348 stroker in mag

W Head

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 8
#1
The July issue of Chevy High Performance mag. has a article on stroking a 348 out to 434. Said would dyno the engine in the August issue. Pretty good article.

W Head

59 El Camino 348-3,2s
59 Impala 409-2,4s
 
#5
Guys I don't know if anybody noticed but that is the same engine in the Jan. issue of hot rod deluxe mag. that made 521 hp and 488 lbs with the eldbrock intake and heads. Its got the same boat headers and was put together at Joe Jills out in Ca. its going to be very interesting to see a direct comp. of the eld. 2x4 intake and one of the $1500 Lamar Walden single 4 mini rams. Just how much hp and lbs is that $1500 worth over a 2x4 intake. also I thought that hot rod did a much better job of detailing the engine built in their article
 

Ronnie Russell

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 2
#6
Joe Jill is obviously a very good engine builder, however, all of the magazine articles dealing with his builds, ( there was also a Car Craft article on one of his 409 stroker builds ) , have many errors. You cannot install a 348-409 piston without a .030 counterbore for the ring compressor . Hogwash. My favorite is that you can't run a 409 piston out of the hole because a 409 head is flat. Unbelievable that someone would put that in print. The dyno results are great, it is a shame the writers ( at least 2 ) can get so many facts wrong. The mystery to me is that the writers know nothing about 348-409s so they must have recieved the misinformation somewhere at Jill's shop. But , hey, it is good publicity for the 348-409, so that is a good thing.
 
#7
Joe Jill... You cannot install a 348-409 piston without a .030 counterbore for the ring compressor . Hogwash. My favorite is that you can't run a 409 piston out of the hole because a 409 head is flat. Unbelievable that someone would put that in print.
heee hee heee:p

Great stuff, isn't it, Ronnie ?

There's a publication in the works, that will lay to rest some of these goofy mis-conceptions ( my peeve is the "409 crank can't fit in a 348 block":takethat )
 

Tom Kochtanek

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 9
#8
348 w/409 crank

Aubrey, I hadn't heard that one, do you recall the source? I can provide proof otherwise, since CPG supplied me with the pistons for my BBC rods/409 crank in my 1961 348 FA block build. Looks like it fits to me :) :) :).

It's killing me to see that completed engine sitting on a stand down the basement! I need to get cracking on the body. Now there's a summer project for me :).

Cheers!
TomK
 

boxerdog

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 5
#9
I noticed the same discrepancies in those articles. All you can do is take whatever useful info is there and put it away. I would be interested in how that manifold works, too...you wouldn't think that it would be the optimum setup for that combo, but time will tell. It does look imposing.

Tom, please tell me how to resolve the more engines than cars problem. It's only getting worse out here.
 

Ronnie Russell

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 2
#11
Skip, Like boxerdog said. Use the info you can and ignore the stuff that does not add up. The cam bearing suggestion was good. We used it. We also own the Isky cutter now, ( 1.870 ) because of the article. So, thanks to Joe Jill for that.
 

Skip FIx

Well Known Member
#12
So have you done that on all the cam bearings in the past too Ronnie? Or do 409 cam bearing usually have correct holes?

Yea I'm thinking of getting a cutter. My head guy thinks he can mark the block and do a good job by hand too.

I've always been a skeptic of articles. My old machinist build Pontiac motor years ago that ended up in Muscle Car Review. Heads were listed as RAIVs were 74 SD so way different CR. Cam was listed as a Comp was an Ultradyne. His conservative dyno didn't have big enough numbers so it went to another dyno shop.
 

Ronnie Russell

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 2
#13
Skip, No, I have always used the CH5 Durabond, switched to the CHP-4 because I asked my machinist his opinion on the subject. The CHP-4 is a performance bearing and a good choice. Drilling the 2 extra holes were easy because I supplied him with a set to CHP 5 to compare. It is only the rear bearing that needs the 2 extra holes.
 

buildit

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 8
#14
Rear cam bearing options

Or, another option is to just use a die grinder with small diameter cutoff wheel and make a small trough in the bearing housing bore of the block, connecting the feed hole to the lifter gallery hole on each side. This trough, if sized correctly, can also double as an oil restrictor to the top end, if so desired. Then use a set of coated race SBC cam bearings in the engine. Do not drill any extra holes in the rear bearing; they are not needed now. The load capacity of the rear bearing is reduced because of the groove in the rear camshaft journal, but then it only has half the load of the center journals anyway. This setup worked fine in my roller cam 476, and I am using it on a 527 also. I tried to order the cam without the rear journal groove from Comp, but apparently the core already has the groove when they receive it. I agree, drilling the extra holes in the rear bearing will work also.
I also wonder if the brand new W-motor cam bearings that are available now are better than the NOS old ones, which we all know were weak.
 

39chevy

Well Known Member
#15
Some issues with the CHP issue

I ran out and grabbed the CHP mag 'cause I got two 348's and I'm hot to build me a stroker motor. I was pleased to read there is someone in So Cal that knows something about W-Motors, since a lot of you guys seem to be in the Mid-west.

I gotta agree with boxerdog, there were errors and omissions in the artlicle. To me the most obvious one was not mentioning the block needed to have the mains line bored after the caps were installed, but I suppose if I know that, everbody does.

I was wondering... if Joe Jill has all the trick CNC programs to do the machine work, why are they using an Isky clearance cutter? Seems like using an ax when you have a scapel available.

Last thing, in the center top photo on page 43, showing the stock and stroker pistons side by side, it seems to me the stock piston actually would have a smaller combustion area and therefore higher compression ratio. Someone wanna 'splain that one to me?
 

impalamike.com

 
Supporting Member 1
#16
I would like to see a comparison between Lamar's 1x4 intake (in the article), his 2x4, M/T Crossram, Edelbrock 1x4, Edelbrock 2x4 and Aubrey's new 1x4.
 

W Head

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 8
#17
dyno numbers in Aug. mag.

Just got the Aug. addition of Chevy High Performance and the dyno numbers on the stroked 348. (434 cu.in) 576.8 HP at 6200 RPM and 516.8 pounds of TQ. at 5500 RPM.

W Head

59 El Camino 348-3,2s
59 Impala 409-2,4s
 

1961BelAir427

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 3
#19
So the new intake was worth 55HP and 24 TQ?? Or was the second dyno test on a different dyno?? I'm sure there are lots of variables here.
 

hogmotors

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 1
#20
Dang! I wish someone had told me that you had to use a ring compressor 40 years ago.
Guess I'll hafta start flycutting my blocks so I can use one.(don't think so at this LATE date!)
 
Top