Why are stroker motor tolerances "looser"?
10-29-2003, 02:17 PM
#21
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CANNIBAL
I wonder what a 427 would cost that had:
block
steel crank/forged crank
non forged pistons/rods, just normal material
decent set of heads and a mild cam/valvetrain
I bet the price would be significantly less and you'd still have a TQ monster with factory engine reliability. Granted you won't be pumping out 126+ MPH in the 1/4 and it wouldn't be too wise to spray the motor too much (<100 shot) you'd have a really solid TQ monster with zero to no worry.
I wonder how much power would be lost with tighter tolerances, hyper pistons, and a mild cam setup. Heck you could still go aggressive on the cam as long as you had the valvetrain for it. Then your only maintenance concern would be servicing the valvetrain periodically.
I just like throwing ideas out there.
block
steel crank/forged crank
non forged pistons/rods, just normal material
decent set of heads and a mild cam/valvetrain
I bet the price would be significantly less and you'd still have a TQ monster with factory engine reliability. Granted you won't be pumping out 126+ MPH in the 1/4 and it wouldn't be too wise to spray the motor too much (<100 shot) you'd have a really solid TQ monster with zero to no worry.
I wonder how much power would be lost with tighter tolerances, hyper pistons, and a mild cam setup. Heck you could still go aggressive on the cam as long as you had the valvetrain for it. Then your only maintenance concern would be servicing the valvetrain periodically.
I just like throwing ideas out there.
1)any extra internal friction caused by the tight clearances, which can't be THAT much - what, 10 to 15 crank horsepower?
2)The Hypereutectic pistons cost power in that you lose the ability to run forced induction or N20 - but that's a non issue if you had been planning for an N/A motor all along.
and as you say, if it turned out to be too mild, throw a wilder cam in and change the valve springs every 2 years. At least you wouldn't have to go any farther into the motor than the valve covers.
This definitely isn't the engine setup for everyone. But it is just what the "set it and forget it" crowd needs. Lou at LG calls this an "executive" package, and I think this is how most of lingenfelter's packages are designed.
10-29-2003, 03:22 PM
#22
TECH Senior Member
If I ever got a stroker motor built I'd definitely prefer to lose 20-30hp if it meant the engine was going to be a lot more durable.
Call me crazy, but I'd love to be the first guy in the country to go 200,000 miles on a stroker LS1. I need an LS1 equipped vehicle first though. (preferably a C5)
Call me crazy, but I'd love to be the first guy in the country to go 200,000 miles on a stroker LS1. I need an LS1 equipped vehicle first though. (preferably a C5)
10-29-2003, 03:49 PM
#23
Originally Posted by TTopJohn
The only thing I can see that would cost power is
1)any extra internal friction caused by the tight clearances, which can't be THAT much - what, 10 to 15 crank horsepower?
2)The Hypereutectic pistons cost power in that you lose the ability to run forced induction or N20 - but that's a non issue if you had been planning for an N/A motor all along.
and as you say, if it turned out to be too mild, throw a wilder cam in and change the valve springs every 2 years. At least you wouldn't have to go any farther into the motor than the valve covers.
This definitely isn't the engine setup for everyone. But it is just what the "set it and forget it" crowd needs. Lou at LG calls this an "executive" package, and I think this is how most of lingenfelter's packages are designed.
1)any extra internal friction caused by the tight clearances, which can't be THAT much - what, 10 to 15 crank horsepower?
2)The Hypereutectic pistons cost power in that you lose the ability to run forced induction or N20 - but that's a non issue if you had been planning for an N/A motor all along.
and as you say, if it turned out to be too mild, throw a wilder cam in and change the valve springs every 2 years. At least you wouldn't have to go any farther into the motor than the valve covers.
This definitely isn't the engine setup for everyone. But it is just what the "set it and forget it" crowd needs. Lou at LG calls this an "executive" package, and I think this is how most of lingenfelter's packages are designed.
$2500 for Darton block
Crank?
Rods/Pistons/Rings?
S2 TEA heads JM version $2XXX?
