When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"?
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,987
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne, FL
When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? .005? .010? .040? Can guys still claim "stock cubes" with anything short of a resleeved block? I would tend to think so myself, since we're only talkin' little more than clean-up hone jobs on the cylinders...
Just wondering what everyone's opinion is... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Just wondering what everyone's opinion is... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? A stock shortblock means not rebuilt. Anything else is a just a 346, 347, or 348 ci motor. I think .010 over is a 347.5 ci motor?
I'm sure you will have one of the quickest 347s around. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
I'm sure you will have one of the quickest 347s around. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? As long as it's not resleeved, and has a stock stroke crank and stock length rods I would consider it a stock CI LS1.
But if it happens to be quicker than Terry he will whine like the little bitch he is and cry no fair as he usually does. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_tounge.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[fight]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_punch.gif" />
But if it happens to be quicker than Terry he will whine like the little bitch he is and cry no fair as he usually does. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_tounge.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[fight]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_punch.gif" />
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
But if it happens to be quicker than Terry he will whine like the little bitch he is and cry no fair as he usually does.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">11.5what?
But if it happens to be quicker than Terry he will whine like the little bitch he is and cry no fair as he usually does.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">11.5what?
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,987
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne, FL
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? Hmmm, kind of what I figured... There will never be any agreement on the "stock cube" issue. I'm with Richie though, although my new motor has slightly longer than stock rods...
BTW, it's a little bigger than 347cid... But it isn't resleeved or stroked (and is a stock aluminum block)...
Doesn't matter, since I'm not concerned with any kind of competition for quickest this, fastest that... I just want to have fun with the car! <img border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" title="" src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" />
BTW, it's a little bigger than 347cid... But it isn't resleeved or stroked (and is a stock aluminum block)...
Doesn't matter, since I'm not concerned with any kind of competition for quickest this, fastest that... I just want to have fun with the car! <img border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" title="" src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" />
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by GeorgeC:
<strong>Doesn't matter, since I'm not concerned with any kind of competition for quickest this, fastest that... I just want to have fun with the car! <img border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" title="" src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You're definitely taking the right attitude George! IMO, I consider it stock cid. Did you really gain any power from the 1 added cubic inch? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> I'll take a built 347 w/ forged pistons and rods, ARP bolts, etc. over a factory-stock rotating assy. any day. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
<strong>Doesn't matter, since I'm not concerned with any kind of competition for quickest this, fastest that... I just want to have fun with the car! <img border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" title="" src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You're definitely taking the right attitude George! IMO, I consider it stock cid. Did you really gain any power from the 1 added cubic inch? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> I'll take a built 347 w/ forged pistons and rods, ARP bolts, etc. over a factory-stock rotating assy. any day. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
__________________
Trending Topics
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: Houston / Dallas
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Trevor D:
<strong>[QUOTE]Originally posted by GeorgeC:
[qb]Did you really gain any power from the 1 added cubic inch? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> I'll take a built 347 w/ forged pistons and rods, ARP bolts, etc. over a factory-stock rotating assy. any day. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Which is why its not a fair comparison. The built shortblock will not gain from that additional cube, but has the option of much more agressive and higher lift cams with the lighter rotating assembly and valve-reliefs in the pistons. But who cares? George has the right attitude about it and I am sure he will have fun and run some kickass times <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
<strong>[QUOTE]Originally posted by GeorgeC:
[qb]Did you really gain any power from the 1 added cubic inch? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> I'll take a built 347 w/ forged pistons and rods, ARP bolts, etc. over a factory-stock rotating assy. any day. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Which is why its not a fair comparison. The built shortblock will not gain from that additional cube, but has the option of much more agressive and higher lift cams with the lighter rotating assembly and valve-reliefs in the pistons. But who cares? George has the right attitude about it and I am sure he will have fun and run some kickass times <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? OK Terry you got me
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
And I believe that your car weighed 3400 lbs when you ran 11.1 it's probably more like 3100 lbs!
Lets make a comparison.
Your car has 30 more ftlbs of TQ and 30 more HP at the wheels than mine and weighs 300-400 lbs ligter than mine and you only ran 11.16 to my 11.52!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> If I were you I would get my money back or learn how to drive.
If my car weighed what yours did and made the same power I would be running 10's!
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
And I believe that your car weighed 3400 lbs when you ran 11.1 it's probably more like 3100 lbs!
Lets make a comparison.
Your car has 30 more ftlbs of TQ and 30 more HP at the wheels than mine and weighs 300-400 lbs ligter than mine and you only ran 11.16 to my 11.52!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> If I were you I would get my money back or learn how to drive.
If my car weighed what yours did and made the same power I would be running 10's!
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? I respect George and Raugh ALOT.
These guys r hardcore but I also have a BIG opinion n this subject.
