382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore?????
09-29-2002, 07:25 AM
#21
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 6,034
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? hehehe, I wish I had the $$$$ for the bore and stroke <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
So for my setup (M6, N2O, 4:10s heads/cam) it seems that the all bore is the way to go..
Keep the info coming <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
So for my setup (M6, N2O, 4:10s heads/cam) it seems that the all bore is the way to go..
Keep the info coming <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
09-30-2002, 12:17 AM
#22
On The Tree
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? I have always heard and thought that HP is not greater than TQ and vise versa, what i am trying to say is that the best would be a medium between the two. Also HP is a function of TQ.
10-01-2002, 11:32 AM
#23
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Native Texan
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? Long arm cranks do not cut down on piston speed, they increase piston speed in the same rpm range. I personally like to keep piston speed under 4000ft per second on a street car. This would mean with the following 382 CI combos would be at 4000 ft. per second at the following rpm points.
4.1 x 3.62 = 6630 RPM
3.9 x 4.0 = 6000 RPM
A long stroke moves power down in the rpm range with a small amout of HP gain but a larger gain in torque. This sounds good, but I would rather have a broader powerband that is more tractable because it gives away a little on the bottom and makes it up in the upper end of the powerband. Also a long stoke is not as forgiving on over rev just because the piston speed is multiplied even further.
4.1 x 3.62 = 6630 RPM
3.9 x 4.0 = 6000 RPM
A long stroke moves power down in the rpm range with a small amout of HP gain but a larger gain in torque. This sounds good, but I would rather have a broader powerband that is more tractable because it gives away a little on the bottom and makes it up in the upper end of the powerband. Also a long stoke is not as forgiving on over rev just because the piston speed is multiplied even further.
10-01-2002, 05:17 PM
#25
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? Before I built my engine I was thinking about this issue!
I cam to the final conclusion,
Big Bore: good peak rwhp @ about 6300. riving the engine very high = more friction and faster wear and tare. Also, big bore has no forged internals. Thinner sleeves might break, might have high temps, and the biggest problem it the sleeve shifting issue. Ruff idle, well, depending on cam. But cheaper!
Stroker: good peak rwhp @ about 6000. Lower engine rpm = less friction and longer engine life. Better TQ. Also, stroker engines have forged internals which are a plus for more durability and additional power, NOS for example. Stock sleeves, therefore, no temp issues from sleeve thinness and should handle power better. But a bit expensive.
All in all, I think the Big Bore rwhp peaks about 5 rwhp more at around 6300. But a stroker will peak lower @ around 6000 with more rwhp (will get to power sooner).
I went with the stroker! I got 450 rwhp and 446 rwtq. I could see more power with a bigger cam very easily. But, drivability is very important for me. Also, with my new 200 hp MAF plate NX shot (getting installed soon), no all bore can catch up! <img border="0" alt="[Burnout]" title="" src="graemlins/burnout.gif" /> Just kidding!
<small>[ October 01, 2002, 05:22 PM: Message edited by: RUF SS ]</small>
I cam to the final conclusion,
Big Bore: good peak rwhp @ about 6300. riving the engine very high = more friction and faster wear and tare. Also, big bore has no forged internals. Thinner sleeves might break, might have high temps, and the biggest problem it the sleeve shifting issue. Ruff idle, well, depending on cam. But cheaper!
Stroker: good peak rwhp @ about 6000. Lower engine rpm = less friction and longer engine life. Better TQ. Also, stroker engines have forged internals which are a plus for more durability and additional power, NOS for example. Stock sleeves, therefore, no temp issues from sleeve thinness and should handle power better. But a bit expensive.
All in all, I think the Big Bore rwhp peaks about 5 rwhp more at around 6300. But a stroker will peak lower @ around 6000 with more rwhp (will get to power sooner).
I went with the stroker! I got 450 rwhp and 446 rwtq. I could see more power with a bigger cam very easily. But, drivability is very important for me. Also, with my new 200 hp MAF plate NX shot (getting installed soon), no all bore can catch up! <img border="0" alt="[Burnout]" title="" src="graemlins/burnout.gif" /> Just kidding!
<small>[ October 01, 2002, 05:22 PM: Message edited by: RUF SS ]</small>
10-01-2002, 07:56 PM
#26
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 6,034
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? Actually, the all bore has forged internals, but uses a stock crank.
Im still undecided. Im thinking about spraying a direct port 200 shot, probably progressive, too.
decisions, decisions.....
Im still undecided. Im thinking about spraying a direct port 200 shot, probably progressive, too.
decisions, decisions.....
10-01-2002, 11:35 PM
#28
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by RUF SS:
<strong>
Big Bore: good peak rwhp @ about 6300. riving the engine very high = more friction and faster wear and tare.
Stroker: good peak rwhp @ about 6000. Lower engine rpm = less friction and longer engine life. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I disagree. The stroker while it might not rev quite as high as an all bore, the difference in minscule relative to wear, but sideloading is an issue. Moreover, as has allready been mentioned a stroker has more movement of rod/piston per equal amount of movement in an all-bore. So the wear and tear is actually heavily weighted on the stroker. Not the all-bore.
<strong>
Big Bore: good peak rwhp @ about 6300. riving the engine very high = more friction and faster wear and tare.
