Thanks for the links Mag.
Please keep us posted and informed on your build's progress and the results of your crank and piston pin offset research and what you decide to do as a result of that research.
I'm also impressed that you know it was Smokey who was the first one to reverse pistons
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAG58
1.53 rod/stroke ratio isn't the greatest, but is the exact same as the B18B or 454 chevy. Cant argue with those motors.
|
Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on this one though. I can and have and do and always will argue with the 454. Very over rated engine. It has the worst rod length to stroke ratio of ANY American V8 ever made except for another knappy Chevy: the small block 400. The 454 Chevy is only able to accomplish what it does because of the support and work of hot rodders and the aftermarket. In fact, that same statement can be applied to all pre-LSx based Chevy V8s. Did you happen to see that big block shoot-out that Car Craft did back about ten years ago? They took all the American big blocks and built them as similarly as possible. The 454 ended up in the bottom half when all the dyno room smoke had cleared, keeping company with the 455s from Pontiac and Oldsmobile. Incidentally, those three big blocks were/are the three with the worst rod length to stroke ratios and the worst bore to stroke ratios of all the big blocks. Also, ironically, the smallest displacement engine [cough440Moparcough] with the shortest stroke and longest rod ratio made the most torque, blowing another long held myth about short rods and long strokes being the best for torque production.
In another very extensive comparison done in about 1993, Trailer Life magazine compared three similarly equipped pick-ups and found the 460 Ford to be superior to the 454 Chevy in just about every way, even noting how the engine oil temps stayed higher in the Chevy and lower in the Ford, especially when pulling a heavy trailer, a side effect I believe of the increased side loading caused by the 454's rotten rod ratio. (The V10 Dodge won that comparison BTW.)
Even the Chevy 350's ratio of 1.64, while not too terribly bad, is still the worst ratio of ANY American V8 it's size (340-360 ci) ever made. (Go ahead and try to find one that is worse.) In a factory crate motor shoot-out done years ago by Hot Rod magazine (it was the late 80s or early 90s), the 360 Mopar thoroughly spanked the 350 Chevy despite the fact that the Chevy was sporting Chevy's latest trick of the week Corvette based aluminum heads while the Mopar had to make do with a set of pedestrian iron pre-magnum truck heads. (Mother Mopar wins again!) Yet, inexplicably, the Chevy myth lives on.....
Sorry to get off track but this worship of Chevys really gets me boiling. They aren't all that. Never have been.
Back on track though, I wouldn't drop a rod ratio below 1.59 under any circumstances. I in fact really don't like to see a rod ratio below 1.7 despite the fact that my beloved 401s come in at 1.59. I agree that 1.75 or better is even better. For reference even the short deck, short rod 5.0 M119 comes in at 1.75, the tall deck, long rod 5.0 M119 comes in at 1.82, and the 4.2 M119 comes in at 1.89.
And I'm sure you know how much Smokey believed in long rod ratios. I believe, like he did, that rod ratios are far more important than most folks realize. Even the Chevy engineers recognized the error of their past ways and lengthened their rods (and the resulting ratios) on the new 4.8-6.2 LSx engines.
Regards, Eric