Raughammer,George or anyone else who takes the shortblock apart.Sorry--->U guys r NOT stock shortblock cars anymore.Once u go into the motor alot of things can happen.I am not accusing anyone of funny stuff but lets face facts.
LONGER rods and or lighter components setup in BLUE PRINTED manner will only HELP not hurt a 346 or for that matter a 347,348CI
Its not a stock short block nor a H/C classifcation anymore.Its not a fair comparo to the guys that run a stock shortblock.
I might sound like a bitch but I strongly believe this to hold true.Sorry guys thats just my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
JS
These guys r hardcore but I also have a BIG opinion n this subject.
Raughammer,George or anyone else who takes the shortblock apart.Sorry--->U guys r NOT stock shortblock cars anymore.Once u go into the motor alot of things can happen.I am not accusing anyone of funny stuff but lets face facts.
LONGER rods and or lighter components setup in BLUE PRINTED manner will only HELP not hurt a 346 or for that matter a 347,348CI
Its not a stock short block nor a H/C classifcation anymore.Its not a fair comparo to the guys that run a stock shortblock.
I might sound like a bitch but I strongly believe this to hold true.Sorry guys thats just my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
JS
D(irecto)r Pepper
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,952
Likes: 0
From: Houston Raceway Park...in TEXAS.
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? Hey thats your opinion, your entitled to it.
I am still using the stock block, pistons, rods, crank, etc. The only difference is the rings.
We could split hairs all day long... do what makes you happy..... but if it pisses someone else off? Hey, thats just gravy. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Campbell
I am still using the stock block, pistons, rods, crank, etc. The only difference is the rings.
We could split hairs all day long... do what makes you happy..... but if it pisses someone else off? Hey, thats just gravy. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Campbell
TECH Addict
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,207
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? here's my take.
Stock cubic inches = stock displacement. If there is any overbore, etc. It is no longer stock cubic inches. This is really a matter of simple physics/math as opposed to a "definition". If Displacement 2 != Stock then it is not stock cubic inches.
Yes, the extra inch of displacement makes no difference in power, etc. - but that is beside the point - the displacement is no longer stock.
In regards to a stock bottom end - I consider that as delivered, assembled by the factor. A rebuilt motor with stock parts is no longer a stock (as delivered) bottom end). It may "use stock parts", etc. - but it simply isn't stock (again, as delivered).
Chris
Stock cubic inches = stock displacement. If there is any overbore, etc. It is no longer stock cubic inches. This is really a matter of simple physics/math as opposed to a "definition". If Displacement 2 != Stock then it is not stock cubic inches.
Yes, the extra inch of displacement makes no difference in power, etc. - but that is beside the point - the displacement is no longer stock.
In regards to a stock bottom end - I consider that as delivered, assembled by the factor. A rebuilt motor with stock parts is no longer a stock (as delivered) bottom end). It may "use stock parts", etc. - but it simply isn't stock (again, as delivered).
Chris
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by ChrisB:
<strong>here's my take.
Stock cubic inches = stock displacement. If there is any overbore, etc. It is no longer stock cubic inches. This is really a matter of simple physics/math as opposed to a "definition". If Displacement 2 != Stock then it is not stock cubic inches.
Yes, the extra inch of displacement makes no difference in power, etc. - but that is beside the point - the displacement is no longer stock.
In regards to a stock bottom end - I consider that as delivered, assembled by the factor. A rebuilt motor with stock parts is no longer a stock (as delivered) bottom end). It may "use stock parts", etc. - but it simply isn't stock (again, as delivered).
Chris</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't agree here . if you rebuild your bottom end with stock parts to stock specs its a stock bottom end. but if you change just one thing its not a stock bottom end. but hey just my opinion
<strong>here's my take.
Stock cubic inches = stock displacement. If there is any overbore, etc. It is no longer stock cubic inches. This is really a matter of simple physics/math as opposed to a "definition". If Displacement 2 != Stock then it is not stock cubic inches.
Yes, the extra inch of displacement makes no difference in power, etc. - but that is beside the point - the displacement is no longer stock.
In regards to a stock bottom end - I consider that as delivered, assembled by the factor. A rebuilt motor with stock parts is no longer a stock (as delivered) bottom end). It may "use stock parts", etc. - but it simply isn't stock (again, as delivered).
Chris</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't agree here . if you rebuild your bottom end with stock parts to stock specs its a stock bottom end. but if you change just one thing its not a stock bottom end. but hey just my opinion
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? Good luck with your all-bore engine George! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />
__________________
TECH Regular
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by GeorgeC:
<strong>.005? .010? .040? Can guys still claim "stock cubes" with anything short of a resleeved block? I would tend to think so myself, since we're only talkin' little more than clean-up hone jobs on the cylinders...
Just wondering what everyone's opinion is... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The controversial thing about this topic is that you say "considered" stock ci. Considered and what it really is are 2 different stories.
