land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

Re:D Motor options...

To: "Ken Bond" <kmb2@humboldt.edu>, "Dick J" <lsr_man@yahoo.com>,
Subject: Re:D Motor options...
From: "Keith Turk" <kturk@ala.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:02:11 -0500
Ken I kinda agree.... and there is one thing you might not have thought of
in the 2.9" crank mode.... the Large Journal .... ( read 68-69) 3" crank
can be offset ground to a small journal ( 2.1 to 2") to  make a 2.9" crank
which really makes it about as cheap as any other option.... it's not
expensive to do and the total crank bill doesn't have to be ridiculous....
like buying a Bryant or something....

K

----------
> From: Ken Bond <kmb2@humboldt.edu>
> To: Dick J <lsr_man@yahoo.com>; land-speed@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: SBC
> Date: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:46 PM
> 
> At 10:21 AM 08/29/01 -0700, Dick J wrote:
> >I've been sitting here making good use of my
> >lunch hour looking at SBD dimensions and have
> >come up with a question.  The weakling of all
> >SBCs had to be the 262 that was made during the
> >mid-seventies.  It has a b/s of 3.671 X 3.1.   
> >Could the 262 block be bored enough and keep the
> >3.1 crank be a good candidate to make a "D"
> >motor?
> >
> >Dick J
> 
> Dick,
> 
> In my opinion, NO it is not a good candidate.
> For small engines ("D" motors), the key 
> seems to be to rev high to make horsepower.
> Large bore and short strokes are the wisdom of
> the day to rev high.
> 
> Assuming you agree with the large bore, short stroke
> argument (and I do), then starting with a
> 327 block (4" bore) and a 283 crank (3" stroke)
> gives you 302 cu in.  With a .020 or .030 bore to clean up
> the block, you are at the top of the "D" class.
> 
> No matter what you do with the 262, you still have
> the 3.1" crank and my 3.0" crank (or aftermarket 2.9"
> crank) will have an inherent advantage every time.
> 
> My guess is that while the 262 can be made to work,
> "for the same money" the 327/283 combo will run faster
> every day.  For a SBC "D" motor, the
> stroke of 3.1" is too long.
> 
> Others, such as Keith will make the point that if you
> go to 4.060 bore and 2.9ish stroke you get the best
> option (but more money).  My point is that you are going
> up hill on the stroke length issue.
> 
> Just my thoughts
> 
> KEN
> 
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * Ken Bond,                                                 *
> * Prof. of Bus. Admin.                                      *
> * Humboldt State Univ.              ____________            *
> * Arcata, CA 95521          _______| 58  85  99 |_________  *
> *                          /     How much horsepower     /  *
> *                         /      Can I have and still   /   *
> * Wk.:707.826.4277       /_________ go to Heaven?______/    *
> * Wk Fax:707.826.6666              |_61______61_|           *
> * Hm.:707.826.7764           I Never Drive Faster than      *
> * Hm Fax:707.826.0334        My Guardian Angel Can Fly      *
> * Internet:                                                 *
> * kmb2@humboldt.edu (office)                                *
> * ragtops@humboldt1.com (home)                              *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

///
///  land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
///  To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
///  with nothing in it but
///
///     unsubscribe land-speed
///
///


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>