And a T76-GTS will do 900rwhp on a 346+ inch motor too. Look at the dyno results forum of turbomustangs.com, a guy just made 980 RWHP on a T76 Q-trim with a 363" motor.

Saying you'll destroke it to be able to turn more revs is a load of baloney as well. You're going to be limited by your camshaft primarily with how high you can rev, not how long the stroke is. We have a motor going into a friends car here that's 414 inches (4.125 x 3.875) that carries power to 8000 RPM's with a big solid roller cam. Stroke is basically a non-issue when it comes to how high you can turn a motor nowadays.

 

Right. The cam will have the most effect on where you make peak power.

 

Id build the best combo to achieve the absolute best rod to stroke ratio. I would think that maximizing the efficiency of the internals would be better than just trying to get the most cubes out of it. A huge stroker with boost to me just sounds like serious cylinder pressure boost & r/s ratio. Sure you could get big power but for how long? A smaller engine w/ a perfect r/s will have less stress on it, you might have to run more boost to make the power but it will hold it and last longer. And has less rotating mass. the boost will make up for the torque loss. How fast it heats up has nothing to do with it. And the way it reacts in a heavy/light car is all up to how you set it up, converter, gears, ect..

And saying stroke makes no difference on how high an engine can rev, true, but it does determine how long you can rev it.

 

Why not build a huge bore short stroke 350?
4.155" bore 3.25" stroke with 6.25"-6.3" rods. Thats 352 cubes. Then you have the cubic inches for torque and the short stroke for revs.

 

I don't buy into the rod/stroke ratio crap either. Unless we're talking about something class limited like 500ci pro stock motors where you need to look everywhere for 2 or 3 or 4 horsepower to make the difference beween winning and losing, the rod/stroke ratio is really completely meaningless when we're talking about a street engine.

I deal with a lot of Hondas, and somehow they got started big on rod/stroke ratios. B16 motors run a 77.4mm stroke with a 134mm connecting rod. 1.73:1 rod/stroke ratio. B18A/B motors run an 89mm stroke with a 137mm connecting rod, for a 1.54:1 rod/stroke ratio. Fairly significant difference, but do the B16's make a better turbo motor? Nope. I built a motor for a friend who is turning 10000 RPM's all day long with a 92mm stroker crank and the B18B length rods, for a supposedly poor rod/stroke ratio of 1.49:1. This motor made just over 760 WHP on C16 and around 450 WHP on pump gas, and sees a lot of street miles. We took it down before this season to freshen it up, and the bearings and cylinder walls looked no worse after about 12K miles than the B16 he had the year before that was making ~690 WHP on race gas.

If Hondas can turn 10 thousand PLUS RPM's with 3.5" and longer strokes, and if Chevrolet will build the LS7 that has to have stone cold reliability for 100K plus miles turning 7000 RPM's with a 4" stroke, I stand by my original statement that stroke length is peanuts when talking about revs, except that you want lots of it to make lots of torque for a street motor.