Gain extra benefits by becoming a Supporting Member Click here find out how!
Silver
Gold ***Platinum***
Carl1962 (2)briski1971 dfwwingnut CowboyTrukr (3)sz0k30 (6)
Suburbazine (2)Gunk(7)markl350 (6)roseyintxCutlass442 (10)Rager
Chevyfan60 (10)JohnE (12)cnbell (11)Todd M (11)savina64
LRH (3)61ohboy66conv55_FEVER george88gta (10)BillOrton39
beebeesycstevebigears
68 Bel-AirNitroholic (10)
warpwr (8)Lynn63 (5)
scottdalealrenchBelair54HT (3)
boerdoc (3)kiwimike (6)
Jim.Biron (7)
1956chevy (2)
BMF-1955
Classic Performance Products
Ciadella Interiors American Auto Wire Art Morrison.com
Exile® Battery Keeper™ 6/12 volt charger w/ LED battery monitor
Hellwig Products IncPerformance Rod & Custom
Impala Bob's Bob's Chevy Trucks Bob's Chevelle Parts Bob's Classic Chevy

  >> Switch to Mobile Version <<

Recent Hot Topics
Current Quote
"Another reason of why this site and the people that participate in it are great. I have been in need of a good running engine for the fleetline and thanks to Patgizz I now have one. He was kind enough to give a nice 250 I6 motor. Thanks again Pat!!!"
~ Member
Recent Topics
WIN / WIN

Use this to search for parts on Ebay
A portion of your purchase will come back to the site.
Username Post: Stroker vs. Destroker        (Topic#173436)
SARDiver 
Contributor
Posts: 188
SARDiver
Loc: Ohio
Reg: 08-17-07
10-29-07 09:28 PM - Post#1284632    

I've never messed with motors, I'll ask for the benefit of all. I did some searches and read the stickys at the top of this forum from G.V. There is some info there that is fantastic. Can someone explain (or post a link to an earlier explanation) of the benefits or liabilities of stroking or destroking a motor. I may have a line on a 400 sbc destroker that is in process (KB pistons, Crane Cam, Clevite bearings), but was considering a 383 stroker for a build project. Where does the real value come into play in these set ups? Thanks Scott
Respect your equipment...one day it may save your life.


 
rumrumm 
"13th Year" Silver Supporting Member
Posts: 1848
rumrumm
Loc: Macomb, IL
Reg: 10-18-01
10-30-07 05:15 AM - Post#1284749    
    In response to SARDiver

Several years ago, a major magazine (Chevy High Performance, I think) ran a comparison of a 383 and a 377 (destroked 400) and found that the power they made was comparable, but concluded the 377 had advantages as a road race engine while the 383 had advantages as a drag race engine. I would not be hesitant to build a 377 for a street thumper. The difference on the street would be negligible between the two. Personally, if I had a 400 block, I would build a 406--more cubic inches, more torque.
Lynn

"There's no 12-step program for stupid."


383 sbc, Eagle, AFR, SRP, CompCams, Edelbrock, Sanderson. Dyno #'s: 450 hp @ 5700, 468 ft. lbs. torque @ 4300.

http://photo.net/photos/Lynn%20Johanso n


 
grumpyvette 
Senior Chevytalk Moderator -- Performance Subject Matter Expert --
Posts: 15990
grumpyvette
Age: 66
Loc: FLORIDA USA
Reg: 03-16-01
10-30-07 07:17 AM - Post#1284793    
    In response to rumrumm

Ok in both those engine sizes Ive built similar engines, add killer heads,(maybe the AFR, 195cc, brodix IK200 TRICKFLOW 215R )a cam like the crane 110921,or crower 00355, a cpr at about 10.5:1, a decent intake and carb like an edelbrock RPM air gap,1.6:1 roller rockers, and a 800cfm holley, good headers etc,match them to a manual trans with a 4.11:1 rear gear and you get a killer street/strip combo for a 2800-3200 lb muscle car, it won,t idle or perform great in traffic but it will kick butt and take names at the local strip .
as stated above a 377 and a 383 will produce similar hp but differant tq values
theres no question a 377 will produce slightly more hp per cubic inch of displacement with its larger bore and higher average rpm range, lets say (assume) 1.3 hp per cubic inch (490hp)for the 377, vs the 1.25 hp per cubic inch of a 383 built in a similar manor (480 hp)for the 383, but the 383 has noticably more torque in the lower and mid rpm ranges (below 5000rpm), where youll spend 90% of your time on the street.
the suggestion to build the 406 (the larger bore of the 377 with the longer stroke of the 383 is a good one, with the advantages of both you might get 1.27 hp per cubic inch, or 515 hp for the 406 with the tq curve that runs similar to the 383, but slightly better

http://www.crower.com/misc/cam_spec/cam_fin der.php...

