View Single Post
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 09-17-2001, 02:31 PM
Brad Pfeifer's Avatar
Brad Pfeifer Brad Pfeifer is offline
CC Member
Visit my Photo Gallery

Join Date: May 2000
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA,
Posts: 149
Not Ranked     


I am in the same process, building a motor with the aid of Dyno 2000. There was a magazine, I believe Hot Rod that compared data that they actually saw at the dyno with what the got from Dyno 2000. Dyno 2000 was pretty accurate, within about 5-10 HP, but on the optimistic side. I trust the results as engine building really is a series of mathmatical processes.

Regarding your cam conundrum. You can build lots of power with a hydraulic roller cam. The 351W did not have one as stock, but Comp Cams builds a number of retrofit cams. They also have the retrofit hydraulic roller lifters (PN 851-16) and the 'spider' retainer needed to keep them from twisting in their bores (PN 31-1000). Cam, lifters, and retainer will run you around $520, but you'll be hard pressed to equal the same kind of performance gain for the same money. However, any hydraulic lifter is going to start having problems after 6500 rpm's or so, so play with the Dyno to get your peak HP around 5500.

Unless you are on a tight budget, consider aluminum heads. You can run a higher compression ratio on pump gas. You should be able to run 10:1 without problems. Here in California octane peaks at 91-92 and these motors run OK. I understand in some states you can still get close to 100 octane. In most cases the aluminum heads breathe better too.

Lastly, the main journal diameter is not the limitng factor in the stability of the engine - it is the fact that the 351W generally have 2-bolt mains. You can get a 351W from Ford Racing that has 4-bolt mains, but given your other requirements I don't think it would be cost-effective. At 3.00", the Ford crank is beefier than the Chevy crank, so before you break the crank you would probably destroy the mains.

Reply With Quote