427 crank
- Thread starter jester
- Start date
I had a 396/427 crank cut down to 409 specs about 6-7 years ago and the labor cost was about $800. Much more expensive than the readily available 454 cranks that have been prepped for the 409. So there's your high water cost.
Might ask someone else about the 40 over on the rods. I assume that is in relation to the 409 specs?
Good luck!
TomK
Might ask someone else about the 40 over on the rods. I assume that is in relation to the 409 specs?
Good luck!
TomK
I thought that .040" might pose a problem.
Aubrey can chime in here, he recommended the 3.75 inch stroke along with a certain set of Ross forged pistons and a solid lifter camshaft for my particular build. One distinction is where in the RPM range that 396/427 crank-based engine develops it's power.
Best to locate bearings first if you're still interested in making an offer
.
Best,
TomK
Aubrey can chime in here, he recommended the 3.75 inch stroke along with a certain set of Ross forged pistons and a solid lifter camshaft for my particular build. One distinction is where in the RPM range that 396/427 crank-based engine develops it's power.
Best to locate bearings first if you're still interested in making an offer
.Best,
TomK
CDNpontiac409guy
Banned
Yes, Tom... the 427 crank will move the power curve up a bit in RPM, over a 4.00" stroke.
BTW... a rather embarassing mistake on my part. A 366/396/427 crank, I thought, was 3.76" stroke.
It's actually 3 .766".
When determining optimum piston / deck height, this is critical.
For serious performance / racing, using large port heads that still resemble their factory configuration, I still do, and always will prefer the 3.766" stroke over the 4.00".
INSTANT RPM, with a higher RPM limit.... and at 446 to 464" or so CID, the cylinder volume doesn't get ahead of the cylinder head's ability.
4.00" stroke ?
If I EVER free up some money from this intake manifold... I'll build one for my tow rig
BTW... a rather embarassing mistake on my part. A 366/396/427 crank, I thought, was 3.76" stroke.
It's actually 3 .766".
When determining optimum piston / deck height, this is critical.
For serious performance / racing, using large port heads that still resemble their factory configuration, I still do, and always will prefer the 3.766" stroke over the 4.00".
INSTANT RPM, with a higher RPM limit.... and at 446 to 464" or so CID, the cylinder volume doesn't get ahead of the cylinder head's ability.
4.00" stroke ?
If I EVER free up some money from this intake manifold... I'll build one for my tow rig
Now THIS is getting good!
CDNpontiac409guy
Banned
I would run one of my 4” stroker motors up against your 3.766 stroker motors any day heads up if you like
WEll, it wouldn't be MINE
... because I'll never have enough money for the oil filterHowever...
Right now, I'm doing a 452 inch engine for a fellow. Yeah... If I can talk him into just a little more serious valve train... yup... you're on
... and he'll have just a single 4 barrel
Wow!! Lock it up, that's a race! I wanna see this go down!
Everyone should remember it's not the cubic inches or the stroke the trans gear raito the tire size, rearend ratio the weight of the car or suspension and shock system and cam profile, plus many other small things that make a car run quick and strong. It's a combination of all. The driver also has a little part in this.
CDNpontiac409guy
Banned
just a second here....
133 MPH ???? :eek
what the hell is THAT ???????
Nope, I can't build a street W block that'll do THAT
no matter what stroke
Guess I better just stick with my Stocker
133 MPH ???? :eek
what the hell is THAT ???????
Nope, I can't build a street W block that'll do THAT
no matter what strokeGuess I better just stick with my Stocker
Yes, Tom... the 427 crank will move the power curve up a bit in RPM, over a 4.00" stroke.
BTW... a rather embarassing mistake on my part. A 366/396/427 crank, I thought, was 3.76" stroke.
It's actually 3 .766".
When determining optimum piston / deck height, this is critical.
For serious performance / racing, using large port heads that still resemble their factory configuration, I still do, and always will prefer the 3.766" stroke over the 4.00".
INSTANT RPM, with a higher RPM limit.... and at 446 to 464" or so CID, the cylinder volume doesn't get ahead of the cylinder head's ability.
4.00" stroke ?
If I EVER free up some money from this intake manifold... I'll build one for my tow rig
You might have something there. Years ago talking to Donnie Shaffer he told us his short stroke engine was faster than his 4" stoker and his brother who built the engines knows his stuff. I though about doing 450 incher, but decided to do the 4" inch again to keep rpm down and help the longevity.
If you are going to Byron for the meltdown deal let me know. You just have to get rid of the modern wheels and cowl hood or trust me they will not let you run.
Would love to see Brian's car run at the meltdown drags. Might have to add that to the list for this year
I will have my camcorder at Thompson. See Ya There!!