People will have so many opinions, but facts are what mean something. Seems like people always want to use their own logic. This one is easy though. Kind a like Chris B said below.. a 346 is a 346 ... if you add JUST 1 cube it's not stock cubic inches anymore . It does not matter what someone else thinks. Some things are not subject to opinion.
346 does not= 347 or 348 . Whether 1 or 2 cubes helps power is not the issue. If you add a cube it's not stock cubes.
Try putting 346 is = to 347 or 348 on a One question math test and see what happens.
346 =347 would = BIG F.
Whether or not you loose or gain power is not the issue. If you add 1 cube it's not stock Cubic inches anymore.
<small>[ May 09, 2002, 10:07 AM: Message edited by: Rpm2800 ]</small>
<strong>.005? .010? .040? Can guys still claim "stock cubes" with anything short of a resleeved block? I would tend to think so myself, since we're only talkin' little more than clean-up hone jobs on the cylinders...
Just wondering what everyone's opinion is... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The controversial thing about this topic is that you say "considered" stock ci. Considered and what it really is are 2 different stories.
People will have so many opinions, but facts are what mean something. Seems like people always want to use their own logic. This one is easy though. Kind a like Chris B said below.. a 346 is a 346 ... if you add JUST 1 cube it's not stock cubic inches anymore . It does not matter what someone else thinks. Some things are not subject to opinion.
346 does not= 347 or 348 . Whether 1 or 2 cubes helps power is not the issue. If you add a cube it's not stock cubes.
Try putting 346 is = to 347 or 348 on a One question math test and see what happens.
346 =347 would = BIG F.
Whether or not you loose or gain power is not the issue. If you add 1 cube it's not stock Cubic inches anymore.
<small>[ May 09, 2002, 10:07 AM: Message edited by: Rpm2800 ]</small>
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
And I believe that your car weighed 3400 lbs when you ran 11.1 it's probably more like 3100 lbs!
Lets make a comparison.
Your car has 30 more ftlbs of TQ and 30 more HP at the wheels than mine and weighs 300-400 lbs ligter than mine and you only ran 11.16 to my 11.52!! If I were you I would get my money back or learn how to drive.
If my car weighed what yours did and made the same power I would be running 10's!
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sounds like someone is whining and bitching? I have one of the quickest/fastest head/cam cars on here with AC and a 10 disk changer, you don't. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
And I believe that your car weighed 3400 lbs when you ran 11.1 it's probably more like 3100 lbs!
Lets make a comparison.
Your car has 30 more ftlbs of TQ and 30 more HP at the wheels than mine and weighs 300-400 lbs ligter than mine and you only ran 11.16 to my 11.52!! If I were you I would get my money back or learn how to drive.
If my car weighed what yours did and made the same power I would be running 10's!
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sounds like someone is whining and bitching? I have one of the quickest/fastest head/cam cars on here with AC and a 10 disk changer, you don't. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? Sorry, I guess it would be an all-hone engine. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_tounge.gif" />
Nobody is going to argue that the cubic inches are changed when the cylinders are honed, no matter how little. To me, I still consider it stock cid when looking at the package. Is it technically? no Hey, whatever floats your boat. I guess it only really matters if you're shooting for a spot on a certain "list". I guess we need an all-hone category now. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
Nobody is going to argue that the cubic inches are changed when the cylinders are honed, no matter how little. To me, I still consider it stock cid when looking at the package. Is it technically? no Hey, whatever floats your boat. I guess it only really matters if you're shooting for a spot on a certain "list". I guess we need an all-hone category now. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
__________________
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? is this for a racing class or bragging rights?
since you didnt say 'original' displacement than i say any internal changes you want as long as it comes up as 346 ci is 'stock cid' because it is..
i mean you can take a mustang 302 and make it exactly 346 ci with a stroker it. and it would be "stock ls1 cid"
346 is 346 however you want to get it as above.. i would prefer getting it by a 4.125 bore and a 3.3ish stroke <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
since you didnt say 'original' displacement than i say any internal changes you want as long as it comes up as 346 ci is 'stock cid' because it is..
i mean you can take a mustang 302 and make it exactly 346 ci with a stroker it. and it would be "stock ls1 cid"
346 is 346 however you want to get it as above.. i would prefer getting it by a 4.125 bore and a 3.3ish stroke <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
Re: When is an engine no longer considered "stock cid"? I think that GM has a larger tolerance when they build the motors than what George is talking about. If you pumped a 1000 LS1s, they would range from 345-347. Nothing that GM builds is exact. NASCAR is allowed to run 358s, and you know that they would say " If that ONE cube is the determining factor in you winning a race, Ill eat my shorts!" So, anything ~ 15 thou is still a stock cube. Can you tell me REALLY the exact amount of cubes that your car has? probably not.
Louis
Louis