Kind of the same thing with the 396/427 or the FE 332 thru 428 and many others. If they cast the cylinder walls thick enough to go all the way to 409 or a 332 to go all the way to 428 would it effect heat transfer for cooling?
Why did they build a 409 when a 348 could be stroked so easily?
- Thread starter 1964SuperStocker
- Start date
Quiz! What won S/S Top Eliminator Championship Drags 1959 Great Bend Kansas! It wasn’t a 348
I suspect the bigger bore was done for two reasons: 1) That was the prevailing theory at the time, plus it could have eventually opened things up for subsequent stroke increases that never happened (from the factory anyway), and 2) That it significantly unshrouded and clearanced the exhaust valve. Just a guess. I've always thought 409 the hard way might be better (348 bore, 3.76 stroke) but never had any proof.
1957 Chevy with a 283!!!!!
That's exactly what happened with the FE with its smaller bore center they ran out of room for larger bore with the 427,as it was the wall thickness was marginal for Nascar and they had to resort to a cloverleaf cross section bore for strength in the later race blocks,apparently they were unwilling to go to siamese bores.They did experiment with some 482 inch 1/2" strokers in 62/63 though.
Same reason they went from 396-427-454-502? Because they wanted more displacement and that is an easy path to more hp and torque? Lots of other things they could do with stroke, heads, intakes, carbs, exhaust, rpm, turbos, super chargers, but more displacement is a cheap place to start when you are mass producing vehicles and will be selling millions of vehicles. Plus, bragging rights, mine’s bigger than yours, always been the way to go. Simple answer.
Not really. The nostalgia is nice but the reality is different.
Once again, I'll duck the incoming bricks, bats and rotten fruit......
Aah could those 482 be the early version of the Carolina’s mountain motors quite possibly out of Holman and Moody? I recall in the 60’s stacks of motors in there including racks of the SOHC’s
Robert
While setting at the stop light yesterday I was pondering how 1/2ton trucks have gotten so big. My 3/4ton 4x4 is way smaller and can not carry nearly as much weight as my dads new "half ton". There will always be an arms race for bigger, faster and more efficient.
The manufacturers have changed things recently but....check the door post capacity ratings and you will see usually much bigger numbers. But the 3/4 are down also and engines and transmissions are de rated by some. Now if you’re towing anything other than small landscaping trailers one ton or 450’s are the only way to go
Robert
. Bingo! 270hp
As far as I understand that motor was designed from the beginning with racing in mind. The RPM's is where that motor gets its power.
I'm certain H/M had a lot to do with them especially since they did some of the testing in Fred Lorenzen's 62 Galaxie Grand National convertible with Starlifter roof.
Val Headworth Had a 56 Handyman wagon with the 265 and dual quads on it from the factory. Packed the front end forever and ran hard. He never has mentioned anything about the W motors to me but I’ll ask him how much competition they were back then next time I see him...Not really. The nostalgia is nice but the reality is different.
Once again, I'll duck the incoming bricks, bats and rotten fruit......
Only going thru the gears, they ran out of steam in the 1/4 mile.
So Hamjet, if it were 1969 again and you could go to a dealer and pick out a Camaro would it Be a Z- 28 with the 302, Or the ZL-1 with the all aluminum 427 four-speed? Man I was born way too late!
63 was a good year though.
Not drag racing, the car and the motor were designed for road course racing.