When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Some of you may enjoy this and learn something and some of you it may bore to death. The power is in the details and and this pictorial gives you a good idea of of what it takes for a successful build
Thanks for posting Chris. I was following that build on the Chevelle Forum. I had a 477 built with a similar top end that made 800/660. Using the same top end, what stroke would be required to get something like 800/500 on a 4.6 bore? 500tq would be the theoretical limit of a C2/C3 irs.
The use of a 3.766" stroke and the 4600 bore would reduce the load on the C3 drivetrain. Knocking compression to a true 9.5 to 10 to 1 area would also help reduce the torque. This would yield a 500CID with ability to rev like a DZ302 but have the power of BBC.
That's what I have now on a 4.5 bore. From a bench racing perspective, what would a 3.2 or 3.3 stroke yield with the ported Canfield top end, providing the valve train is built for high rpm?
Thanks for posting Chris. I was following that build on the Chevelle Forum. I had a 477 built with a similar top end that made 800/660. Using the same top end, what stroke would be required to get something like 800/500 on a 4.6 bore? 500tq would be the theoretical limit of a C2/C3 irs.
Treated with a degree of 'respect' rear end should be capable of handling more than 500 tq - mine has 564 tq with 285mm Toyo's and its OK (so far)
That's what I have now on a 4.5 bore. From a bench racing perspective, what would a 3.2 or 3.3 stroke yield with the ported Canfield top end, providing the valve train is built for high rpm?
I did a cam for one of these type builds, 3.35" Stroke in a BBC. 7" rod with an 8-71. I can tell you limited to 12# she made 1040HP at 7800rpm.
It was a nasty little BBC.
HP would be based on rpm but you could achieve the torque level your asking for. Camshaft would be very small. May want to fill the runners on the heads and get the raised runner intake from Brodix. Would be very fun!!!
Im not sure a short stroke motor will require as many rpms as most people think. Im happy with my 477 but it has more tq than I wanted. Ill just have to live with it for awhile.
One day, Ill build a 3.2 or 3.3 stroke short block for my top end and see what happens, lol.