New Guy Intro and 427 Build ?'s

[Ididntdoit]

Been lurking for a while – figured it was time to join.  New to FE’s but a lifetime hotrodder.  Currently driving a ’60 f-100 with a stone stock ’61 T-bird 390/COM combo.  Last winter I participated in my first FE build – a 428 PI for a friends ’67 GT 500. What a thrill to work on that car, it had been totally restored some time ago, but he sucked a nut from an air cleaner stud and ruined a cylinder wall…..nothing fancy on the build, modern CJ replacement cam, custom flat top pistons, “stock” dual quad intake.  But this motor made me a believer in FE Power – the car goes like a raped ape and the “power band” is immense.

Now onto my proposed build/questions. Note, I want this to be as much of an “old school” type build as possible.  It will be used “for fun” in a lightweight, good handeling car (still sorting this out).  The block is an early ’65 center oiler fresh from the machine shop, blueprinted and finished at a 4.25” bore – this is as far as I’ve gotten.

I have a freshly ground 3.5” stroke 352 crank and “long” factory rods – Am I absolutely nuts for thinking about using them with stock dimension (compression height) 427 wiseco pistons (at “0” deck)?  How strong are these rods (with arp bolts)? Was this combo ever used “back in the day” for any class racing or high RPM applications?  How high would you spin the motor with this combo (everything checked, balanced, etc)?  Should I just use a 390 crank and scat or eagle rods? 428 crank? Or get a 4.25 stroker kit like everyone else?

Heads – To start, I’m thinking garden variety low risers with a 1.66 ex valve and a 2.19 intake.  How much compression do I need to run to make the 1.66 valve “work” as opposed to a 1.71?  10:1? 11:1? 12:1?....Obviously, the heads would also be ported.  Do the chambers need to be opened up to unshroud the larger valves? No – I will not buy edelbrock heads.

Intake (I know – buy the book) but what do you think – perf RPM, streetmaster, victor, 2x4? I assume port matching is mandatory.

Camshaft – 294s? bigger? Smaller?

I know – tons of questions in a marathon post from a “newbie” – Please be easy on me – Thanks - Mike

[blykins]

Hi Mike,

I personally wouldn't use the "long" rods.  I'm not much of a fan of using factory rods at all, especially with higher horsepower builds, but the 352 rods are very spindly in comparison to other FE rods.   

On another note, I don't see the 427 pistons working with this combination.  Typical 427 piston compression height, meant to be used with a 3.780" stroke and a 6.490" rod is about 1.775-1.780".  To use a 352 crank and a 352/360 rod, you would need a piston roughly around 1.830"-1.850" compression height to get to zero deck.

Now, I'm not going to rain on your parade and say don't do it, but if I were going to use this combination, I would find another rod and a custom piston.  I like the 4.125/4.250 stroke motors as well as everybody else, but sometimes it's refreshing to see something that's more factory-ish.

If you're interested in a factory build with LR heads and a big cam, you can look at my thread that I posted a few weeks ago about some old school iron combos. 

[jayb]

Welcome to the forum, Mike.  You've got a great start with that block.  First suggestion:  Go with the stroker kit, like everybody else    There is a reason they are popular.  Number 1, you aren't using old parts.  Eventually old, used parts will fail.  Number 2, the BBC bearings in the stroker kits are wider and smaller in diameter than stock FE bearings, giving you more load surface and less bearing speed at a given RPM.  Number 3, cubic inches rule, especially on the street.  If you think your friends 428 has an immense powerband, wait 'til you feel a 482" FE powerband.  Number 4, a 4.25" stroker combination is easily capable of 7000 RPM, and will pull hard all the way there.  If you are trying to build a real winder, a shorter stroke crank will let you go higher, but you'll still be down on power because of fewer cubes.

On the heads, the 1.66 valve will work fine, but I guess I'm not sure why you don't want to go with the 1.71.  That valve would be a better match for your 2.19 intake.  You should be able to get 300 cfm on the intake side with those heads, making over 600 HP do-able with this combination.  You should not have to open up the low riser chambers much, if at all, to get that flow number.

