Cylinder Head for 500+ ci.

I ran a 6.800 rod 4.500 stroke 557 in a D1 block for years @ 15:1 compression.and when it was torn down the pistons looked fine.

I'm not sure what all the big deal is about. It's about the same rod stroke ratio as a stock 454, not saying that's anything special:P Just saying.......

Over thinking it I would say.

IDT-572 wrote:I ran a 6.800 rod 4.500 stroke 557 in a D1 block for years @ 15:1 compression.and when it was torn down the pistons looked fine.

I'm not sure what all the big deal is about. It's about the same rod stroke ratio as a stock 454, not saying that's anything special:P Just saying.......  

Over thinking it I would say.

That's good data. Can you expand on it a bit though? How many years? How many passes, or hours, or miles? How did the rings look? The criticism of older blocks with a 4.5 stroke has always been that they wear out the rings faster, so are there enough hours on the engine to draw a conclusion there, or is it just supporting the idea that 4.5 strokes are fine in older blocks for racing use, but not ideal for street use that will see 50K+ miles?


.

This engine was run hard for 6-7 years shifting at 7000-7100 ring gap was still good and ring lands were still ok on the pistons.

I'm not sure how that engine compares to a 10:1 compression street engine that turns less and has 200 less hp, but I would think it would see a ton of miles before it would see the wear that the race engine saw.

And a 550 inch street engine probably won't see a ton of miles with the fuel mileage it will get.

I would probably just go with a 4.300 crank if I was sweating the difference in the two blocks.

It only comes down less than a 1/16 of an inch lower in the bore .050.

And on street engine I don't think you would know the difference between the 4.3 and 4.5.

I'm building a 550 hp 10:1 street engine now with a 1.350 cd piston and 6.700 rod D1block and have 0 concerns on it's longevity.

IDT-572 wrote:This engine was run hard for 6-7 years shifting at 7000-7100 ring gap was still good and ring lands were still ok on the pistons.

I'm not sure how that engine compares to a 10:1 compression street engine that turns less and has 200 less hp, but I would think it would see a ton of miles before it would see the wear that the race engine saw.

And a 550 inch street engine probably won't see a ton of miles with the fuel mileage it will get.

I would probably just go with a 4.300 crank if I was sweating the difference in the two blocks.

It only comes down less than a 1/16 of an inch lower in the bore .050.

And on street engine I don't think you would know the difference between the 4.3 and 4.5.

I'm building a 550 hp 10:1 street engine now with a 1.350 cd piston and 6.700 rod D1block and have 0 concerns on it's longevity.  

I've actually built several 4.500 arm torque/street motors for towing guys, and RV guys, but always used D9 blocks. The difference in available torque at low rpm compared to a 4.300 stroke can be significant. All are still out there running as far as I know.

Relative to street use vs race......25,000 miles at and average of 40mph is 625 hours. How many hours is a race engine in a car that gets trailered to events running per year? Maybe 3 hours per event? 5 events per year? At that rate, it would take 41 years to hit the same number of hours. None of that answers the question of weather or not there is even any increased wear from the piston being less stable at BDC. Could be a total non-issue.



.

foxbody82 wrote:I should have explained myself a little better. I was saying I would rather get to my desired cubic inch by boring as much as I could without sacrificing wall thickness and turning it a little more rather than putting a huge stroke in it. This will be on 275's most of the time so I need something that will be less likely to overpower the truck or make me have to pull timing to get it to leave. I was looking into d0ve and d1ve blocks for their strength, but would the additional cylinder length be worth going the D9 route? As far as the "easy" statement, which head will do it the easiest with room to grow? I assume the P-51 is going to be the answer, but before I pull the trigger on that set up I am interested in more budget friendly heads as it appears 700 out of these motors are pretty common with basic stuff.

To answer your question....yes, the P51 and others would do what you need to do and with a 4.300" stroke.

Relative to the boring/thickness thing....please just use the bore that cleans the cylinders up. 4.390", 4.400" or 4.420" your not going to see anything between the three on the track.

Carl wrote:

IDT-572 wrote:This engine was run hard for 6-7 years shifting at 7000-7100 ring gap was still good and ring lands were still ok on the pistons.

I'm not sure how that engine compares to a 10:1 compression street engine that turns less and has 200 less hp, but I would think it would see a ton of miles before it would see the wear that the race engine saw.

And a 550 inch street engine probably won't see a ton of miles with the fuel mileage it will get.

I would probably just go with a 4.300 crank if I was sweating the difference in the two blocks.