http://www.cranecams.com/?show=browseParts& ;act...


http://airflowresearch.com/articles/article072/A -P...

keep in mind SOLID LIFTER FLAT TAPPET CAMS are an excellent value, and route to keep costs lower
" " IF YOU CAN'T SMOKE THE TIRES FROM A 60 MPH ROLLING START YOUR ENGINE NEEDS MORE WORK !"


Edited by grumpyvette on 10-30-07 09:10 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Rick_L 
Honored Member
Posts: 25464

Loc: Katy, Tx, USA
Reg: 07-06-00
10-30-07 11:16 AM - Post#1284913    
    In response to grumpyvette

Everybody has a different take on this even after reading the CHP article.

I thought the CHP article very clearly proved that the differences between the two engines, as equipped, were within the margin of error. Which reinforces my opinion on the matter.

My opinion also is that the 377 type combo would be better for an all out drag race engine because the bigger bores would marginally reduce shrouding of the intake valve, or allow you to run a slightly bigger valve.

If we're talking a typical street or bracket race engine with similar equipment, there's no difference, save for the 6 cubic inches.





 
MikeB 
Senior Member
Posts: 9472
MikeB
Loc: Plano, TX
Reg: 08-28-03
10-30-07 03:39 PM - Post#1285042    
    In response to SARDiver

The 377's larger bore will actually let you take advantage of larger valves, like a 2.05" intake. And it's slower piston speed per given RPM, as well as less rod angularity, might contribute to less wear and tear on the pistons, rings, and bore. That said, the 383 would probably be more steet friendly. But then again, so would a new Malibu!

As a 327 owner and a fan of short stroke motors, my next step up may indeed be a 377, but I'd probably have to buy a new block, since those 400s are becoming scarce.
Real Hot Rods have a Clutch!

1955 210 2dr: 327, Brodix IK180 heads, Jones cam, M20, Wilwood front brakes

1982 C-10 SWB pickup, 250 six, 3-speed

My car pictures



 
Rick_L 
Honored Member
Posts: 25464

Loc: Katy, Tx, USA
Reg: 07-06-00
10-30-07 07:19 PM - Post#1285202    
    In response to MikeB

I guess I didn't really offer a real conclusion.

Build what you have - or build what's readily and economically available. If economics are not a concern build the big bore motor (377).

Next question you've got to ask yourself, especially if you can afford it - why do do want a 383 or 377 if you could have a 406? Or bigger?

 
greg_moreira 
Very Senior Member
Posts: 3262

Reg: 10-06-03
10-30-07 08:14 PM - Post#1285231    
    In response to Rick_L

Here are some simple pros and cons to both. keep in mind lots of this stuff is mentioned already over the various responses so far....Im just gonna try and put it all side by side).

One factor is durability. 6000 rpm is not equal in all engines. The 377 has a 3.48 stroke. The 383 has a longer 3.75 stroke. So say we are only talking about one sole revolution. In one revolution, the 3.75 stroke travels a longer distance than the shorter 3.48 stroke, simply because its a shorter stroke. Think of it this way. If you spin around one time, you cover a couple feet of ground. If the earth only spins around 1 time....it covers just under 25,000 miles since it is MUCH bigger. if it takes you 24 hours to spin around....you have moved a couple feet in 24 hours. It takes the earth 24 hours as well. Still only one revolution....but it went MUCH further, so it had to obviously go MUCH faster to cover that much more ground in the same amt of time.

Same goes per crank stroke. With each revolution, a longer stroke goes further....so the parts are moving faster in order to cover the same amount of distance(revolutions) in the same amount of time(per minute). If they are both 6000rpm engines.....the parts in the longer stroke engine are all moving faster cause they go further.

