351 stroker guys

Discussion in '1994 - 1995 Specific Tech' started by trav_19, Feb 11, 2007.

  1. LOL..o yea balancer...man this is adding up!:eek: I am sorry I did this excersice!!!:rlaugh:

    I must e the king of editing too but I always have ideas poping in my head. I like 347's. The other benefit of getting the 347 would be it leaves you enough money left over to get a 6 speed and PERFECT gearing!!!

    Low 5.0 I noticed in your pic you do not have hood latches. Is there a reason for that? I really don want to put in hood latches for my swap hood.. I know we touched on this b4 but I will see how it latches 1st...I have the metal latch not just fibreglass. I like the car with and without latches but I dont like the idea of drilling holes...eek..
  2. ...oh well i wouldn't put just a plain jane 351 in the car... lol why would you do that the reason for the 351 is to stroke it out more, 347 is the biggest kit i can go in a 302 if i were going to choose between a reg 351 and a 347 i think taths a pretty common sense answer lol

    im noticing every one mentioning a lower intake.....what about the upper are they all the same 302 and 351? that would be good news

    also who do you guys recomend for fuel rails?
  3. Pokageek, I got a fiberglass hood covering my 408. I thought about hood pins but decided that they weren't really necessary since it seems pretty sturdy already. And I, too, did not relish the idea of drilling holes in the hood.

    Trav_19, for my stroker I used the Mallory fuel rail kit. It was pretty cheap and it'll support pretty much anything I can throw at it.

  4. Say you car is your driver. So you decide you will use another block and build a engine then do the swap and sell your motor because you need to drive your car. Say your engine is worth $500.

    So go buy a 351 from a junkyard vs a 302 from a junkyard. If I was building a 347 I would buy a aftermarket oil pan, distributor, intake, cam, heads, fuel rails, injectors, Billet flywheel, headers, dampner, etc etc. So buy them all for a 351 instead of a 302! If you want to save money on the roller conversion buy a late model roller block.

    So how much more has all this cost so far????? Next to Nothing......the machine work is the same also.......so the kit you buy costs $500 more....you get that back when you sell your motor. Unless you have tons of parts already that you are going to reuse it's not that much more money. So now you have a 408 vs a 347 with way more torque and hp.
    Figure out how much it cost's to build a 347 the way I am talking and how many HP per $, now figure out the cost per HP of a 408 and it will actually be cheaper! The HP per $ will be less for a 408 than a 347.

  5. Yes the uppers are the same.

  6. For the added strength! :D The 351 block handles boost better because of the 1/2" head studs. Other than that, I see no reason to install a 351 over a 347 unless you find a killer deal on built 351.

    The upper intakes are the same, but you're limited on your choices because not every 302 intake is offered with a 351 lower. I made a list of the 351 intake options recently, but I don't remember what thread it was in....could have been this one! lol

    If your keeping it N/A I would just use the stock fuel rails if they'll work with your intake. I think they'll work with most intakes so that shouldn't be a problem.
  7. How would ported gt40p's be on a 357 non stroked 351
  8. STILL WAITING..... to hear from the guys saying that 351's are not any stronger than 302's.
    COME ON lets hear what your builder has to say!! You trust him more than ANYONE on the site so lets hear it!!

    :dead: Sorry for bringing this up again but I really want to hear what these guys have to say.
  9. O..NM. Isn't it great when someone is mean and it backfires on them though? ;)
  10. I LOVE that too ;)

    I know I have never done any type of testing on the subject at hand and I KNOW you have not either. All you are doing is reposting what other non engine building people on the internet have said. You aren't offering any real world experience you have done. All I said was what my builder has posted on this very site. Whether he is wrong or right, I trust what he says with out a doubt over ANYTHING you have to say.

    I am not mean, I just tell it like it is. If you can post your real world testing on the subject at hand and prove that part A will not crack down the middle as fast as part B then I will admit what I posted is wrong and edit my post. Until then, carry on and keep reposting your internet hearsay :nice:


    By the way, have a very nice day pal :)
  11. So bottom line, you still nothing to back up your statement like we do...yet are confident in your sarcastic assumptions... Is this how you approach everything?

  12. :rlaugh:
  13. yeah there is no doubt in my mind thats its 408 or nothing...it will be a nitrous motor so i think i will need aftermarket rails

    the car is not a dd i have 3 others to choose from....

    i will still prolbey build it and then swap them though so i can enjoy driving it and since im not using the motor for anything but to reemburst my wallet ....
  14. Good reading thx guys..lol
  15. I wanted to let you guys know that in the October 2006 issue of Muscle Mustangs &FF they had a article on the TFS box R intake that they ran on a 408 stroker.

    The engine was one that they had used testing the AFR205 Vs. TFS 205 head shootout. The engine was from Coast High Performance and had 10.2:1 comp. They put in a little hotter cam for this test it was 238/248 deg @.050 with .579lift on a 114 LS. They wanted to try the new CNC ported TFS TW heads but were too lazy to do the head swap so the test is with AFR 205’S and a 90mm TB.

    It made 525hp @6,300rpm and 530ft-lbs @4500rpm. Torque exceeded 500ft-lbs from 3,600 to 5,400rpm. It also exceeded 450 ft –lbs all the way to 6,100rpm. At the start of the dyno graph it made 440ft-lbs then never made below 450ft-lbs until 6200 rpm.!

    This would make an awesome street engine with that broad torque curve. This is what I was talking about on 408ci strokers, that you can run a bigger cam, heads and intake and STILL make more torque than any 302 based engine. :nice:
  16. Was this rwhp? Low is making 450rwhp and his car is n/a. I would say that is around 550+ Gross HP
  17. Adding 15% I get 517HP/533TQ. With the 18% drivetrain loss that I generally hear for the TKO its at 531HP/546TQ.
  18. the "correct" math for 15% loss would be

    RWHP = FWHP * .85

    therefore, given RWHP, to get FWHP you would have:

    RWHP / .85 = FWHP

    so in Low's case, it would be 449 / .85 = 528 HP at the flywheel

    with a 18% loss thru the drivetrain, it would be 449 / .82 = 547 FW

    make sense?
  19. Yes. This is how I would have calculatede it BV.