Ryan K

iTrader: (11)

So, One question that I have to ask, How many of the high HP cars that we are seeing are 4.125" bore with a 3.23" stroke? Are you guys really trying to say that you are running a stock 5.7L 3.622" stroke and 3.9" bore? My bet is that there are more than 1 big bore "stock displacement" engines running around here.

What do the rest of you think?

Ryan K.

<small>[ January 31, 2003, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: Ryan Karasek ]</small>

Joe Kizzire

Ryan all you have to do is watch the dyno graphs.... peak hp numbers will be above 7300rpms... if they do the cam for the stroke.
Personally I would go for a 3.350 stroke and work the bore numbers to fit... if I was going to get in the 350 inch race. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

verbs

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Ryan Karasek:
<strong> So, One question that I have to ask, How many of the high HP cars that we are seeing are 4.125" bore with a 3.23" stroke? Are you guys really trying to say that you are running a stock 5.7L 3.622" stroke and 3.9" bore? My bet there are more than 1 big bore "stock displacement" engines running around here.

What do the rest of you think?

Ryan K. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I have no clue...but we'd be seeing dyno graphs with people spinning their cars above 7000rpms if they were boring em out....which we aren't seeing.

HP-GURU

You'd think with the power flattening off hard on these cars at around 6500 rpm that there is no sense trying to make power at those levels without a different intake design.

Fly By

I would bet that these shops arent even considering these options. Thats a whole motor!

would it be cool? you bet! But I can tell you that a stroke of that length is not going to make 430+ TQ.


LIke it was said before, if you are gonna have a 4.125 bore, why the hell would you put a 3.22 stroke in it? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

I haven't really seen anyone with those kinds of combos.

I have a stock 3.27 stroke crank here out of a 4.8 motor, I could offset grind it up to like .200 I have been told.

I have kicked around this scenario but it might not be worth it to give up the torque... I'm just not sure.

01 SS Jay

Come on PSJ... you know that 10+psi will handle any torque concerns you may have. Build a big bore, short stroke turbo motor - thats a combination we havent seen yet, and it might be the combination we need to get Supra kind of power out of an FI LS1.

BurnOut

iTrader: (1)

I can tell you for sure that the LGM setup is on a 3.9" x 3.622" 346 bottom end. They certainly don't include a big bore/short stroke bottom end in that ~$6k package. I watched the installation of the package on the silver Z06 that the latest numbers came from.

As I am 110% certain that LGM is using a stock bottom end, I also find it entirely believable that Cartek setup is also on a 3.9" x 3.622" 346.

Same for MTI. Same for LPE. Same for JPR. Same for... well, you get the idea...

I honestly don't think that any of the vendors on here would attempt to deceive their (potential) customers in this way... because they (the vendor) would either end up doing big bore/short stroke bottom ends for REALLY cheap (read: free) or end up with all of the people (who bought that package) being REALLY pissed off when they couldn't duplicate the numbers.

Just my $.02...

Brian Tooley Racing

iTrader: (13)

You can set the Dynojet computer stack (you know, the red one) in front of the exhaust or just real close to it and gain 20-30 RWHP. It sees the supposed hot room air temp and corrects the numbers way up. If it sees 100 degree air temp it will correct about 20-30 RWHP at an SAE correction factor. And if the car is actually seeing cold air, 60 degrees or less the difference could be 40 RWHP plus, and this folks is just one of the many ways to trick dyno numbers.
We need organized racing events with stringent tech rules and see who comes out on top. Just my .02

CHRISPY

Amen Brian...

XJGPN

While it is definately true that you could do this, I know for a fact that Cartek did not do this, and I seriously doubt LGM did did this.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Brian Tooley:
<strong> You can set the Dynojet computer stack (you know, the red one) in front of the exhaust or just real close to it and gain 20-30 RWHP.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

LG Motorsports

Brian,
With all due respect.

I find it odd that you, a sponsor, would imply that LGM or Cartek would do something like that. IT would be the same thing as if LGM or Cartek said that you used bogus flow numbers.

It would be best if you stuck to pointing out the good points of your own products, rather than making assumptions about the derogatory, products of others.
This is just some food for thought.

Lou Gigliotti LGM

mattf2

Thanks Lou,

I like when folks sell their stuff based on what they can do for you, not what others can't.

I feel that way about politics too, but the negative advertisements always seem to work.

01 SS Jay

Not trying to step on anyone's toes, but from an outside perspective, it didnt seem like that post was pointing any fingers or even implying that LGM or Cartek wasnt honest. He was just describing ways to fudge dyno results, since the original post was discussing various "sneaky" ways to get very high #'s.

I do understand you having a quick trigger finger as of late, but in my opinion, Brians post did not warrant that reply.

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

No more comments please with that tangent.

This is about real experience with big bore short stroke motors.

No hearsay.

No crap.

I am keeping this crank and I might try to use it but we'll see. I can't see a value in using it NA unless someone just wanted to buzz a motor up to over 7500.

NoGo

iTrader: (2)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Ryan Karasek:
<strong> So, One question that I have to ask, How many of the high HP cars that we are seeing are 4.125" bore with a 3.23" stroke? Are you guys really trying to say that you are running a stock 5.7L 3.622" stroke and 3.9" bore? My bet is that there are more than 1 big bore "stock displacement" engines running around here.

What do the rest of you think?

Ryan K. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">These motors come from the factory with a 78% VE. Most race engines can get that number to over 100%.

By the numbers alone, there is still alot of potential left in the 346, even at obtainable rpm.