Stroker: good peak rwhp @ about 6000. Lower engine rpm = less friction and longer engine life. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I disagree. The stroker while it might not rev quite as high as an all bore, the difference in minscule relative to wear, but sideloading is an issue. Moreover, as has allready been mentioned a stroker has more movement of rod/piston per equal amount of movement in an all-bore. So the wear and tear is actually heavily weighted on the stroker. Not the all-bore.
10-02-2002, 12:26 AM
#29
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: san diego
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? I am considering boring an iron block to 382 and having a forged crank, rods and pistons.
How would this perform? I would like to shoot a good sized shot of nitrous like a 150 or 200 shot. Would a forged 382 all bore be able to handle it?
How would this perform? I would like to shoot a good sized shot of nitrous like a 150 or 200 shot. Would a forged 382 all bore be able to handle it?
10-02-2002, 12:41 AM
#30
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: houston
Posts: 2,422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? kewlbrz, torque is what gets you down the 1/4 mile, not hp. I would rather have 500 tq and 450 hp over 500hp and 450tq anyday of the week.
10-02-2002, 02:07 AM
#31
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Native Texan
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Slomaro:
<strong>kewlbrz, torque is what gets you down the 1/4 mile, not hp. I would rather have 500 tq and 450 hp over 500hp and 450tq anyday of the week.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That would strictly depend on set up.
<strong>kewlbrz, torque is what gets you down the 1/4 mile, not hp. I would rather have 500 tq and 450 hp over 500hp and 450tq anyday of the week.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That would strictly depend on set up.
10-02-2002, 02:17 AM
#32
TECH Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Slomaro:
<strong>kewlbrz, torque is what gets you down the 1/4 mile, not hp. I would rather have 500 tq and 450 hp over 500hp and 450tq anyday of the week.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh dear, here we go again. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
<strong>kewlbrz, torque is what gets you down the 1/4 mile, not hp. I would rather have 500 tq and 450 hp over 500hp and 450tq anyday of the week.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh dear, here we go again. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
10-03-2002, 08:37 PM
#33
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NW Houston, TX
Posts: 10,036
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? Just go with a 4.000 inch bore, with a 4.000 stroke and be happy. <img border="0" alt="[Burnout]" title="" src="graemlins/burnout.gif" />
10-04-2002, 12:38 AM
#34
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Quickin:
<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 kewlbrz:
You should quantify that, since HP is a function of TQ. They should not be compared directly. TQ all by itself is meaningless and does no work without movement (RPM), which = HP.
Bottom line is bore over stroke, when displacement is similar, the bored motor will dominate in a drag race.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What would be better for drag racing?
everything else equal:
500 RWHP 460 RWTQ
460 RWHP 500 RWTQ
FaSS Blac,
A NASCAR motor is also a pile of junk after a race and they idle horrible, not a good comparison to the street cars we got goin on.
Same with a 950 HP CART motor, there amazing but totally useless on the street. Not to mention methane gas.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Torquer. That engine will win at the strip due to lower ET rather than high MPH
Bret
Cubes are Cubes, the longer stroke and smaller bore mean, smaller valves to go into the engine and shorter rods. Both of those are not pro-HP mods IMHO.
Bret
<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 kewlbrz:
You should quantify that, since HP is a function of TQ. They should not be compared directly. TQ all by itself is meaningless and does no work without movement (RPM), which = HP.
Bottom line is bore over stroke, when displacement is similar, the bored motor will dominate in a drag race.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What would be better for drag racing?
everything else equal:
500 RWHP 460 RWTQ
460 RWHP 500 RWTQ
FaSS Blac,
A NASCAR motor is also a pile of junk after a race and they idle horrible, not a good comparison to the street cars we got goin on.
Same with a 950 HP CART motor, there amazing but totally useless on the street. Not to mention methane gas.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Torquer. That engine will win at the strip due to lower ET rather than high MPH
Bret
Cubes are Cubes, the longer stroke and smaller bore mean, smaller valves to go into the engine and shorter rods. Both of those are not pro-HP mods IMHO.
Bret
10-04-2002, 12:52 AM
#35
TECH Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by SStrokerAce:
The Torquer. That engine will win at the strip due to lower ET rather than high MPH
[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So more TQ and less HP is better for the drag race?
The Torquer. That engine will win at the strip due to lower ET rather than high MPH
[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So more TQ and less HP is better for the drag race?
10-04-2002, 05:06 AM
#38
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Gold Coast Australia
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 382 Stroker VS. 382 All bore????? Advantages in having a lower reving motor is:
valve train efficencies.
Lower diff gears (on street that means lower revs at hwy speeds = better fuel economy and engine wear.
Less tq converter is needed...most likely means better everyday driver.
All in all my preference is which ever is cheapest.
I personally want big bore and offset ground stock crank, but I may change my mind <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
IHRA Pro Stock motors have huge strokes on them and lower diff gears, make mountains of tq (and hp) they seem to go as big as they can no matter how it gets that big.
<small>[ October 04, 2002, 05:10 AM: Message edited by: v8 ute ]</small>
valve train efficencies.
Lower diff gears (on street that means lower revs at hwy speeds = better fuel economy and engine wear.
Less tq converter is needed...most likely means better everyday driver.
All in all my preference is which ever is cheapest.
I personally want big bore and offset ground stock crank, but I may change my mind <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
IHRA Pro Stock motors have huge strokes on them and lower diff gears, make mountains of tq (and hp) they seem to go as big as they can no matter how it gets that big.
<small>[ October 04, 2002, 05:10 AM: Message edited by: v8 ute ]</small>