Because of this, the short stroke engine aint workin as hard as the long stroke engine even though the rpm is the same. If this were an endurance app where the rpms will stay high for a long amount of time, its reasonable to expect the shorter stroke to last longer since its not suffering quite as much. There are pros and cons to each depending on the application.

Another fator is bore size. The 377 has a bigger bore and the same set of heads will breathe better into a larger bore as opposed to a smaller bore. This inherently helps the larger bore engine breathe easier at higher revs. Another pro if it has to be high rpm.

Longer stroke make a bigger vacuum signal sooner(faster moving pistons create faster pressure drop at lower engine speeds....bigger vac signal sooner). This is why the longer stroke engine is inherently prone to making more torque sooner(good for fast street cars or heavier bracket cars).

With todays modern technology....you can truthfully trick either engine into doing whatever you want successfully. One happens to be naturally more "prone" to doing one thing better than the other....but yeah you can trick either into doing the same thing if built properly.

At the end of the day....Id prefer the 400 block WITH a 400 crankshaft and have at least 400 inches! For the average engine, splitting hairs like these wont really get us too far. Cubic inches are more of a guarantee though!

 
RickWI 
Very Senior Member
Posts: 1669

Loc: Madison, WI
Reg: 10-08-01
10-30-07 10:08 PM - Post#1285270    
    In response to SARDiver

  • SARDiver Said:
Where does the real value come into play in these set ups? Thanks Scott



The value is in meeting the specs of a race class rule book. Build whatever is cheaper. If you can afford it, build a 400 for the street, well worth it in the end.
70 SS Camaro, Dart Aluminum SmBlk 454 CI, 125 MPH (on the motor) in the quarter and 18 MPG on Power Tour


 
apache31 
Contributor
Posts: 492
apache31
Loc: Northern California
Reg: 09-09-07
10-31-07 01:31 AM - Post#1285308    
    In response to RickWI

I think you are splitting hairs...no disrespect intended at all. I run a 383ci 405hp 450tq and this baby get's up and boogies in a hurry!! I'd be thinking about traction.
"It was made to drive..."
1959 Chevrolet Apache 3100
My Truck Pics


 
apache31 
Contributor
Posts: 492
apache31
Loc: Northern California
Reg: 09-09-07
10-31-07 01:32 AM - Post#1285309    
    In response to apache31

I meant I run a 383ci/450hp/450tq
"It was made to drive..."
1959 Chevrolet Apache 3100
My Truck Pics


 
SARDiver 
Contributor
Posts: 188
SARDiver
Loc: Ohio
Reg: 08-17-07
10-31-07 09:49 PM - Post#1285931    
    In response to apache31

Thanks for the info. I've started reading through a lot of the links and info already posted. Also just ordered a couple of the books G.V recommended (as well as others' recommendations). Not sure which I'll go with right now. I guess it will depend on block availability. The 400ci I looked at was in pretty good shape. It has been together for about a year without being finished. Needs to come apart and get a hot bath and cleaned up. Friend of mine has a 355ci sitting in his garage complete (ran well when it was removed 6 months ago). 383 stroker may be an easier route with this one. Scott
Respect your equipment...one day it may save your life.


 
SARDiver 
Contributor
Posts: 188
SARDiver
Loc: Ohio
Reg: 08-17-07
11-24-07 02:35 PM - Post#1303538    
    In response to SARDiver

OK guys, I checked out a possible donor motor today. 350 bored to 355 - 4bolt. Casting #3970010 with 39GM below it. Owner says he's 98% sure it is a 1970 block? Pulled a rocker cover and found this #890482 (maybe 890462). Full roller motor. Edlbrock performer intake, one used and one brand new Holley 650 still in box. Dizzy is unrecognizable (broken during removal) I will assume 2 piece rear main. Is this block acceptable for the clearancing that has to be done for the 383 stroker. Sorry if I didn't get the correct casting numbers. I've seen the postings that show where to look, and meant to take that with me. I can go back if I need to for more info, but it will be a couple of weeks. He is only asking $400 so even if I parted it out to finance another block, I think I'll be OK.
Respect your equipment...one day it may save your life.


 
smasher0219 
Senior Member
Posts: 863

Loc: joisey
Reg: 06-09-03
11-24-07 04:23 PM - Post#1303609    
    In response to SARDiver

The 010 blocks are the preferred Gen I block to build.

