Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 20 of 141 Posts

·
Urban Cougar Trapper
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Looks like Im torn between rebuilding my 454 or going tall deck ? from scratch ... for the guys that build engines for a living what is the Ideal CI with rod/Stroke ratio and reliability ? 461 ? 496 ? 540 ? 528 ? 555 ? are afew I was thinking of ...What would YOU recommend ???
 

·
Bostick Racing Engines
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
Looks like Im torn between rebuilding my 454 or going tall deck ? from scratch ... for the guys that build engines for a living what is the Ideal CI with rod/Stroke ratio and reliability ? 461 ? 496 ? 540 ? 528 ? 555 ? are afew I was thinking of ...What would YOU recommend ???
Depends on what "tall deck" you have to work with... and what sort of build your going for.


Personally, I do like the 555 combo with a tall deck and the 6.800 rod... but depending on what you got to work with, and what you're trying to do, the 496 with a 6.385 rod ain't bad either.
 

·
Distinguished Member
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
You'll get lots of opinions based on personal preference but my favorite BB build is a tall deck 565 (4.6 bore x 4.25 stroke) or a 582 (4.6 x 4.375). Easy to get 950-1000 HP NA with fairly conventional head and will live pretty well in a bracket/lake hot rod. Also, fairly common build so most parts are available off the shelf and reasonable $$ wise.
If you want the absolute most HP for the $$$, nothing beats blown alcohol. Any 500" plus combo will make 1500 HP with basic conventional head stuff and mild cam/compression. Pay attention to parts, a bit more compression/cam and 1800+ HP is pretty easy if the tuner knows what's up....IMHO Neither is what you'd call "lake friendly"
 

·
Distinguished Member
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
4.600 X 4.750 in a Dart 10.6 block, 60MM cam and .903 lifters.
After that things just get stupid expensive.
Our wallets are definitely different sized. I say the same thing about the 10.2 block with standard cam bore and .842 lifters :redface:
In Steve's (Roaddogg) Rayson, I think the 632 he built is perfect since it's basically a fast cruiser. In a drag race style motor, anything 4.5" stroke and beyond gets to be a challenge (read that expensive in my terms anyway) to get them to RPM well enough. Seems like the longer stroke motors use up cylinder head at a pretty low RPM which can be fine in some situations, but not so much in a drag race flat/hydro deal.... I guess it's all in what the build needs...
 

·
Urban Cougar Trapper
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Priced out parts for 565 build ..looking at about $6500 without cam & lifters for rotating assy, block , and ring set Dart Block ,Howards Crank ,Oliver Rods and Ross pistons , ......454 parts using my block will be about $4500 less machine work to bore and prep block again really torn to go tall deck but then looking at new pan , blower intake, pushrods ..yaddayaddayadda :)eh:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
Our wallets are definitely different sized. I say the same thing about the 10.2 block with standard cam bore and .842 lifters :redface:
In Steve's (Roaddogg) Rayson, I think the 632 he built is perfect since it's basically a fast cruiser. In a drag race style motor, anything 4.5" stroke and beyond gets to be a challenge (read that expensive in my terms anyway) to get them to RPM well enough. Seems like the longer stroke motors use up cylinder head at a pretty low RPM which can be fine in some situations, but not so much in a drag race flat/hydro deal.... I guess it's all in what the build needs...
I didn't say it wasn't expensive, it just gets $tupid after that.:D

I would tend to draw line at 4.375 stroke on a drag deal. I am not a fan of non billet cranks over 4.5, and even then it better be a DAMN GOOD forging.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Distinguished Member
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
Priced out parts for 565 build ..looking at about $6500 without cam & lifters for rotating assy, block , and ring set Dart Block ,Howards Crank ,Oliver Rods and Ross pistons , ......454 parts using my block will be about $4500 less machine work to bore and prep block again really torn to go tall deck but then looking at new pan , blower intake, pushrods ..yaddayaddayadda :)eh:)
If it's a used (seasoned :confused:) Chevy block (not a Bowtie) personally I wouldn't use it. If you do use the block, plan on helicoiling/keensert every head stud hole now while it's apart. If not, it will strip eventually and likely when you least want it to.....
 

·
Urban Cougar Trapper
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Standard run of the mill GMC 4 bolt block. I'm gonna be in $1500 crank , 1300 rods , 800 ish on pistons hate for the block to be weak link
 

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,528 Posts
I prefer short deck builds unless the stroke absolutely demands a tall deck. Short deck builds are lighter, have shorter pushrods and it;s easier to get the runners of a TR under the carbs. A naturally aspirated 582 (4.6 bore x 4.375 stroke) with the right top end will make 1200 hp. at a reasonable rpm. I don't have a problem with a 4.375 in a short deck but I think that's the max.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,853 Posts
Our wallets are definitely different sized. I say the same thing about the 10.2 block with standard cam bore and .842 lifters :redface:
In Steve's (Roaddogg) Rayson, I think the 632 he built is perfect since it's basically a fast cruiser. In a drag race style motor, anything 4.5" stroke and beyond gets to be a challenge (read that expensive in my terms anyway) to get them to RPM well enough. Seems like the longer stroke motors use up cylinder head at a pretty low RPM which can be fine in some situations, but not so much in a drag race flat/hydro deal.... I guess it's all in what the build needs...
I don't understand what you mean "Seems like the longer stroke motors use up cylinder head at a pretty low RPM". Could you explain?
 

