331 Stroker

Discussion in '1994 - 1995 Specific Tech' started by Holik95, Jun 18, 2006.

  1. How much power can I expect from a 331 with everything thats listed in my sig? What kind of times in the 1/4 would I run on DR?
  2. Maybe 315hp/360tq. Car won't make much power after 5,500 but it will make decent low end torque if thats what you're into. At least change the cam.

    Why not a 347? Make more power w/o costing you an extra dime.
  3. Simple...grn92lx...because the 331 is different, less aggressive rod ratio, more piston material, and the majority of the time the 331 doesn't have to be "stroker clearanced"...

    Why does everyone have to have a 347 like you? LOL.

    There must be a huge difference between the two...does the 347 provide 1000 more horsepower?
  4. I heard that 347's are more likely to break due to the angle of the rods? :shrugs:
  5. zZ, uhh WTF you talking about?
  6. grn92lx - He is talking about the steeper rod ratio...it does put a slight amount more on the sidewalls of the cylinders. It is very, very unlikely that the rod ratio itself will split a block unless it was on the absolute verge of splitting...but it doesn't help the block's strength. That is what he was talking about and passing on...
  7. I've read this on these forums also. A few years ago 331 vs 347 was a huge debate on these sits. Supposedly, the extra stress on the sidewalls also leads to faster ring wear with a 347 as compared to a 331 in addition to the potential issues 5spGT noted.

    Note: I'm not speaking from experience, just regurgitating info I've heard from others, so take this with a grain of salt.
  8. Back on topic:

    Depends on how well it's tuned. :D I'd expect to see between 320-340 RWHP with the E-cam that's in there. There are better cam options that I'd wager could get you over 350 RWHP.

    Not all drag radials are created equally...but assuming your running some stickey MT's and can drive well you could see low 12s or even high 11s.

    Mid-12s with "average" driving and "average" traction. :D
  9. If you are staying NA, then there is really no reason to go 331 over a 347, unless you are racing in some kind of class that prohibits engines of that size.

    It will be very difficult to make enough power / RPM to break a stock block staying naturally aspirated. Are you telling me that you're gonna make 500 RWHP or spin the motor to 8K all the time? With an E cam, AFR 165s, and a track heat? No way.

    I agree with Grn92LX... go 347. More power, same price.

  10. Yeah ... I heard that too!

    I also heard Fox pcm's work better in our cars than the original!

    I even have seen many say a gear ratio of 3.55 will keep your car from turning too many rpm's when cruising at highway speeds so that is why you don't want to consider the next step up which is the 3.73 ratio.

    That is the thing about a lot of info you hear .................

    Its just info that is passed on and on and on ...........

    and finally

    that info becomes perceived as truth

    when in REALITY

    It is 50% truth or maybe 75% of the truth at best.

    Funny thing about a lot of the info that is heard and passed on is

    in many instances, the source is not known to be from one who has experience from doing it.

    As for the 331/347 which is better thing .........

    The 347 rod ratio is not as bad as some OEM Production motors.

    I myself just said that ... and ... you just heard that ... SO ... I just passed that info along ... :rlaugh:


    Cruise over to hardcore (pretty smart folks about this topic over there btw) and see for yourself if the info I passed along has merit or not.

    See how the I heard this or that info can easily be checked for validity when some guy like me says something that is different from the masses.

    Almost forgot about those other two things I've heard a lot about

    Search button on this site will give 100% truth about them.

  11. What Grady and Adam said. I need not say more :)

    If you want REAL answers on 302 based strokers, www.hardcore50.com is the place.
  12. Well, I did put

    in my post. :D
  13. I was not trying to single out anybody with my post and that info was ment to refer to the general Stang community.

    I did use a quote from zZsKyZz but only to give reference to my train of thought.

    Another way to look at this hear say info is using this example.

    Not too long ago, one of the Stang rags did an article on the pcm retrofit for our cars.

    Notice how that Q has been cropping up a lot lately. If a Stang mag writes it, its gotta be true ;)

    Anyway ...... Back to the original posters Q.

    I gotta throw in with Grn92LX and say you usually get 302 power if you use 302 parts on a stroker. I would want parts on a 331/347 that would move more air. I don't think you would even make 1 rwhp for each cubic inch.