It only comes down less than a 1/16 of an inch lower in the bore .050.

And on street engine I don't think you would know the difference between the 4.3 and 4.5.

I'm building a 550 hp 10:1 street engine now with a 1.350 cd piston and 6.700 rod D1block and have 0 concerns on it's longevity.  

I've actually built several 4.500 arm torque/street motors for towing guys, and RV guys, but always used D9 blocks.  The difference in available torque at low rpm compared to a 4.300 stroke can be significant.  All are still out there running as far as I know.

Relative to street use vs race......25,000 miles at and average of 40mph is 625 hours.  How many hours is a race engine in a car that gets trailered to events running per year?  Maybe 3 hours per event?  5 events per year?  At that rate, it would take 41 years to hit the same number of hours.  None of that answers the question of weather or not there is even any increased wear from the piston being less stable at BDC.  Could be a total non-issue.



.

Apples to oranges, pyramids to volcano's, boy to girl, I think the hours on an overbuilt likely poorly tuned / maintained engine running 50% less compression and RPM can NOT be compared to the ragged edge properly tuned race engine and its ability to do work. 25000 miles vs 6-7 years at 7100 at 15:1 living under these conditions makes it a killer piece and many can not even get a season out of a 15:1 7100 RPM BB of any brand. Comparing mileage is redundant, deciding the best application or the ability of the chosen parts to perform as assembled and the parts ability to survive under these conditions matters and obviously you have both met the requirements in different arenas so this should not be an argument about mileage or a disbelief that there is more than one way to do it in the BBF world. There are many examples of both being competent, I respect the accomplishments and views of both of you but I do not agree with the premise of this disagreement there is no need either approach is worthy.

Lem Evans wrote:

foxbody82 wrote:I should have explained myself a little better. I was saying I would rather get to my desired cubic inch by boring as much as I could without sacrificing wall thickness and turning it a little more rather than putting a huge stroke in it. This will be on 275's most of the time so I need something that will be less likely to overpower the truck or make me have to pull timing to get it to leave. I was looking into d0ve and d1ve blocks for their strength, but would the additional cylinder length be worth going the D9 route? As far as the "easy" statement, which head will do it the easiest with room to grow? I assume the P-51 is going to be the answer, but before I pull the trigger on that set up I am interested in more budget friendly heads as it appears 700 out of these motors are pretty common with basic stuff.

To answer your question....yes, the P51 and others would do what you need to do and with a 4.300" stroke.

Relative to the boring/thickness thing....please just use the bore that cleans the cylinders up. 4.390", 4.400" or 4.420" your not going to see anything between the three on the track.

If you are using custom pistons then 4.375" become a target, also.

rmcomprandy wrote:

Lem Evans wrote:

foxbody82 wrote:I should have explained myself a little better. I was saying I would rather get to my desired cubic inch by boring as much as I could without sacrificing wall thickness and turning it a little more rather than putting a huge stroke in it. This will be on 275's most of the time so I need something that will be less likely to overpower the truck or make me have to pull timing to get it to leave. I was looking into d0ve and d1ve blocks for their strength, but would the additional cylinder length be worth going the D9 route? As far as the "easy" statement, which head will do it the easiest with room to grow? I assume the P-51 is going to be the answer, but before I pull the trigger on that set up I am interested in more budget friendly heads as it appears 700 out of these motors are pretty common with basic stuff.

To answer your question....yes, the P51 and others would do what you need to do and with a 4.300" stroke.

Relative to the boring/thickness thing....please just use the bore that cleans the cylinders up. 4.390", 4.400" or 4.420" your not going to see anything between the three on the track.

If you are using custom pistons then 4.375" become a target, also.

Back in the 1980's, My first 500" Pro Gas Jet boat engine was a 4.375" bore. It let me get a ring package I was wanting.....wanting to get away from the 1/16-1/16-3/16 stuff.

Lem Evans wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:

Lem Evans wrote:

foxbody82 wrote:I should have explained myself a little better. I was saying I would rather get to my desired cubic inch by boring as much as I could without sacrificing wall thickness and turning it a little more rather than putting a huge stroke in it. This will be on 275's most of the time so I need something that will be less likely to overpower the truck or make me have to pull timing to get it to leave. I was looking into d0ve and d1ve blocks for their strength, but would the additional cylinder length be worth going the D9 route? As far as the "easy" statement, which head will do it the easiest with room to grow? I assume the P-51 is going to be the answer, but before I pull the trigger on that set up I am interested in more budget friendly heads as it appears 700 out of these motors are pretty common with basic stuff.

