Billiumss

iTrader: (11)

It seems 383 strokers (4.000" stroke) are very popular if your going to stroke a stock LS1 block, but why don't you see much about a 396 CU IN stroker?

3.903" bore & 4.125" stroke gives you a 396.

From the research that I have done so far, all you need is a 4.125 stroke crank (which Lunati makes) and you have to notch a few spots in the block to allow for piston/rod clearance, the same thing you need to do for a 427 engine.

Why go 383 when you can go 396 and get more torque? The costs are the same.

Is there something I'm missing here?

Bill

ls1290

iTrader: (20)

The big problem with the 396 stroker package is deck height and oil consumption. Because the LS1 deck height is not that tall, the rod/stroke ratio is pretty poor and this leads to oil consumption problems.

Billiumss

iTrader: (11)

So if these statements are true, wouldn't a resleved 427 have the same problems? Deck height would still be the same.

Please explain more about the rod-stroke ratio.

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

that 3.903 to 4.125 ratio is very undersquare. Most builders prefer square (equal bore and stroke) or oversquare (more bore than stroke). Oversquare engines tend to rev quicker than undersquare engines also.

396ci is popular with LT1 engines because that is the biggest they can get.

Tony

ls1290

iTrader: (20)

No, a resleeved 427 is a 4.125" bore x 4.0" stroke. The 0.125" difference in the cranks makes a huge differance.

93Polo

iTrader: (5)

The LT1 396 is still an oversquare design with bore of 4.03" and stroke of 3.875
The LS1 396 uses a 3.9" bore and a 4.125" stroke.

A sleeved 427 is oversquare at a 4.125 bore by 4.00" stroke or an Iron block is almost a square bore at a 4.06" bore and 4.125" stroke.

Billiumss

iTrader: (11)

So, it is possible, but not recommended to do a 396?

As for oil comsumption, is it because the piston crank pin is too close to the oil ring?

Any good books out there I can read to learn more about the do's and don't of engine building?

mattf2

can't you do a 396 oversquare too? (LS1)

I always thought another SS396 would be cool.

93Polo

iTrader: (5)

Futral did a 393 sleeved motor. 4.125" bore with a 3.72" stroke offset ground stock crank? I could be wrong on the exact specs. You could get a 396 by adding a little stroke or bore.

TSP has an Iron block 396 4.06" bore and 3.82" offset ground stock crank.

Cubes= (Bore*.5)^2*3.14*(# of cylinders)*(stroke)

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

Here, make it easier on yourself:

http://www.web-cars.com/math/displacement.html

mattf2

I think Chris Pippy was talking about an offset ground crank w/ an .060 bored 6.0 iron block would go 396.

gillbot

iTrader: (27)

Bill, just get a 6.0 block and bore it 0.030 then get a 4" crank. Call it a 396 or a 409!

I'm actually planning on the 4.030 bore 6.0L block and the 4" crank myself sometime down the road.

gator's 99TA

iTrader: (2)

why is everyone caught up in cube numbers?

Billiumss

iTrader: (11)

It's just cool....

Scalpel

iTrader: (4)

Yes it is

Technoman64

iTrader: (6)

Isn't there an old syaing there is no substitution for cubic inches. Or something like that

monkeyboy

my buddy is in the process of doing an all bore 396. from what i understand, all bore 396 motors are superior to stroker 396 motors. is this true?

gator's 99TA

iTrader: (2)

396" from stroke equals a big tq but a LOT of cylinder distance. it is way over square. for an all out drag motor, no doubt more bore is where it is at.

gillbot

iTrader: (27)

There's no replacement for Displacement.

DaveSchott

iTrader: (5)

remember most ss396's were actually 402's! put whatever badges on it and have fun, who'll know?