The "Similar Builds" thread got me thinking... a bit different approach

[winr1]

Ed Hamburger and his Dusters

340 .. 4.04 bore ... 3.31 stroke ... 2.02 intake ... 10.5 comp.

360 .. 4.00 bore ... 3.58 stroke .. 1.88 intake .. 8.4 comp.

Ed allowed the cars ran almost equal times due to the 360's 20 extra cubes, the 1.88 intake helping low end power



Ricky.

[DubyaTF]

    I've enjoyed that thread as well since I've had my eye on a certain 79 F150 4x4 Flareside and thought a 427 would be a lot of fun. The thing is that there's lots of ways to 427 with all the support for Windsors, of course it's a matter of budget.

    I'm not familiar with the Dusters you're referencing which I'll check them out but I had two thoughts on his results-
 
 If both cars were setup identical (suspension, trans, chassis etc) but the engines being the difference, the track they ran them on is always going to be a factor not to mention the air.
 
 With each engine mentioned the offsetting specs makes it apples to pears as opposed to the "similar build" deal in my view. Had they ran the same heads would have been more interesting data points. Then there's the cam selection based on the cubic inches and the valve.

   Still interesting stuff to bench race and explore what's possible.   

[Rory428]

Keep in mind that Ed Hamburger raced this SB MoPars in NHRA Stock and Super Stock classes, with all the rules and restrictions that go along with that. Factory head castings with stock valve sizes and no porting in Stock, and even in super Stock until about 20 years ago, stock carb (Carter Thermoquad in these cases), stock cam lift and factory intake manifold in Stock, etc.The 360 also most likely had a heavier shipping weight.

[Hipopinto]

After reading all the great replies I was thinking as well

Do “square” engines run well?

4.25 bore 4.25 stroke?

And also I see in Barry’s page a column for 4.375 stroke

Does this crank exist ?

Can too long of a stroke hinder performance providing the heads and intake can feed it or does it make sense to build to some how build to your project or needs?

Again guys I probably think too much

Thanks
Dave

[blykins]

After reading all the great replies I was thinking as well

Do “square” engines run well?

4.25 bore 4.25 stroke?

And also I see in Barry’s page a column for 4.375 stroke

Does this crank exist ?

Can too long of a stroke hinder performance providing the heads and intake can feed it or does it make sense to build to some how build to your project or needs?

Again guys I probably think too much

Thanks
Dave

The 4.375" crank used to be available by RPM Crankshafts, but is no longer available. 

There's really no reason to pass up on the largest stroke crankshaft you can find, because pistons/rods/cranks are all the same price.  For instance, you can build a 445 for the exact same price that you can build a 431 (both are stroked 390's), but there's no reason to pass up on the extra displacement, horsepower, and torque, unless your combination is extremely crippled by head flow/intake flow, etc., from the beginning.   Even then, I think I'd still push someone to opt for the big displacement and maybe upgrade the top end later down the road. 

[cammerfe]

Billet cranks can be had made to your specifications.

KS