LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

408 LT1 build

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 23, 2008 | 08:58 AM
  #31  
mdacton's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,970
From: Goochland, Va.
Originally Posted by ss95
i was under the impression that anything over the 3.875" stroke would cause some huge problems with reliability. did you have to get a special cam made so it wont get smacked by the rotating assembly?
yeah it does. too much trouble for nothing.

383 is plenty of cubic inch to make good h.p.
Old Feb 23, 2008 | 10:29 AM
  #32  
user 647483's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 1,444
Good luck with the build man, I'm interested to see how it works out for you.
Sometimes it's fun to be different.
Old Feb 23, 2008 | 02:03 PM
  #33  
Formula408's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 66
Well guys thanks for the opinions. To answer a few questions I am using a 6 inch rod,I don't think you can do less because of piston to counterwieght issues. This does make for a very short skirt piston with a lot of sideload.(not for daily driver). I honestly don't know my compression height I would have to do some asking on that one.
As far as a cam I went with a .900 base circle which is common for a solid roller cam anyway, and I used stroker clearanced rods. I don't have the cam yet but I can tell you when the rods are at there highest point they do not go above the bearing journal.
As far as reliabilty I can't say yet. But what I can say is that I have seen guys break through on 383s and a lot of guys dont. I barely broke through on my 4inch and in all honesty didn't need to. I would say an experienced builder with someone willing to spend the money for the good rods mentioned in earlier post on the thread could do it with good chances of success. For a rookie probably not a good idea. But i'm not sure that a 383 for a rookie is a good idea either.
Yes sometimes it is good to be a little different, You can build plenty of HP with a turbo ecotech but that's not my cup o tea. I have honestly never been a stroker fan. But I figured if I was gonna do it, go all out! I plan on a all NA motor and knowing the torque difference from 350 to 383 a 408 should be a torque monster.
Old Feb 23, 2008 | 06:49 PM
  #34  
2000GTP's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,312
From: Aurora, IL
Interesting buildup, definitely something different and unique. Keep us posted on the final result.
Old Feb 24, 2008 | 05:51 AM
  #35  
Masnart39's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 90
From: The Assembly Room
Originally Posted by AdioSS
can those who have dealt with or are dealing with 4" stroker small blocks tell me what rod length and piston compression height you used?
The most common is a 6" rod with a 1.000" compression height. As mentioned, the skirts are pretty short.
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 03:39 PM
  #36  
blkchevyz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 575
From: St Charles MO, USA
i feel sorry for the guy who has to tune that thing.


Old Feb 28, 2008 | 03:47 PM
  #37  
marshall93z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,639
From: Mooresville, NC
Why?
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 04:08 PM
  #38  
blkchevyz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 575
From: St Charles MO, USA
because its me.
Old Feb 28, 2008 | 05:32 PM
  #39  
Formula408's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 66
i feel sorry for the guy who has to tune that thing.
It has to get in the car and run without an oil pan full of water first! The shortblock is sitting in garage collecting dust now waiting for the cam to get here.
I think I figured out the devcon problem and have it repaired for anyone that still cares to hear. I believe the splayed cap bolts caused an issue unfortunatly I had to pour a little more after machine work but it will be ok I hope. Another lesson learned... Do the Devcon FIRST!!! before ANY machine work. There are some knowledgeable guys on here and I thank them for there replies.
I don't think its the 408 ci that scares him in the tuning process, he forgot to mention his reasoning. But thats a long way off and I'm still holding my breath.
Old Feb 29, 2008 | 05:03 AM
  #40  
CANTONRACER's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,764
From: North Canton, OH
I ruined a perfectly good block years ago trying to build a "bigger than normal" small block.

But, it turned out the machine shop I had do the work actually had an LT4 block, Milodon billet mains, everything done for $750 so really was better off. Customer never picked it up.....
Old Feb 29, 2008 | 06:19 AM
  #41  
AdioSS's Avatar
West South Central Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
it has been suggested to me that if you are wanting to go with a 4" (or even a 3.875") stroke, then buy your crank and rods with small rod journals to help with camshaft clearance issues.
Old Feb 29, 2008 | 06:56 AM
  #42  
rskrause's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 10,745
From: Buffalo, New York
Originally Posted by AdioSS
it has been suggested to me that if you are wanting to go with a 4" (or even a 3.875") stroke, then buy your crank and rods with small rod journals to help with camshaft clearance issues.
Well, that has many pros and cons. To sum it up, a max effort motor would be where you think about that kind of thing. It should be considered only if a top quality crank is used or if the motor is going to see frequent teadowns/rebuilds. The crank is going to be significantly weaker with small journals. OTOH there is less friction and clearance is improved, as you suggest. Bearing wear will also be more rapid with smaller journals.