To answer your question....yes, the P51 and others would do what you need to do and with a 4.300" stroke.

Relative to the boring/thickness thing....please just use the bore that cleans the cylinders up. 4.390", 4.400" or 4.420" your not going to see anything between the three on the track.

If you are using custom pistons then 4.375" become a target, also.

Back in the 1980's, My first 500" Pro Gas Jet boat engine was a 4.375" bore. It let me get a ring package I was wanting.....wanting to get away from the 1/16-1/16-3/16 stuff.

Lem, what was your preference for ring thickness at that time?

.043" and gas ports.

IDT-572 wrote:I ran a 6.800 rod 4.500 stroke 557 in a D1 block for years @ 15:1 compression.and when it was torn down the pistons looked fine.

I'm not sure what all the big deal is about. It's about the same rod stroke ratio as a stock 454, not saying that's anything special:P Just saying.......  

Over thinking it I would say.

With the wrist-pin in the ring groove, were you using buttons with the ring land made in the button or did you still use spirolocks?

FalconEh wrote:25000 miles vs 6-7 years at 7100 at 15:1

That's the thing though, the race engine doesn't live at 7100. It only hits peak rpm 2-3 times per run, and only for a moment. Most of it's run time is spent at idle, or mid range rpm at best. Even after 6-7 years, it likely only has minutes at peak rpm, at the most.

There is certainly a great deal of stress on the parts, but I don't know that it applies to longevity in a street application.....which I guess is what you were saying. Apples and oranges. Clearly a 4.500 stroke in an an early block isn't a problem in a race engine, but where did the conventional wisdom of rings wearing out faster on the street come from? It certainly makes sense in theory, but does anyone have documentation on that?




.

Carl wrote:

FalconEh wrote:25000 miles vs 6-7 years at 7100 at 15:1

That's the thing though, the race engine doesn't live at 7100.  It only hits peak rpm 2-3 times per run, and only for a moment.  Most of it's run time is spent at idle, or mid range rpm at best.  Even after 6-7 years, it likely only has minutes at peak rpm, at the most.

There is certainly a great deal of stress on the parts, but I don't know that it applies to longevity in a street application.....which I guess is what you were saying.  Apples and oranges.  Clearly a 4.500 stroke in an an early block isn't a problem in a race engine, but where did the conventional wisdom of rings wearing out faster on the street come from?  It certainly makes sense in theory, but does anyone have documentation on that?

With a 6.800" length rod it won't be a problem in an early block on the street but, using a 6.700" rod length starts to become an issue with that 4.500" stroke.

I was privy to a lot of testing with a 6.605" rod length with a 4.300" stroke in an early block and the piston wrist pin is almost in the same place.  A later block with the longer bores helped oil consumption and piston skirt wear a bunch with that combination; it did run OK with either block.

Ford didn't use the 6.605" with a 4.300" because it was a better idea. It was because they had plenty of the stock truck rods for super cheap.

rmcomprandy wrote:I was privy to a lot of testing with a 6.605" rod length with a 4.300" stroke in an early block and the piston wrist pin is almost in the same place.  A later block with the longer bores helped oil consumption and piston skirt wear a bunch with that combination; it did run OK with either block.

Was that centered around testing for the crate engine program, or earlier testing when they were looking at putting a 514 into regular production? Do you recall to what extent oil consumption was a problem? Was it an emissions issue? Were the pistons being tested at the time cast or forged? If cast, could that have been the issue with skirt wear? Was this in the course of extreme durability studies that may not necessarily apply to most hobbyists who probably won't see 50K miles in the life of an engine? And was the D9 block developed because of those tests?




.

The D9 block was all about the 429 dump truck kind of engine.

Carl wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:I was privy to a lot of testing with a 6.605" rod length with a 4.300" stroke in an early block and the piston wrist pin is almost in the same place.  A later block with the longer bores helped oil consumption and piston skirt wear a bunch with that combination; it did run OK with either block.

Was that centered around testing for the crate engine program, or earlier testing when they were looking at putting a 514 into regular production?  Do you recall to what extent oil consumption was a problem?  Was it an emissions issue?  Were the pistons being tested at the time cast or forged?  If cast, could that have been the issue with skirt wear?  Was this in the course of extreme durability studies that may not necessarily apply to most hobbyists who probably won't see 50K miles in the life of an engine?  And was the D9 block developed because of those tests?

.

This was Ford Motorsport endurance testing in the late 90's, when releasing that particular crate engine was being investigated; (forged TRW type pistons). A quart of oil after 8 continuous hours of being "part throttle" run on the dyno at 2,500 RPM at whatever intake manifold vacuum, (simulating the aggressive city & highway combination driving of their potential customer), tended to foul a few spark plugs and was to much oil consumption.
A quart after 40 hours was the target.

rmcomprandy wrote:This was Ford Motorsport endurance testing in the late 90's, when releasing that particular crate engine was being investigated; (forged TRW type pistons). A quart of oil after 8 continuous hours of being "part throttle" run on the dyno at 2,500 RPM at whatever intake manifold vacuum, (simulating the aggressive city & highway combination driving of their potential customer), tended to foul a few spark plugs and was to much oil consumption.
A quart after 40 hours was the target.

Wow, a quart in 8 hours is a lot. Definitely not something I'd want to be towing cross country with, or even running in drag week for that matter.

Thanks for the insight.


.

Carl wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:This was Ford Motorsport endurance testing in the late 90's, when releasing that particular crate engine was being investigated; (forged TRW type pistons). A quart of oil after 8 continuous hours of being "part throttle" run on the dyno at 2,500 RPM at whatever intake manifold vacuum, (simulating the aggressive city & highway combination driving of their potential customer), tended to foul a few spark plugs and was to much oil consumption.
A quart after 40 hours was the target.

Wow, a quart in 8 hours is a lot.  Definitely not something I'd want to be towing cross country with, or even running in drag week for that matter.

Thanks for the insight.

.

The blocks with the longer bore reached the oil consumption target with that 4.300" stroke using 6.605" length rods; for a racing type engine, I don't think it would matter.
Some of those 4.300" stroke crate engines were built using re-furbished .030" overbore blocks so, they wanted to be sure that no early, shorter bore blocks were being used for this crate engine.

They did sell the components separately if someone wanted to use their own block.

rmcomprandy wrote:

Carl wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:This was Ford Motorsport endurance testing in the late 90's, when releasing that particular crate engine was being investigated; (forged TRW type pistons). A quart of oil after 8 continuous hours of being "part throttle" run on the dyno at 2,500 RPM at whatever intake manifold vacuum, (simulating the aggressive city & highway combination driving of their potential customer), tended to foul a few spark plugs and was to much oil consumption.
A quart after 40 hours was the target.

Wow, a quart in 8 hours is a lot.  Definitely not something I'd want to be towing cross country with, or even running in drag week for that matter.

Thanks for the insight.

.

The blocks with the longer bore reached the oil consumption target with that 4.300" stroke using 6.605" length rods; for a racing type engine, I don't think it would matter.
Some of those 4.300" stroke crate engines were built using re-furbished .030" overbore blocks so, they wanted to be sure that no early, shorter bore blocks were being used for this crate engine.

They did sell the components separately if someone wanted to use their own block.

all this FOMOCO 460 history is fascinating to me.

What class are you planning to run in for Drag Week? I guess that with a 10.90, street machine eliminator would be the only class you would probably competitive in. And to qualify for the final 32, you probably will have to run at least a 10.50 average or better. Building a truck that will be able to drive 1,000 miles over 5 days and make 1 or more passes on each day isn't going to be easy. Lots of big money cars broke this year and went home early! I've toyed with the idea of doing drag week, if they ever get back up in the midwest again. Problem is the cars keep going faster and faster, it's not going to be as easy as it was a few years ago. I believe there were about 6 street driven cars in the 6's at up to 215 mph! Unbelievable!

Cobrajet 502 wrote:What class are you planning to run in for Drag Week? I guess that with a 10.90, street machine eliminator would be the only class you would probably competitive in. And to qualify for the final 32, you probably will have to run at least a 10.50 average or better. Building a truck that will be able to drive 1,000 miles over 5 days and make 1 or more passes on each day isn't going to be easy. Lots of big money cars broke this year and went home early! I've toyed with the idea of doing drag week, if they ever get back up in the midwest again. Problem is the cars keep going faster and faster, it's not going to be as easy as it was a few years ago. I believe there were about 6 street driven cars in the 6's at up to 215 mph! Unbelievable!

"Drag Week" with the street/highway driving influence being there, in my opinion, will eventually be all turbo type cars doing the winning.

All the fast ones already are, and there are twice as many turboed LS Fox bodies than with SBF / BBF!

Have you considered the annialater block! ? Thats the beefeist block I have ever seen period!

What about a set of D-3 Ford ProStock heads?