10-29-2003, 04:10 PM
#24
No, you couldn't simply throw an "aggressive" cam into that engine and expect the valvetrain just to wear out. RPM is what kills/wears out engines. An aggressive cam typically moves the power band higher, and will wear out the rings, bearings, and valvetrain sooner.
Everything has a tradeoff, no freebies in the engine building vs performance vs longevity game.
Hypereutectic pistons aren't bad as long as they aren't abused with things like nitrous or detonation. The extra silicon content in their composition makes them pretty tough, have excellent wear characteristics, limited heat expansion, and light weight. Forged pistons are just better at taking the abuse and aren't as brittle.
Tony
Everything has a tradeoff, no freebies in the engine building vs performance vs longevity game.
Hypereutectic pistons aren't bad as long as they aren't abused with things like nitrous or detonation. The extra silicon content in their composition makes them pretty tough, have excellent wear characteristics, limited heat expansion, and light weight. Forged pistons are just better at taking the abuse and aren't as brittle.
Tony
10-29-2003, 06:09 PM
#25
No, you couldn't simply throw an "aggressive" cam into that engine and expect the valvetrain just to wear out. RPM is what kills/wears out engines. An aggressive cam typically moves the power band higher, and will wear out the rings, bearings, and valvetrain sooner.
10-29-2003, 07:18 PM
#26
Because if you are just talking about longevity, increasing the aggressiveness of the camshaft will bring with it a higher rpm range. This means increased wear on the bearings, rings, valvetrain, and fatigue on the rods and rod bolts. Doing anything to increase the RPM range of this "mild" engine will also shorten its lifespan.
Tony
Tony
10-29-2003, 07:32 PM
#27
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nine Ball
Because if you are just talking about longevity, increasing the aggressiveness of the camshaft will bring with it a higher rpm range. This means increased wear on the bearings, rings, valvetrain, and fatigue on the rods and rod bolts. Doing anything to increase the RPM range of this "mild" engine will also shorten its lifespan.
Tony
Tony
Can you use "better" rods, rod bolts, rings, bearings and valve train parts that can deal with the higher RPMs, or does that necessarily bring us back to the loose clearance uses that uses oil and is not expected to last 100K miles?
Okay, let's not worry about what we do if this "executive package" motor doesn't make enough power, let's say we keep a milder cam in it and set the redline at 6000 or 6500. That should do it?
The cubes (382 or 422) should more than make up for the mild cam.
What exacly is considered a mild cam with that many cubes - a 224/224 114 is going to behave a lot better in a 382 than in a 346 - but would that better behavior go along with a corresponding increase in longevity? (same size cam, 346 v. 382/422)?
Admittedly there's got to be some tradeoff in a performance engine v. a factory engine. But can't you trade $ (in the form of hours spent balancing and blueprinting, porting and polishing that the factory just can't afford to do on a mass produced enigne) and fuel economy (bigger cubes than the factory is comfortable with for CAFE reasons, tuning that may use more fuel but makes your bigger cam drivable) and get more power?
Or must you trade longevity and drivability?
10-29-2003, 07:35 PM
#28
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CANNIBAL
I agree at least that these options should/could be made available to the average Joe-schmo that just wanted a big cube daily driver that didn't care to get every ounce of HP out of their setup. I know most shops want to debut their motors with the most power and that's just common sense but they could put a little asterisk claiming "Different pistons/rings and camshaft/valvetrain could be changed for a less aggressive setup but more consumer friendly, i.e. less oil burning, longer valvetrain life etc." Somepeople just assume that a certain motor package just is what it is and couldn't be tweaked above or below for different uses.
I wonder what a 427 would cost that had:
block
steel crank/forged crank
non forged pistons/rods, just normal material
decent set of heads and a mild cam/valvetrain
I bet the price would be significantly less and you'd still have a TQ monster with factory engine reliability. Granted you won't be pumping out 126+ MPH in the 1/4 and it wouldn't be too wise to spray the motor too much (<100 shot) you'd have a really solid TQ monster with zero to no worry.
