet designs. I could easily see that a high volume/psi oil pump with thick oil and high rpms could make that little gear very unhappy.