you might find that small block chev rods can be used in this conversion.
simon
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Kent <pkent@skynet.net.au>
To: Simon Sparrow <Simon.Sparrow@wang.co.nz>; 'dkern@napanet.net'
<dkern@napanet.net>
Cc: Buick-Rover-V8 mailing list (E-mail) <buick-rover-v8@autox.team.net>
Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 6:14 PM
Subject: RE: P76 Crankshaft
>(The rod ratio is as you've correctly guessed, something like 1.7 and
>above
>is desirable. The std. P76 motor has a stroke of 3.5" and a rod length of
>6.25" this gives a ratio of 1.78. The higher the ratio number, the longer
>the piston 'pauses' at TDC and BDC. This has benefits for the combustion
>process, but I can't remember the details.)
>
>
>
>
>Reply:
>A rod/stroke ratio below 1.5 is not ideal and a rod/stroke ratio is very
>good, however, many successful engines have a rod/stroke ratio between
>1.5 and 1.7. I read an article once that ran a Chev 383 strocker on a
>dyno with 2 kits using different rod lengths. The engine produced around
>400bhp, and the difference was 15hp max (started on come in above 4000
>rpm). There was a correponding small increase in torque (but still in the
>2% to 3% range). Worth considerating but not of overwhelming importance.
>
>A P76 crank in a Rover/BOP block has the following rod/stroke ratio:
>
>Rover 5.66 rod 1.62
>Chev 5.70 rod 1.63
>Chrysler 5.78 rod 1.65
>
>I have an Excel spreadsheet that allows modelling of different pistons
>(compression height, bowl volume etc) for Rover/P76/BOP standard and
>stroker engines (including compression calculation). If me know if you
>would like me to email you a copy.
>
>(Does anyone know what the factory specification for deck height
>(crank centerline to top surface of block) is for Rover 3.5, Rover 3.9, or
>BOP 215?)
>
>Reply: The block height on the only Rover 3.5 I have measured was 8.9565"
>
>The Prostroke P76/Rover block 272ci kit looks like it will retail for
>approx. AU$1800 (US$1134).
>
>
>Regards,
>Peter Kent
>
|