    The power would have to be down due to the small parts.

  14. Grn92lx - That is a drag racing forum, that is the jist of it. They try to get all they can out of cars...just as you did with your non-daily driver.

    I'll respond later when I get some time...;)
  15. You see where I stand
  16. Any numbers on that thing? How much boost are you seeing with that Powerdyne on the 347?
  17. Let me say it again...more reasons...because the 331 is different, less aggressive rod ratio, more piston material, and the majority of the time the 331 doesn't have to be "stroker clearanced"...

    Who said that he is going to break his block?

    No one.

    Blocks have been broken with h/c/i combo's...

    Grn92lx - So are we giving fake answers?

    Is there just as much piston material on a 347 piston? Is a 347 not different than a 331? Does a 347 not have a more aggressive rod ratio? Does a 347 automatically cost the same as a 331 even though shops charge a bit for stroker clearancing so the rods don't hit?

  18. as of the last time i talked to him, the car still isnt together, same as mine.....as far as the 331 to 347 debate goes, i went 331 because i stuffed everything in a stock block which is a time bomb anyway. why increase the risk of destroying it sooner with the added cubes was the way i looked at it when maqking my choice. as far as what your car will make, who knows? you are putting parts suited for a 302 on a larger displacement engine so you are looking at a bottleneck there. aside from that, the tune plays a huge part in power production as does the compression ratio, neither of which are things you spoke about. a little more info is necessary to give you a somewhat accurate answer to your questions.
  19. Grady, I'd like to help in your efforts to debunk internet myths. That's something that I can't stand. But this is one of those things that I do not consider myth (BTW, yes, I realize the quote above isn't necessarily in reference to the 347 vs. 331 debate). I have talked to 5 different [thouroughly experienced] engine builders. They all agree that the 347 stroker has more stress on the rings and creates more side load. This, being from experienced builders, rules it out as "myth" in my book.

    This is where the consumer steps in. Is 16 c.i. (which will equate to ~20 hp, depending on combo) worth a "possibly" shorter engine life? There are 347's that last longer than 331's with roughly the same combo. So it is a decision to make. But I don't think it is exactly a critical decision. You just have to weigh the facts (after you find them, lol) and go from there.

    This is definitely true.

    Now, personally, my new combo will be a 347. I've done a few years worth of research on this. My decision was to take the 16 c.i. & run. If my engine ends up lasting a few thousand miles less than the typical 331, it's still worth it to me.

  20. All very valid points Justin :nice:

    Lets keep this stroker thing is a world of reality for MOST peeps who would consider a stroker whether it be 331 or 347.

    First things first ... rod ratio is better on 331 than 347


    IMHO, peeps take that truth and make a mountain out of a molehill

    Short motor life ... again ... stock oem production motors have greater ratios than the 347 stroker.

    At this point in my post, I feel anymore words are wasted on the bad rod ratio thing, and I'll sum it up with this quote.

    The 347 has a rod ratio that is not as favorable as the 331 BUT it is not the demon most make it out to be IMHO.

    Now Lets Talk About The Reality Part Of Strokers.

    Reality ...............

    Most strokers are not in daily drivers :)

    Not to say they can't be made to work just dandy in a street car but, if it is a street car, it most likely is gonna be in a week end toy or street/strip car.

    Most who commit to a stroker AND do it up correctly go into a project like this with their eyes wide open and know its gonna take a good bit of money invested and it ain't gonna be gas milage friendly. That kind of stuff and daily drivers usually don't go hand and hand.

    Now lets move on to another thought ............

    If you wanna subscribe to the thought the 347 will have a shorter motor life ... how much shorter? 10K ... 15K ... :shrug:

    If any, (which I don't buy into) :nono: how much shorter?

    More Reality is most peeps don't even put 10K a year on a weekend toy.

    I could type on and on and on


    This subject to me is like the pcm retrofit thing :fuss:

    The small amount of truth in it is blown up to represent WAY more of a disadvantage than it REALLY is.

    Just more internet Lemming Protocol if you ask me!

    As always my friends :) ... feel free to tell me I'm out there in left field with my line of reasoning :rlaugh: