DOC OTIS

iTrader: (9)

These motors are close to the same in price to build. NA does the extra 26 cubic inches make up for the added weight of the 6.0 block? I do not care about dyno #'s I want the car to E.T. at the track. So with that in mind which set-up gets your vote? Keep in mind that I would be using the same heads on either set-up (GTP 5.3 62cc stg2)and full bolt-ons, oh and I already am aware I would have to open the chambers up for the bigger bore application.


Would really like to hear some input on this so I can get some sleep one of these nights <img border="0" alt="[bang head]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_banghead.gif" />
I am leaning towards the 408 cause I think it will lay down better #'s. I will eventually (next year) spray a 250-300 DP shot. I would think a studed, complete forged, 382 would stand up fine to the job if I decided to go that route. I think both motors will be fine for this application. So it comes down to the NA #'s. I've done tons of searches on these stroker combo's but don't seem to find a whole lot of track #'s.


Lastly, The car's old set-up ran a best of 11.26 at 120 w/1.50 60' ( I wanna go faster mid 10's NA). I need a new shortblock (cracked a ringland) and my budget is 8,000. There are some other things I need to do with that money like k-member and control arms is a must while the motor is out. Thought about a TH400 or a Jerico and not as expensive shortblock just an example of the possibilities going through my head. The car is hardly driven on the street mostly track. Here is a list of mods, well most of them anyway, open to any other suggestions within that budget.

346 CI LS1
GTP STAGE 2 HEADS W/TIT RETAINERS
COMP 230/230 CAM 592/592 LIFT ON A 110 LSA
BOGART D-10S 15X3.5 FRONT W/M/T FRONT RUNNERS 15X8 REAR W/ M/T 28X10.50 15 SLICKS
MOSER 12 BOLT 4.56S SPOOL AND 5/8 STUDS 35 SPLINE AXLES
MCCLEOD CLUTCH ADJUSTABLE MASTER CYLINDER
HALS UP FRONT WITH SPRINGS
WOLFE 6 POINT ROLL BAR
BMR STRUT TOWER BRACE
BMR PANHARD BAR ADJUSTABLE ALL BMR IN RED
BMR FRAME CONNECTORS
BMR ADJUSTABLE PAN HARD BAR
MARK WILLIAMS CHROME MOLY DRIVESHAFT W/BILLET YOKES
FLP LONGTUBES WITH MUFFLEX 4" DUAL TIPS
LS1 EDIT
HARLAN TWO STEP
CARBON FIBER AIR LID
TAYLOR PLUG WIRES
ASP CRANK PULLEY
K&N FILTER

<small>[ April 15, 2003, 01:41 AM: Message edited by: DOC OTIS ]</small>

DOC OTIS

iTrader: (9)

Sorry for the long *** post (longer than I thought when I re-read it, oops). Thought that was the info I needed to give out in order to get a good response.

<small>[ April 15, 2003, 01:37 AM: Message edited by: DOC OTIS ]</small>

kumar75150

If you are going to spray 250 or more, go for the iron block. Personally, I am only going to spray a 150 shot so I went with the 395 kit. Its only like 35 bucks more than the 382 kit.

Chicago Crew UnderBoss

iTrader: (1)

The strength, reliabilty, durability (especially with big shot of N20 your planning), and extra cubes, more than makes up for the 85# weight penalty in my opinion. That is why i went with a 427cid 6 liter ironblock and i don't even plan on spraying.

MTI 427 C5 Roadster

BurnOut

iTrader: (1)

The 85# weight penalty will be at least partially offset by going to a tubular K-member (since you mentioned it), and the rest of the weight could be at least relocated (read: move battery to rear of car if you haven't already done it).

In any event, IMO, the extra cubes will more than make up for the added weight... especially since we're talking about adding cubes by opening up the bore (read: unshrouding the valves) instead of by adding more stroke.

gator's 99TA

iTrader: (2)

brian, i really think the big iron block bigger bore motor is where you want to be for exactly the same reason as others have stated. get that easy 4" bore integrity of iron block, and more cubes. also more power in the upper band where you want to be. power across the band versus power at peak you know is a huge difference esp carrying it through the line.

Visceral

iTrader: (1)

If its the 382 stroker you are talking about, the 408 is going to make far and away better power. THe 382 is a great street configuration, but really doesnt have the power way up high like a 408 can. Take into account the added work on the heads though to get the 408 will need to widen out the combustion chamber.

In my opinion, if you are already cutting 1.50s and plan on spraying, you are kinda hard on the tranny, so save $ out of that 8k for a 400 from a good sponsor. PSJ is workign on getting a very stout 400 built from someone here. (ls1motorsports.com ?).
Anyways, if you are doing the K-member, the iron block is probably only going to hurt you 100 lbs, which the K-member makes up for about 25 or so of w/o the aftermarket a-arms.
If you are going to spray it loads, I cant imagine why you wouldnt want to go with the 408 at this point. The iron 408 should take enough spray that you'll have issues in other places <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

chris

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

Actually I am probably getting a T400 from FLP, they did my 4L60E and it worked great...

The iron block is like 80lbs heavier, so it's gonna be a wash if you compare identical motors, ie same bore and stroke.

Bore is generally a good thing... SBC's are 4.000 bore, and 400 SBC's are 4.125 bore...

DOC OTIS

iTrader: (9)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by MTI 427 C5 Roadster:
<strong> The strength, reliabilty, durability (especially with big shot of N20 your planning), and extra cubes, more than makes up for the 85# weight penalty in my opinion. That is why i went with a 427cid 6 liter ironblock and i don't even plan on spraying.

MTI 427 C5 Roadster </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Do you have any cooling issues?

DOC OTIS

iTrader: (9)

Most of the comments made I have already taken into consideration, but thanks all for taking the time to reply. I just wanted to confirm my decision before I blow my bankroll <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

Really leaning towards an inline Jerico instead of a th400. I think the car will trap 4 to 5 mph faster keeping it a manual. Not to mention it would definitely be different. <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" />

Chicago Crew UnderBoss

iTrader: (1)

So far no cooling issues at all as my car stays between 176 and 180 degrees coolant temps. I have the BE COOL Radiator and thats the key which you must get to stay cool. Oil temps seem to stay around 219 and i do not have an oil cooler.

Terry Burger

iTrader: (4)

Iron blocks are horrible for drag racing, IMHO. If you care about your drag times stay alum. If you're just racing around on the street then either will work.

<small>[ April 17, 2003, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: Terry Burger ]</small>

a1s2d3f4

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Terry Burger:
<strong> Iron blocks are horrible for drag racing, IMHO. If you care about your drag times stay alum. If you're just racing around on the street then either will work. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm with you on this! If you get the alum. done right it will be as good as the iron.

I don't like the iron b/c of the 80lbs on the front of the car.

Pro Stock John

iTrader: (34)

I had a 422ci ironblock (4.060 bore x 4.075 stroke).

I put a couple thousand street miles on it.

It never overheated. I had a colder t-stat, programming, 50/50 dexcool factory style mix, and I was almost 12:1 compression. Never pinged either.

I made 475rwhp/505rwtq with a 12:1 AF. I'd tune for a 12:1-12.5:1 AF because the big motors need a lot of fuel and your AF will lean out launching at the track on slicks (more load).

I went not quite 123mph with a 3500 raceweight and we later realized that the reluctor wheel had lost it's crush...

But the car drove great on the street and I drove it 400 miles in one day.

ls1290

iTrader: (20)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Terry Burger:
<strong> Iron blocks are horrible for drag racing, IMHO. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Would you care to expand on that?

a1s2d3f4

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by ls1290:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Terry Burger:
<strong> Iron blocks are horrible for drag racing, IMHO. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Would you care to expand on that? </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The car does not transfer the weight well.

Terry Burger

iTrader: (4)

Switching from an alum to iron block means your adding 80-90# to (almost) the worst possible spot on the car for weight transfer. Running good ET's at the track is all about your 60' time, and all that weight up front will hurt your 60' at least .1 sec IMHO (.15 sec loss in the 1/4 or more, on top of the weight penalty, could be as much as .3 sec slower overall).

ToplessTexan

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by MTI 427 C5 Roadster:
<strong> So far no cooling issues at all...</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Just watch out for the bird's nests <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_images/icons/tongue.gif" />