Edit: clearance will only improve in this scenario IF a custom rod is also used. This will be very spendy. Most small journal rods have the same big end, just a smaller hole bored in it.

Rich

Last edited by rskrause; Feb 29, 2008 at 07:00 AM.
Old Feb 29, 2008 | 07:33 AM
  #43  
AdioSS's Avatar
West South Central Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
Originally Posted by Formula408
Well guys thanks for the opinions. To answer a few questions I am using a 6 inch rod,I don't think you can do less because of piston to counterwieght issues. This does make for a very short skirt piston with a lot of sideload.(not for daily driver). I honestly don't know my compression height I would have to do some asking on that one...
Originally Posted by Masnart39
The most common is a 6" rod with a 1.000" compression height. As mentioned, the skirts are pretty short.
Do you folks think a 5.85" rod with 1.125" compression height piston would work at all? A while back I picked up a set of 4.030" pistons for cheap because they were very close to what I thought I needed for a engine I was working on. Wiseco tech Brian Nutter said they were originally ordered for a NASCAR SuperTruck team. That means they were designed for a 3.500" stroke since their displacement limit was 358cid.

I have no doubt that they'd work with a 3.75" crank and 6" rods. But naturally I want to push the limit. My heads will be able to support a larger engine at the PCM limit, so why not?

One bonus would be an increase in the compression ratio of about .8:1 with the longer stroke. Another is that I'd be able to run a longer duration camshaft to make even more horsepower without losing torque.

The skirt length is 1.335" (total piston height 2.460" minus known compression height 1.125" since measuring from pin centerline is difficult.)

Cylinder length on an LT1 block seems to be about 5 and half inches. That means that the skirt will start to hang out with any stroke longer than 3" With a 4" stroke the skirt will hang nearly an inch out of the bore at BDC. I am not sure if that will work or not.
Old Feb 29, 2008 | 07:40 AM
  #44  
AdioSS's Avatar
West South Central Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
Originally Posted by rskrause
Well, that has many pros and cons. To sum it up, a max effort motor would be where you think about that kind of thing. It should be considered only if a top quality crank is used or if the motor is going to see frequent teadowns/rebuilds. The crank is going to be significantly weaker with small journals. OTOH there is less friction and clearance is improved, as you suggest. Bearing wear will also be more rapid with smaller journals.

Edit: clearance will only improve in this scenario IF a custom rod is also used. This will be very spendy. Most small journal rods have the same big end, just a smaller hole bored in it.

Rich
Rich, I've seen 800-900hp motors using small journal rod journals. Of course they have absolutely top of the line crankshafts and have frequent teardowns like you said.

Agreed with the custom rod. I do believe there are some off the shelf small journal rods with smaller outside diameters.
Old Feb 29, 2008 | 09:58 AM
  #45  
rskrause's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 10,745
From: Buffalo, New York
Originally Posted by AdioSS
Do you folks think a 5.85" rod with 1.125" compression height piston would work at all? A while back I picked up a set of 4.030" pistons for cheap because they were very close to what I thought I needed for a engine I was working on. Wiseco tech Brian Nutter said they were originally ordered for a NASCAR SuperTruck team. That means they were designed for a 3.500" stroke since their displacement limit was 358cid.

I have no doubt that they'd work with a 3.75" crank and 6" rods. But naturally I want to push the limit. My heads will be able to support a larger engine at the PCM limit, so why not?

One bonus would be an increase in the compression ratio of about .8:1 with the longer stroke. Another is that I'd be able to run a longer duration camshaft to make even more horsepower without losing torque.

The skirt length is 1.335" (total piston height 2.460" minus known compression height 1.125" since measuring from pin centerline is difficult.)

Cylinder length on an LT1 block seems to be about 5 and half inches. That means that the skirt will start to hang out with any stroke longer than 3" With a 4" stroke the skirt will hang nearly an inch out of the bore at BDC. I am not sure if that will work or not.

5.85 + 1.125 = 6.975" If the deck is 9.000 this leaves this piston 25 thou in the hole with a 4" stroke. Maybe I missed an earlier post, but how does that increase your CR?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:21 AM.