They are a 2 piece rear main seal, and NOT a roller setup unless some retrofitting was done.

If you meant it had roller rockers, that's good. But when you talk about a roller engine, you usually mean a roller cam and roller lifters.

 
SARDiver 
Contributor
Posts: 188
SARDiver
Loc: Ohio
Reg: 08-17-07
11-24-07 04:40 PM - Post#1303626    
    In response to smasher0219

Yup, roller cam + lifters as well as roller rockers. At least I'm looking in the right direction.
Respect your equipment...one day it may save your life.


 
greg_moreira 
Very Senior Member
Posts: 3262

Reg: 10-06-03
11-25-07 11:17 AM - Post#1304109    
    In response to SARDiver

Sounds good. Looks like the 355 has a fair amount of nice go fast parts that come with it.

Here is the one thing you gotta keep in mind....the crank and pistons have to go in order to make a 383. You will need a 383 specific crank and set of pistons, so at this point your basically talkin about a rebuild to make a 383. New crank, pistons, bearings, re-balance, fresh hone and new rings... Basically needs redone just as much as the 400 needs redone.

So compare those costs on that level. Here is the other important "factor". What are the other "goodies" in the 400 block? With the 355 engine, you mention you get a real nice choice of carbueretors, a good intake, if they are 462 heads....thats a nice factory performance head casting(not wonderful compared to todays standars, but people still have good success with them when done right). And of course...a full roller valvetrain which costs easily a grand. So what Im sayin is that the top end of the 355 engine sounds stout enough and you wont have to spend a bunch of money here. All the money would go in the bottom end to make a 383.

Now on to the 400....if it has a nice top end(comparable to the 355)...all you gotta do is freshen the thing up(if thats all you gotta do, your money and cubic inches ahead with the 400). If the 400 got a plain jane, standard issue top end, its not gonna run all that great. In that case, you might be money ahead starting with the 355. Find out ALL the important details of each engine and figure out which one costs the least to get respectable performance.

 
SARDiver 
Contributor
Posts: 188
SARDiver
Loc: Ohio
Reg: 08-17-07
12-04-07 09:21 AM - Post#1310550    
    In response to greg_moreira

Sounds good. Looks like the 355 has a fair amount of nice go fast parts that come with it. The motor was originally built to be thrown into a Camaro, and then got stuffed into a truck. I know the owner and the truck would flat out scream.

Here is the one thing you gotta keep in mind....the crank and pistons have to go in order to make a 383. I think I'm going to go with Ohio Crank parts here. They are close enough for me to drive and pick them up to save shipping. I've also read plenty of good things here about there work, products, and service.You will need a 383 specific crank and set of pistons, so at this point your basically talkin about a rebuild to make a 383. New crank, pistons, bearings, re-balance, fresh hone and new rings... Basically needs redone just as much as the 400 needs redone. The 400 is only block, crank, cam, pistons/rods, lifters. He never finished the build of this motor. There are no top end components with this. Also, different owner than the 355.

So compare those costs on that level. Here is the other important "factor". What are the other "goodies" in the 400 block? With the 355 engine, you mention you get a real nice choice of carbueretors, a good intake, if they are 462 heads....thats a nice factory performance head casting(not wonderful compared to todays standars, but people still have good success with them when done right). And of course...a full roller valvetrain which costs easily a grand. So what Im sayin is that the top end of the 355 engine sounds stout enough and you wont have to spend a bunch of money here. All the money would go in the bottom end to make a 383.

Now on to the 400....if it has a nice top endno top end parts(comparable to the 355)...all you gotta do is freshen the thing up(if thats all you gotta do, your money and cubic inches ahead with the 400). If the 400 got a plain jane, standard issue top end, its not gonna run all that great. In that case, you might be money ahead starting with the 355. Find out ALL the important details of each engine and figure out which one costs the least to get respectable performance. Thanks for the info and break down between the two motors. I think I'm going with the 355 even if I haveto sell off parts to add what I really want for the 383 build. Scott
Respect your equipment...one day it may save your life.


 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

16623 Views
FusionBB
FusionBB™ Version 2.1
©2003-2006 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.109 seconds.   Total Queries: 15   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0800) Pacific. Current time is 06:36 AM
Top