427 Small Block
I have a set of Trick Flow aluminum heads which are fine (I think) so I'm thinking about buying a 427 short block. There are several companies selling them, including Dart, although they are the most expensive.I'd love to hear from the guys who have been running a 427 small block for a while. Any advice? Is this a grenade motor? Recommendations for a good cam with a manual trans?
I have been using AFR 210s, as cast out of the box. I could have gone a little bigger on heads, but given my driving style, the210s support my needs just fine.
I've used both a Clay smith 3103 cam and a comp HR286 (both hydraulic retro-rollers). I'm not sure which cam I like better. The .050 numbers aren't all that far apart, but the Clay Smith is designed for AFR 210 heads, and I am sure it produced better power. The Comp had a slightly tamer idle. Both run well. I will look at the Clay Smith line again if/when I decide to tinker again.
The one drawback to the setup I have is the stroke - the Ohio Crank short block has a 4-inch stroke, so get a good oil pan with windage - If you should go a similar setup, you don't want to risk your motor by aerating the oil in the pan.
I've also got a TKO 600 - the first week after I got my 427 in, I toasted the old trans passing someone (I admit I was probably enjoying all the added torque a little more than I should have been). So make sure your driveline is up to the task.
Overall, I like it - no regrets. Just make sure your supporting hardware is ready for the extra torque.
Last edited by cooper9811; Jun 20, 2017 at 03:58 PM. Reason: spelling





i have the world products 427 SBC and it has some good points like revised oiling system, connection for accusump, and up to a 4.200 bore or something like that. Mine is a 4.155 with the .030 first overbore for 434 ci.
The extra 50 ci makes killer TQ over a hot rodded 383
I have been using AFR 210s, as cast out of the box. I could have gone a little bigger on heads, but given my driving style, the210s support my needs just fine.
I've used both a Clay smith 3103 cam and a comp HR286 (both hydraulic retro-rollers). I'm not sure which cam I like better. The .050 numbers aren't all that far apart, but the Clay Smith is designed for AFR 210 heads, and I am sure it produced better power. The Comp had a slightly tamer idle. Both run well. I will look at the Clay Smith line again if/when I decide to tinker again.
The one drawback to the setup I have is the stroke - the Ohio Crank short block has a 4-inch stroke, so get a good oil pan with windage - If you should go a similar setup, you don't want to risk your motor by aerating the oil in the pan.
I've also got a TKO 600 - the first week after I got my 427 in, I toasted the old trans passing someone (I admit I was probably enjoying all the added torque a little more than I should have been). So make sure your driveline is up to the task.
Overall, I like it - no regrets. Just make sure your supporting hardware is ready for the extra torque.
I visited the Ohio Crankshaft website and their price is a little better than some of the competitors. I have a Comp Cams retro fit hydraulic roller in the 383 so I would probably go with a Comp Cam to re-use the lifters. Just need more duration.
Are you using a reduced base circle cam? Did you need a pan for stroke clearance or was windage the only concern?
And I already have the TKO 600 so my big concern would be the rear end.
No, but obviously you will want to check as you assemble the top end
Did you need a pan for stroke clearance or was windage the only concern?
Really you need to plan for both - a 4"stroke is huge - So pan clearance and windage both matter.
And I already have the TKO 600 so my big concern would be the rear end.
I see you have a 79 too - Is this for that car? If so, do you have the 3.55:1 rear end - I have read that up to 79, the pumpkin is capable of supporting a lot of power, but drive it hard enough and you can break anything.
I switched to a 3.73 a few years ago, and I like that combo with the TKO 600. Before I installed the TKO, I basically set mine up for a big block (hardened yokes, made sure I had minimal play in the yokes, and went solid Spicer U-joints). I check them every spring, plus don't beat hard on it, so no issues. I am sure I could break something if I really tried
Last edited by cooper9811; Jun 20, 2017 at 03:57 PM.
The cam is a comp cams core 13 grind 3194/3196 (not small base circle)
It is a EFI engine, overdrive transmission, and 3.70 rear. Engine is not in the car yet (69 Coupe) will be this winter.
I would not change anything, I got good advice from 63mako with this build, I'm happy :- )
http://www.compcams.com/Technical/Ca...obeCatalog.pdf
Last edited by c3_dk; Jun 21, 2017 at 02:06 PM.
No, but obviously you will want to check as you assemble the top end
Did you need a pan for stroke clearance or was windage the only concern?
Really you need to plan for both - a 4"stroke is huge - So pan clearance and windage both matter.
And I already have the TKO 600 so my big concern would be the rear end.
I see you have a 79 too - Is this for that car? If so, do you have the 3.55:1 rear end - I have read that up to 79, the pumpkin is capable of supporting a lot of power, but drive it hard enough and you can break anything.
I switched to a 3.73 a few years ago, and I like that combo with the TKO 600. Before I installed the TKO, I basically set mine up for a big block (hardened yokes, made sure I had minimal play in the yokes, and went solid Spicer U-joints). I check them every spring, plus don't beat hard on it, so no issues. I am sure I could break something if I really tried
Which pan did you use? I would hate to give up a bunch of ground clearance. Our roads aren't very forgiving.
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
be careful of some of the ebay stuff out there. Big fancy ads, cheap prices dicey reputations.
Ohio cranks been around a long time, tpi421 builds a stout piece one at time, Mike Lewis, Mark at Vortecpro (hes a member) etc are all good.
Last edited by cv67; Jun 20, 2017 at 04:16 PM.
I probably should have used one with a larger kickout for improved windage. But as stated before, I don't hammer it (too often) so have not yet aerated my oil.
be careful of some of the ebay stuff out there. Big fancy ads, cheap prices dicey reputations.
Ohio cranks been around a long time, tpi421 builds a stout piece one at time, Mike Lewis, Mark at Vortecpro (hes a member) etc are all good.
Seriously, of course, I'd like to keep it as affordable as possible. I'm planning on reusing as much as I can, but I will still need a new cam, pan, damper, and possibly flywheel. I'll be happy to get away with 6000 US.
and order a crate have them dyno it...if it survives that it will probably be finetpi421vette is in Utah send him a pm he just got back from Canada helping a member with a 427 he built
What heads and intake do you have?
Last edited by cv67; Jun 20, 2017 at 07:05 PM.
I probably should have used one with a larger kickout for improved windage. But as stated before, I don't hammer it (too often) so have not yet aerated my oil.
Do you know if it could accommodate the Steeroids rack and pinion? Thanks much.





