Driving feel differences between 390, 427, 428, and strokers

[Posi67]

My experience doesn't come with any charts or graphs but when I turned my 427 into a 454 the car "felt" slower. Everything remained the same as far as parts and car other than the extra stroke. I never dyno'd or raced it then however the butt-o-meter said the new deal wouldn't out run the old. RPM was the same but it just felt like things happened faster with the 427.

I do know the 454 needed more fuel which proved the previous setup on the car was marginal with the power the 427 was making.

[Drew Pojedinec]

Sorry Dale, I'd like to take your real world experience seriously, but ya know........ no graphs.   

[machoneman]

That's unfortunate as especially at low rpm one should have felt more in the old butt-o-meter with more push. But you answered your own question with the fact that all the rest of your 427 parts remained exactly the same. More carb, fuel pressure or capacity, cam selection, gearing and more would have supplied the gains you expected.

My experience doesn't come with any charts or graphs but when I turned my 427 into a 454 the car "felt" slower. Everything remained the same as far as parts and car other than the extra stroke. I never dyno'd or raced it then however the butt-o-meter said the new deal wouldn't out run the old. RPM was the same but it just felt like things happened faster with the 427.

I do know the 454 needed more fuel which proved the previous setup on the car was marginal with the power the 427 was making.

[NIsaacs]

I have had numerous FE's in numerous Fords, cars and trucks since the late 60's. Stock for stock, the 352,360,390's were just vehicles. Add a 427 or 428 and they become hot rods and will put a smile on your face.

If you have a heavy truck and really want to smile, install a Cummins turbo diesel!

Nick

[scott foxwell]

To the OP's original thought;
Larry Widmer once said, "An engine that accelerates a given load from A to B fastest, wins, regardless of horsepower..." and I'll add here, displacement or configuration.
For your question to be answered accurately; to realize the characteristics of all those combinations I think you would have to build each one to make the exact same peak power. They will be entirely different engines with entirely different personalities. Lets say 550hp target...a 390 making 550hp is going to have to run some rpm. A 500" engine will make that power in a much more reasonable rpm. A 427 or 428...you probably not notice the difference seat of the pants but it would show on the dyno. The difference wouldn't be so much in peak performance, but how they got there. I think that would show you the personalities of each combination.

[cjshaker]

Sorry Dale, I'd like to take your real world experience seriously, but ya know........ no graphs.   

LMAO!

That's unfortunate as especially at low rpm one should have felt more in the old butt-o-meter with more push. But you answered your own question with the fact that all the rest of your 427 parts remained exactly the same. More carb, fuel pressure or capacity, cam selection, gearing and more would have supplied the gains you expected.

My experience doesn't come with any charts or graphs but when I turned my 427 into a 454 the car "felt" slower. Everything remained the same as far as parts and car other than the extra stroke. I never dyno'd or raced it then however the butt-o-meter said the new deal wouldn't out run the old. RPM was the same but it just felt like things happened faster with the 427.

I do know the 454 needed more fuel which proved the previous setup on the car was marginal with the power the 427 was making.

I think it's interesting to hear what happened to Dale when he took the same combo and just added stroke. Not many people want to change every parameter on a car and spend thousands of dollars just to add some cubic inches. I've never ran a stroker anything, so I can't comment on that.

[scott foxwell]

Sorry Dale, I'd like to take your real world experience seriously, but ya know........ no graphs.   

LMAO!

That's unfortunate as especially at low rpm one should have felt more in the old butt-o-meter with more push. But you answered your own question with the fact that all the rest of your 427 parts remained exactly the same. More carb, fuel pressure or capacity, cam selection, gearing and more would have supplied the gains you expected.

My experience doesn't come with any charts or graphs but when I turned my 427 into a 454 the car "felt" slower. Everything remained the same as far as parts and car other than the extra stroke. I never dyno'd or raced it then however the butt-o-meter said the new deal wouldn't out run the old. RPM was the same but it just felt like things happened faster with the 427.

I do know the 454 needed more fuel which proved the previous setup on the car was marginal with the power the 427 was making.

I think it's interesting to hear what happened to Dale when he took the same combo and just added stroke. Not many people want to change every parameter on a car and spend thousands of dollars just to add some cubic inches. I've never ran a stroker anything, so I can't comment on that.

One word; COMBINATION. We preach it to all our cutomers. Combination combination combination! An engine is a sum of parts that ALL have to work together and compliment eachother in order to achieve the best results.

[machoneman]

Yep, paying attention to the overall combination would have resulted in a much better experience and result. We (my Bro' and me) learned this lesson the hard way long ago after working on many muscle cars and somewhat hot streeters. As an example, cam changes alone didn't often perform well unless other not-so-cheap changes were made. A hot cam and an aluminum intake alone didn't do much for a ride with a 3.00 gear!. Changing to a 4 series gear often made a world of difference. But then, traction woes raised its ugly head.

So yes, some careful and 'free' analysis of not only the engine but the tranny, rear gear, traction devices and tires BEFORE any parts were purchased made all the difference between a so-so result and a real screamer!

[Garyford]

I would guess that Dale knew a little bit about the 'combination' being that he goes faster on his spare 390, than most folks believe possible.  I don't think he had meager pickup truck heads on the stroked 427.

He's also had the car for a long time so his butt-o-meter might be calibrated pretty close.

[Posi67]

One word; COMBINATION. We preach it to all our cutomers. Combination combination combination! An engine is a sum of parts that ALL have to work together and compliment eachother in order to achieve the best results.


