![]() |
Originally Posted by Rookie
(Post 4275732)
I agree and some will build it, but I don't know anyone that will stand behind it.
Also, it might only be an increase in 1.5% as you stated. But, 1.3% might be over the critical angle. (The limit) I have no clue, just stating for discussion not argument:) |
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
(Post 4275743)
If I can rebuild the spare 502 and go from 650 to 800 HP I would be real happy with that and the other changes to the boat. and it would cost only about $5,000 to do it. I was thinking that if I can just replace the crank, rods, cam, lifters and the other wear parts. I was hoping to reuse the pistons I have now.
|
If you add stroke to a block - lets say .25 inch then don't you have to shorten the rods by that same amount or the pistons are going to stick out of the block by .25 inch. Or if there is room you can change the piston with ones that have a .25 inch higher pin height.
If I stroke the engine I will have to change the crank and rods anyways. If I can reuse the pistons what is wrong with that. Why would the rod need to be .125 inch shorter? |
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
(Post 4275869)
If you add stroke to a block - lets say .25 inch then don't you have to shorten the rods by that same amount or the pistons are going to stick out of the block by .25 inch. Or if there is room you can change the piston with ones that have a .25 inch higher pin height.
If I stroke the engine I will have to change the crank and rods anyways. If I can reuse the pistons what is wrong with that. Why would the rod need to be .125 inch shorter? |
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
(Post 4275869)
If you add stroke to a block - lets say .25 inch then don't you have to shorten the rods by that same amount or the pistons are going to stick out of the block by .25 inch. Or if there is room you can change the piston with ones that have a .25 inch higher pin height.
If I stroke the engine I will have to change the crank and rods anyways. If I can reuse the pistons what is wrong with that. Why would the rod need to be .125 inch shorter? A stroke increase of .250" is a function of 2 x increase in radius.(.125") BBC rod length increases are related to pin placement. Bob |
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
(Post 4275869)
If you add stroke to a block - lets say .25 inch then don't you have to shorten the rods by that same amount or the pistons are going to stick out of the block by .25 inch. Or if there is room you can change the piston with ones that have a .25 inch higher pin height.
If I stroke the engine I will have to change the crank and rods anyways. If I can reuse the pistons what is wrong with that. Why would the rod need to be .125 inch shorter? |
Ok,first post you wanted to stroke 502 to 540. That is adding 1/4 inch stroke. Later you said you wanted to rebuild using same pistons new rods. I was asking how you were gonna do that. You would need to go .125 shorter or pistons would stick up 1/8th inch out of the holes. As bob said 1/4 stroke is moving rod journal out 1/8 inch. So adding .250 stroke with same pistons would entail special 1/8ths shorter rods which in not a good idea...
|
What do your heads flow?
|
Originally Posted by 14 apache
(Post 4275522)
10.5 to 1 would scare me in a boat. Think 800hp would be hard to achieve unless the heads where killer. With a 540.
|
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4276028)
You could always jack the compression up and retard the timing . even though you won't make more power, you'll sound cooler telling people at the dock how much compression you have :)
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.