I wonder how much power would be lost with tighter tolerances, hyper pistons, and a mild cam setup. Heck you could still go aggressive on the cam as long as you had the valvetrain for it. Then your only maintenance concern would be servicing the valvetrain periodically.
I just like throwing ideas out there.
I wonder what a 427 would cost that had:
block
steel crank/forged crank
non forged pistons/rods, just normal material
decent set of heads and a mild cam/valvetrain
I bet the price would be significantly less and you'd still have a TQ monster with factory engine reliability. Granted you won't be pumping out 126+ MPH in the 1/4 and it wouldn't be too wise to spray the motor too much (<100 shot) you'd have a really solid TQ monster with zero to no worry.
I wonder how much power would be lost with tighter tolerances, hyper pistons, and a mild cam setup. Heck you could still go aggressive on the cam as long as you had the valvetrain for it. Then your only maintenance concern would be servicing the valvetrain periodically.
I just like throwing ideas out there.
383ci LS1 stroker kit featuring a nodular cast iron crank, 4340 steel "I" beam fully floating conrods and custom cast alloy dished pistons in .010" oversize.
There are also options for H Beam rods and forged pistons with this kit. Their first stroker engine was built as a torquey daily driver with a small cam 218/224, 550/550, 114 LSA and made with a basic tune (11:1 AFR's and 22 degrees timing) 465 bhp @ 5500 rpm and 481 ft.lbs torque @ 4500 rpm. The real potential for such an engine is the torque made as low as 2500 rpm is a brutal 397 ft.lbs and it idles at 800 rpm at 17" of vacuum.
You can check out more details about the kits at www.comeracing.com and click on the latest feature.
10-29-2003, 08:46 PM
#29
Originally Posted by Nine Ball
Because if you are just talking about longevity, increasing the aggressiveness of the camshaft will bring with it a higher rpm range. This means increased wear on the bearings, rings, valvetrain, and fatigue on the rods and rod bolts. Doing anything to increase the RPM range of this "mild" engine will also shorten its lifespan.
Tony
Tony
. The mild setup would probably be purchased by those customers that don't plan on spending much time in the high RPMs anyway so even if they did up the ante on the cam/springs they'd still be fine, IMO. They'd be like the LS1 346 boys/girls running the TR224/CC918s, near stock reliability with an extra 'umph (Assuming both "boys/girls" didnt' take it to redline day in and day out) They'd still have to swap out springs at their specified intervals, though
10-29-2003, 09:34 PM
#30
Originally Posted by Brett SS
Well your prayers have already been answered as COME Racing here in Australia have just brought out their stroker kits with :
383ci LS1 stroker kit featuring a nodular cast iron crank, 4340 steel "I" beam fully floating conrods and custom cast alloy dished pistons in .010" oversize.
There are also options for H Beam rods and forged pistons with this kit. Their first stroker engine was built as a torquey daily driver with a small cam 218/224, 550/550, 114 LSA and made with a basic tune (11:1 AFR's and 22 degrees timing) 465 bhp @ 5500 rpm and 481 ft.lbs torque @ 4500 rpm. The real potential for such an engine is the torque made as low as 2500 rpm is a brutal 397 ft.lbs and it idles at 800 rpm at 17" of vacuum.
You can check out more details about the kits at www.comeracing.com and click on the latest feature.
383ci LS1 stroker kit featuring a nodular cast iron crank, 4340 steel "I" beam fully floating conrods and custom cast alloy dished pistons in .010" oversize.
There are also options for H Beam rods and forged pistons with this kit. Their first stroker engine was built as a torquey daily driver with a small cam 218/224, 550/550, 114 LSA and made with a basic tune (11:1 AFR's and 22 degrees timing) 465 bhp @ 5500 rpm and 481 ft.lbs torque @ 4500 rpm. The real potential for such an engine is the torque made as low as 2500 rpm is a brutal 397 ft.lbs and it idles at 800 rpm at 17" of vacuum.
You can check out more details about the kits at www.comeracing.com and click on the latest feature.
Tony
