cam/con rod clearance in a stroker
12-22-2002, 08:45 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 67
cam/con rod clearance in a stroker
Tried installing my Comp Cam solid roller into my 434 stroker this weekend.
The connecting rod ends contact the cam lobes of the cyl on the opposite bank.
No problem clearing the non lobe part of the cam, its ground on a .900 base circle.
It is an Eagle rotating assy, and uses the ESP H-beam rod. The crank is 4.00 inch stroke.
Any body run into this before? Whats the solution? I tried advancing the cam 4 degrees, that didnt work. I dont want to retard it.
Will the rod ends need to be ground down? Is it o.k. to do that?
The engine was balance once already.............
The connecting rod ends contact the cam lobes of the cyl on the opposite bank.
No problem clearing the non lobe part of the cam, its ground on a .900 base circle.
It is an Eagle rotating assy, and uses the ESP H-beam rod. The crank is 4.00 inch stroke.
Any body run into this before? Whats the solution? I tried advancing the cam 4 degrees, that didnt work. I dont want to retard it.
Will the rod ends need to be ground down? Is it o.k. to do that?
The engine was balance once already.............
12-23-2002, 01:03 PM
#2
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 67
Update: (since no one ventured forth any input anyway)
will have to grind the rods down to clear the cam lobes, or go with smaller cam.
Actually it is the shoulder of the rod, about 11:00 from the straight up position that needs to be clearanced.
Am not wild about having to do so, but the cam is custom ground, and is what is needed for the combo.
Gotta make it schwing.....................
will have to grind the rods down to clear the cam lobes, or go with smaller cam.
Actually it is the shoulder of the rod, about 11:00 from the straight up position that needs to be clearanced.
Am not wild about having to do so, but the cam is custom ground, and is what is needed for the combo.
Gotta make it schwing.....................
12-25-2002, 09:13 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: C.C. Texas
Posts: 77
Arnie,
i would tend to agree with you if i hadnt had some experience with this specific problem lately. my friend Frank recently built a 383 L98 motor for his vette and will have to clearance his rods or have a smaller BS cam ground in order for it to spin the bottom end. it's a 5.7 rodded motor w/ a cc305 so that might have something to do with it. i dont have a motor here in front of me to measure the diffrence between a 6.0 and 5.7 rod 383 but i imagine that the diffrence would be slim to none.
i would tend to agree with you if i hadnt had some experience with this specific problem lately. my friend Frank recently built a 383 L98 motor for his vette and will have to clearance his rods or have a smaller BS cam ground in order for it to spin the bottom end. it's a 5.7 rodded motor w/ a cc305 so that might have something to do with it. i dont have a motor here in front of me to measure the diffrence between a 6.0 and 5.7 rod 383 but i imagine that the diffrence would be slim to none.
12-26-2002, 09:11 AM
#7
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 67
Originally posted by VentsWoker
yeah, clearancing like his is normal for a stroker motor. you'll have to clearance all the rods and re-balance. sorry but it's that or go with a smaller, custom ground cam.
yeah, clearancing like his is normal for a stroker motor. you'll have to clearance all the rods and re-balance. sorry but it's that or go with a smaller, custom ground cam.
6 inch rods btw.
They are in process of clearancing the rods right now, he says it is usually just three that need it, Lingenfelter`s book says four rods need it
12-26-2002, 05:26 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: smog zone adjacent to a great lake
Posts: 1,462
Not so much the length of the rod, but the type (crankpin end) of rod, with cap screws or bolts, has an impact of cam clearance available. This (rod issue) should have been added to my earlier post.
12-26-2002, 08:16 PM
#9
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 67
they have taken 4 grams of matl from 4 rods to achieve the clearance.
And are telling me that re-balance may not be necessary, because of the loacation and the small amount of matl removed.
What do yall think?
And are telling me that re-balance may not be necessary, because of the loacation and the small amount of matl removed.
What do yall think?
12-27-2002, 10:53 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a house by the bay
Posts: 2,985
Cam to rod clearance is usually an issue with 4" stroke small blocks. Seems like Comp would have made some recommendations before sending you that cam cause you can get the necesary clearance with a wider lobe seperation angle (110+) and a lobe centerline of 106º. That provides a bit of rod-to-cam clearance on the big stroke small blocks with standard cam height.
As for the weight... me being the **** person I am I'd recheck the balance. May not be a big deal but you're spending a bit of money to put this thing together. Your call.
-Mindgame
As for the weight... me being the **** person I am I'd recheck the balance. May not be a big deal but you're spending a bit of money to put this thing together. Your call.
-Mindgame
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
PFYC
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
08-05-2015 08:35 AM