I have the no bypass high volume oil pump and regulate the pressure max with oil weight
Trick flow heads in the past were junk low lift heads
You need 227 to 245 cc heads for a nice street build
I had 227. Darts at first and they needed a refreshing, so I put on afr 210 and with even a big solid roller it felt lazy on the top end
I have the no bypass high volume oil pump and regulate the pressure max with oil weight
Trick flow heads in the past were junk low lift heads
You need 227 to 245 cc heads for a nice street build
I had 227. Darts at first and they needed a refreshing, so I put on afr 210 and with even a big solid roller it felt lazy on the top end
I have been using AFR 210s, as cast out of the box. I could have gone a little bigger on heads, but given my driving style, the210s support my needs just fine.
I've used both a Clay smith 3103 cam and a comp HR286 (both hydraulic retro-rollers). I'm not sure which cam I like better. The .050 numbers aren't all that far apart, but the Clay Smith is designed for AFR 210 heads, and I am sure it produced better power. The Comp had a slightly tamer idle. Both run well. I will look at the Clay Smith line again if/when I decide to tinker again.
The one drawback to the setup I have is the stroke - the Ohio Crank short block has a 4-inch stroke, so get a good oil pan with windage - If you should go a similar setup, you don't want to risk your motor by aerating the oil in the pan.
I've also got a TKO 600 - the first week after I got my 427 in, I toasted the old trans passing someone (I admit I was probably enjoying all the added torque a little more than I should have been). So make sure your driveline is up to the task.
Overall, I like it - no regrets. Just make sure your supporting hardware is ready for the extra torque.






get a good pan wiht that 4" stroke..can always do a 421 too





