All bore 401, cost effective?
07-26-2007, 12:17 AM
#21
Originally Posted by 3.4camaro
On the flip side:
All things being equal(i.e. piston speed), a 402 stroker will NOT make as much HP because it can't spin as high as an all bore 401. This is because each rpm in the stroker is making the piston move an extra inch or so compared to the all bore, and there is a magic piston speed(i think 4800 ft/min) that you can't or don't want to go past. Look at the F1 engines: V8's with like a 2.3L displacement. They don't make a whole lot of torque, but they can spin to 20,000 rpm because the stroke is so short. This equates to about 1500 HP NATURALLY ASPIRATED!
All things being equal(i.e. piston speed), a 402 stroker will NOT make as much HP because it can't spin as high as an all bore 401. This is because each rpm in the stroker is making the piston move an extra inch or so compared to the all bore, and there is a magic piston speed(i think 4800 ft/min) that you can't or don't want to go past. Look at the F1 engines: V8's with like a 2.3L displacement. They don't make a whole lot of torque, but they can spin to 20,000 rpm because the stroke is so short. This equates to about 1500 HP NATURALLY ASPIRATED!
Sorry to nitpick, but F1 engines aren't at 1500hp either. Currently, they are closer to 700hp. They made power numbers like that back in the turbocharged days.
I would check with a sponsor and see how much the shortblocks are running these days. If I remember correctly, they should be right around the same price as the 401 after machining and assembly etc.