·
just a ski boat with bark
Joined
·
2,811 Posts
I prefer short deck builds unless the stroke absolutely demands a tall deck. Short deck builds are lighter, have shorter pushrods and it;s easier to get the runners of a TR under the carbs. A naturally aspirated 582 (4.6 bore x 4.375 stroke) with the right top end will make 1200 hp. at a reasonable rpm. I don't have a problem with a 4.375 in a short deck but I think that's the max.
What kind of rpm Scott and I assume this is drag race use and not endurance stuff. What kind of top end and compression are you needing for 1200hp and how many passes before inspections/freshen ups?


I don't understand what you mean "Seems like the longer stroke motors use up cylinder head at a pretty low RPM". Could you explain?
Piston speed.
The higher piston speed require larger heads with more flow to keep up. The rod/stroke ratio on a standard 9.8 deck 582 is going to require a head with some CSA to turn 7500rpm.
 

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,528 Posts
What kind of rpm Scott and I assume this is drag race use and not endurance stuff. What kind of top end and compression are you needing for 1200hp and how many passes before inspections/freshen ups?
Big compression, and a spread port top end would make it easier but there are conventional heads these days that will do it. RPM would depend on induction but it could be made as low as 7000-7100 with very broad torque. Endurance or drag would again depend on induction and rpm range. Not many endurance engines run TR's but a stack injection would sure work. Laps/passes/maintenance would all depend on how well the engien was put together. KJell Adams has a 572 (4.56 x 4.375) with some small Dart Big Chiefs, sheet metal intake, 2 x 4 Dominators, I think it had ~14:1, a Straub solid roller that was (I think) under .800 lift and it made 1165 NA in the 7000-7100 rpm range and ran for several seasons (and they ran a good amount of Nos through it to). From what I understand they never even had to adjust the lash. :dunno:

The higher piston speed require larger heads with more flow to keep up. The rod/stroke ratio on a standard 9.8 deck 582 is going to require a head with some CSA to turn 7500rpm.
If you used a piston with the same pin height and had a custom rod made, the difference in ratio between a 496/540/565 and a 582 is ~.05:1 (basically the same as a 572/588 tall deck) which for all intents and purposes is negligible but I think most guys just move the pin up in the piston a little and use the same 6.385 rod. Then it's only a difference of about .04:1. They're all a little short but most guys use heads that are too big anyway so it usually works out. :D The stock rod ratio on a 454 is only 1.53. Look at the ratio of a 632 with a 6.535 rod. Even in a tall deck it's 1.37:1. Now THAT needs some cyl head to turn some rpm. Also, there is a difference between turning 7500 and making peak power at 7500. ;)
 

·
just a ski boat with bark
Joined
·
2,811 Posts
Thanks for the better explanation Scott. If the compression was dropped to a pump gas level say ~10.5:1 would you still run spread port heads or would you run conventional? I never asked before but would your 572 short deck still use a wet dump oiling system? What kind of power do you feel this would make 1000?

Thanks,
Loren
 

·
Urban Cougar Trapper
Joined
·
976 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
OK so lets stay standard deck height for all intentions ,( it would help if most of my crap will still fit ! ) and use say Dart Block out of all the std.deck CI availible which would be the Ideal ??? :idea:
 

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,528 Posts
Thanks for the better explanation Scott. If the compression was dropped to a pump gas level say ~10.5:1 would you still run spread port heads or would you run conventional? I never asked before but would your 572 short deck still use a wet dump oiling system? What kind of power do you feel this would make 1000?

Thanks,
Loren
In most cases these days I don't see the need for spread ports on engines making power in the 7000rpm range. if you're trying to make power in the upper 7000rpm range, then they become a consideration but with the conventional heads on the market today you can do pretty darn well without the spread port stuff. In the case of the 572 above, it's what the customer had (the heads). I think he was originally starting with the idea of a 4.25 crank and was advised to add some stroke to help "use up" those heads since he was trying to make power in "jet boat" rpm range. I think a pump gas version even with a wet sump should be able to make 1K hp. I know DNE did a 565 pump gas deal years ago with a single four that made 1K hp and things have changed almost exponentially since then.
 

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,528 Posts
OK so lets stay standard deck height for all intentions ,( it would help if most of my crap will still fit ! ) and use say Dart Block out of all the std.deck CI availible which would be the Ideal ??? :idea:
Displacement is always your friend. I'd do the 572 (4.56 x 4.375) but remember that the more stroke you have, the more windage becomes an issue. A dry sump would be really nice on the 572...almost to the point where I'd say if you don't want to go to the expense, then stick with the 565. The key to any engine's potential is the induction. Heads, cam, intake and exhaust are all going to need to be thought out as a combination based on your engine's displacement, rpm, and how much power you want to make.
 
1 - 20 of 141 Posts
Top