I would go with a 2X4 intake, probably the medium riser dual plane 2X4 manifold if you can find one (factory or Blue Thunder; they both perform about the same).  And you will want a bigger cam than a 294S; more cubic inches will require more camshaft.  I would consider a roller cam, like a Comp 308R or maybe a hydraulic roller, although the hydraulic roller probably won't let you go to 7000 RPM.

There, I've just spent all your money for you    600 HP, here we come...

[blykins]

All good points....

The availability of BBC parts is much cheaper.   Even a Scat BBC H-beam rod compared to a Scat FE H-beam rod is much cheaper.  I will say this, on many "factory" builds, I will turn the rod journals down to a 2.200" journal because of the reasons that Jay outlined. 

Still nothing wrong with a factory build though, if your heart so desires...

[Ididntdoit]

Wow – thanks for the thoughts.  I hadn’t really “done the math” on the deck height – I knew it would be close – I have to look at where my block ended up.  As far as the rods are concerned, I think I knew the answer before I asked the question.  The BBC rods do intrigue me though – are any modifications to the rods themselves necessary? Is the profile the same? Anything special need to be done to the crank when it’s turned (fillet, chamfer oil holes, etc)?  I assume since I would be getting custom pistons the pin size is not a problem.  My freshly turned 352 crank actually came out of a rebuilt short block that was never fired but sat for a long time – so indexing it and cutting it to the BBC journals wouldn’t be a problem.  I guess my attraction to the 427 piston/352 crank and rods was that if I didn’t like it I only had to change the rods and crank to get back to a “real” 427…..If I go the BBC/custom piston route, I better like it.  As far as the exhaust valve goes, I was under the assumption that the higher the compression ratio, the less the exhaust port/valve size mattered as it had ample help to evacuate the cylinder – If there are no issues going 2.19/1.71 in the LR heads I’ll probably just do that. As for the heads, are the early “closed” chambers (like a 406 tri-power head) better (as far as flow and “swirl”) than the typical “squared off” 71-76cc chambers?  I think it would be fun to put this combo together and see how it does on the Dyno.

[blykins]

The crank journal has to be turned down and widened both....depending on your relationship with your crank grinder, it can get expensive.  No mods to the rods are necessary and you just get a piston with a .990" pin bore instead of a .975".

The exhaust valve size really depends on what you're needing the heads to do as far as flow more so than the compression ratio.  The camshaft also dictates a lot of exhaust events, as the overlap will help the exhaust scavenge the intake charge.

[garyv]

You have come to the right place to get honest opinions from guys that live and breathe FE's.
Take their advice and you will be a happy man.
Sounds like you have a plan in mind. just remember there is more than one way to skin a cat.
As Jay said, you can go the stroker route and get there easier if you are looking for a specific HP/Tq.
You could run a solid flat tappet cam which will let you turn some RPM's.
could also go solid roller cam but that is lot more expensive.
stay away from stock rods. just not worth the risk.
You could still use 428 crank and use aftermarket rods if you wanted. that will give you 454 cubes.
this is still an old school stroke.
make sure your heads have a good valve job done on them and the proper springs to match the cam.
Don't skimp on cheap rockers such as the pro comp stuff.
If you don't know just ask.  Plenty of good help just a click away.
good luck
garyv

[afret]

You might consider having the lifter oil passages drilled in your block in case you decided to go with a hydraulic roller or allow pressure oiling to solid rollers if you ever decide to go this way.

[bn69stang]

Welcome to the forum , take my advice read listen and learn from all of these guy s . Spend your money on new parts as Jay said as well as everybody else , build a 482 with a solid valve train and you will be a happy camper .

[Ididntdoit]

Thanks again for all the input - after crunching the numbers on the combination as well as the cost , and being honest with myself about how I'm gonna use it, I've decided to go with a stock (3.78") cast crank and aftermarket stock dimension rods and flat top pistons - My focus will be on quality parts and machine work - I will keep this thread updated as I make progress.

[Ididntdoit]

Well - I'm moving along on this build and need some more input...Ended up stock stroke with flat-tops .015 in the hole, plan to use fel-pro head gaskets.  Stock cobra jet heads (have not cc'd them yet).  I am assuming I will end up in the 10.25-10.5:1 range.  This will be a "play" motor that I want to run well on pump gas in a 3200lb vehicle with a 3000rpm stall c6 and anywhere from 3.70 to 4.30 gears (have 2 chucks) I know this won't be a "grunt down low" type of set up - I'm perfectly happy making power between 3000-6500rpm. Now onto my question....