I understand the importance of "COMBINATION" but when one puts his own engines together, before internet days and has limited resources, no Dyno time then parts get changed and you hope for the best. I think even today that's the average Joe's situation other than unlimited info on the 'net. We're not all professional engine builders here and yes.. I lucked into a decent Combination on my 390. Certainly was any rocket science in that build.

As for bore/stroke combination, as far as i recall don't the 500 CI Pro Stock guys use something like a 3.50 stroke? That would make for some rather large pistons. My buddy has a 341" SBF he built that makes 935 HP. Big piston, short stroke so there must be something to that arguement.     

 

[scott foxwell]

One word; COMBINATION. We preach it to all our cutomers. Combination combination combination! An engine is a sum of parts that ALL have to work together and compliment eachother in order to achieve the best results.


I understand the importance of "COMBINATION" but when one puts his own engines together, before internet days and has limited resources, no Dyno time then parts get changed and you hope for the best. I think even today that's the average Joe's situation other than unlimited info on the 'net. We're not all professional engine builders here and yes.. I lucked into a decent Combination on my 390. Certainly was any rocket science in that build.

As for bore/stroke combination, as far as i recall don't the 500 CI Pro Stock guys use something like a 3.50 stroke? That would make for some rather large pistons. My buddy has a 341" SBF he built that makes 935 HP. Big piston, short stroke so there must be something to that arguement.   

I think your first paragraph is a cop out, no offense. I started building my own engines in the late 70's. I read everything I could get my hands on and it soon became obvious that there was no one single "be all and end all" book or publication on how to build a good engine. I also started hanging around known successful racers and engine builders and asking lots of questions. It wasn't long before I was reading articles and easily picking out the fodder for filling pages and actual useful tech information. I'm not any smarter than anyone else. The information was available, you just had to work a little harder for it. Of course, these days, everyone is an internet expert so weeding through the BS these days sometimes can be very time consuming and Lord help the new guy. I'm not sure the internet is all it's made out to be for the novice.
Both your bore/stroke examples are for two valve cylinder heads. Already stated that bore dia. allows bigger valves for better breathing, especially when you're trying to feed 500ci @ 12000rpm. But look what advantage the Mod Fords had during some of the EM competitions with their 4 valve heads. They could stroke the snot out of those engines and even with their way under-square configuration, make huge, unfair power because of a multi valve head. It's all about meeting the demand. Believe me, if a 500" PS engine could get away with a 4.50 bore, they would be delighted with that much lighter of a piston. That huge bore presents challenges of it's own.

[blykins]

One word; COMBINATION. We preach it to all our cutomers. Combination combination combination! An engine is a sum of parts that ALL have to work together and compliment eachother in order to achieve the best results.


I understand the importance of "COMBINATION" but when one puts his own engines together, before internet days and has limited resources, no Dyno time then parts get changed and you hope for the best. I think even today that's the average Joe's situation other than unlimited info on the 'net. We're not all professional engine builders here and yes.. I lucked into a decent Combination on my 390. Certainly was any rocket science in that build.

As for bore/stroke combination, as far as i recall don't the 500 CI Pro Stock guys use something like a 3.50 stroke? That would make for some rather large pistons. My buddy has a 341" SBF he built that makes 935 HP. Big piston, short stroke so there must be something to that arguement.   

I think your first paragraph is a cop out, no offense. I started building my own engines in the late 70's. I read everything I could get my hands on and it soon became obvious that there was no one single "be all and end all" book or publication on how to build a good engine. I also started hanging around known successful racers and engine builders and asking lots of questions. It wasn't long before I was reading articles and easily picking out the fodder for filling pages and actual useful tech information. I'm not any smarter than anyone else. The information was available, you just had to work a little harder for it. Of course, these days, everyone is an internet expert so weeding through the BS these days sometimes can be very time consuming and Lord help the new guy. I'm not sure the internet is all it's made out to be for the novice.
Both your bore/stroke examples are for two valve cylinder heads. Already stated that bore dia. allows bigger valves for better breathing, especially when you're trying to feed 500ci @ 12000rpm. But look what advantage the Mod Fords had during some of the EM competitions with their 4 valve heads. They could stroke the snot out of those engines and even with their way over-square configuration, make huge, unfair power because of a multi valve head. It's all about meeting teh demand. Believe me, if a 500" PS engine could get away with a 4.50 bore, they would be delighted with that much lighter of a piston. That huge bore presents challenges of it's own.

Under-square......not over. 

[scott foxwell]

Under-square......not over. 

I know that. 
I stand corrected.

[FERoadster]

From a prior comment I hope I understood that the RPM increase is affected by rotating mass. My 427/454 is going into a light car (under 3000 lb) so I'm using an aluminum flywheel (NOS Weber, got it really cheap). The car is getting a 4.57 differential. Would the aluminum flywheel quicken the rate of RPM change over a normal flywheel,  4 spd.  (It does have a Lakewood bellhousing)
Street driven car only in a small radius from our town.
Richard >>> FERoadster

[scott foxwell]

From a prior comment I hope I understood that the RPM increase is affected by rotating mass. My 427/454 is going into a light car (under 3000 lb) so I'm using an aluminum flywheel (NOS Weber, got it really cheap). The car is getting a 4.57 differential. Would the aluminum flywheel quicken the rate of RPM change over a normal flywheel,  4 spd.  (It does have a Lakewood bellhousing)
Street driven car only in a small radius from our town.
Richard >>> FERoadster

I've had this discussion with some of the better engine builders I know and there seems to be a consensus. I don't know that there is any truth to saying the lighter rotating assembly will accelerate faster than the heavy one. Heavy flywheel helps with inertia on launch. If you don't need that weight, a lightweight flywheel helps reduce overall vehicle weight.