I have a solid cam with the following specs - 244 duration at .050, 114 intake centerline, 114 lobe separation, Exhaust opens 56 BBDC and Closes 8 ATDC Intake opens 8 BTDC and closes 56 ABDC  Would you use this cam? - straight up? Advanced?

Any input on this set up would be greatly appreciated - MERRY CHRISTMAS

[plovett]

Just to make sure I have it right.  You are at 4.25" by 3.50" for 397 cubic inches?

Some thoughts:

I think your compression ratio will be a bit lower unless the heads have been milled a fair amount.  I come up with about 9.9:1 with a 72 cc chamber.  I believe stock CJ's are supposed to be in the 72-76cc range.  I'm assuming your flat tops have some 5-6cc valve reliefs?

Maybe you could get some steel shim head gaskets to up the compression some.  Mr. Gasket makes some.  I'm not sure what their compressed thickness is.  They are sometimes advertised as 0.20" thick and sometimes as 0.032" thick if I remember correctly.  I think I emailed them a long time ago and they told me the larger figure was correct.  It'd be worth checking into.  0.032" plus the 0.015" your pistons are in the hole would give a .047" quench height.  That would be close to ideal in my opinion.  It would also bump the compression ratio about a quarter point.

Cam.  Do you know the advertised duration spec's?  Lift?  It has a wide lobe separation at 114.  For a hotrod type motor I think I'd want a tighter lobe separation for more mid to mid-high range power.  The wide lobe separation should give you a better idle and a wider overall power band.  I think a tighter LSA should concentrate the power in the middle of the power band better which is good, in my opinion.  I'd rather see something like a 108-110 degree LSA.   Considering the relatively small cubic inches I'd install the cam advanced a bit.  Maybe 4-8 degrees advanced from straight up. 

Are you still going to get some port work done on the heads?  Well worth it in my opinion.  I'd get them pocket ported and some mild port work. 

Considering the cubic inches and weight of the vehicle I'd lean toward the lower (4.30) gearing.  3200 lb is not very heavy, but I'd still err on the side of lower gearing.  Closer to 4.30 than 3.70.

JMO,

paulie

[Ididntdoit]

I'm sorry - we went back and fourth a bit on this one - its stock 427 stroke 3.78 - the advertised duration is 296

[plovett]

Ah, that makes the compression ratio range you mentioned make sense.  That's good. 

As for the cam I think it'll work fine and since you're at 429 cubic inches I wouldn't be worried about using a little higher gearing, like the 3.70's instead of 4.30's. 

Personally I still think you'd be better off with a tighter lobe separation unless you are looking for a smooth idle.  If you use the one you have I still think a "standard" advance of around 4 degrees past straight up would be good.  That is install it on a 110 degree intake centerline.  You could advance it a bit more than that.  I wouldn't advance it less than 4 degrees. 

Also check to see if some advance is ground in to the cam.  I mean I wouldn't just advance it 4 degrees without checking where it's at when installed straight up.  Degreeing the cam is the only way to see exactly where its at.

And I'm still for port work on the heads.

JMO,

paulie

[cjshaker]

Like Paulie said, with 114 LSA that cam will give a pretty smooth idle, even for the duration. Actually sounds like it would be a pretty good choice for a 'no hassles' cam that can be driven often or even daily if you chose to. Especially with the 3.70 gears. The 4.30 gears will KILL mileage and cruise speed unless you have some really tall tires....or just don't care. The cam will pretty much be done making power by 6000 though I'm guessing. Although it should run to 6500 without problems given the right springs and other valvetrain components.

Unless you are wanting to spend some serious money, or have the knowledge to do it yourself, I would leave the heads alone. CJ heads are good heads in factory form. Maybe gasket match and just clean up the transition from bowl to seat.....IF you are careful. It's easy to screw things up if you're not sure what you're doing.

Sounds to me like you are moving in the right direction and making good choices. Should be a good running engine when you're done.