Box Stock

Tall deck advantage?

4

496 BB

New member
So if one were to run a tall deck (+.040) with longer rod to get an in hole depth of say .010 would this have an advantage since it would have a longer stroke? No rules here. Just wondering if my thinking is correct.
 
The longer connecting rod does not change the stroke. That is only done with the crank. It will slightly change the rod ratio but not enough to make a big difference like a .400 longer rod and shorter piston would.
 
Duh Im an idiot. Thx for checking me...lol.

Just looking for my next block. Was goona go big bore but not stroke and some had said it not all that great if not stroked. So may just find a standard bore Honda. Or get another clone.
 
Yes. The wiesco is shorter and lighter. You have two choices with rods. We have a drop in combo that is 3.625 rod and combined with the wieso piston gives you a 25% weight reduction. Plus it gives you a higher rod ratio and reduces stress on the crank journal, wrist pin and cylinder wall. We also have a 3.707 rod that uses the same piston, but you will have to cut .080 to .090 off the top of the piston. How ever this will give you a 30% weight reduction and the longest rod ratio avalible. This is a must for engines turning 8500 or higher. They both add extra dwell time at the top and bottom of the stroke which improves combustion, that equals HP...
 
If you want to have some fun try a 160 block with a 200 crank installed use what arc is telling you
arc 6234 rod and the wiseco 11132p2 piston with the .590 pin block will need somework
so rod will clear top of block.
 
What if I ran a big bore (Mike Clements) would I still be able to run the stroker crank with a 3.707 rod and wiseco piston it comes with? Just trying to make decisions with future plans in mind.

Will running a big bore block work with max stroke crank? Are the gains that much or is that crank too small for the block?
 
Max stroke crank is fine for his block, minimal difference if any, depends on the stroke of stock crank you are comparing to. The 3.707 can't be used with the arc stroker crank, its for a stock crank sized journal. JPR miss spoke, the 3.625" rod is for the .175 arc crank cause of the journal size. Their 3.595" rod is the one you use with the weisco pistons and not have to mill the piston and be pretty close to 0 deck height, only fits stock cranks.
 
No I didn't misspeak, I just goofed up... That is what happens when I am on the phone with someone, texting someone and answering a post at the same time... I am an experienced multitasker bit it even gets overwhelming for me at times. Yes the 3.595 is the drop in rod and the 3.625 is for the 6572-C Billet stroker shaft. Thanks for the swift eye BUhl27
 
JPR57 said:
The longer connecting rod does not change the stroke. That is only done with the crank. It will slightly change the rod ratio but not enough to make a big difference like a .400 longer rod and shorter piston would.
Click to expand...
Jody....I'll volunteer too try one of those (,400) out for you! Well, maybe .200! :)
 
The part # for the .400 longer rod (3.707) is 6268. Match that up with a 11132PS piston and 6265 wrist pin. Also we have just designed a .080 longer and a .100 longer rod to be used with a Gx160 piston or a shaved stock clone piston. They should be available mid to end of next week.
 
BUhl27 said:
Max stroke crank is fine for his block, minimal difference if any, depends on the stroke of stock crank you are comparing to. The 3.707 can't be used with the arc stroker crank, its for a stock crank sized journal. JPR miss spoke, the 3.625" rod is for the .175 arc crank cause of the journal size. Their 3.595" rod is the one you use with the weisco pistons and not have to mill the piston and be pretty close to 0 deck height, only fits stock cranks.
Click to expand...

Forgive me as Im still learning the technical side of engine building but why do people like the zero deck height? Ive heard you want to be a total of around .022" "total in the hole" and with zero you would have to make that up with head gasket(s) right? What is the advantage then if it all works out to be the same .022"? Quench? Would you have to stack gaskets?
 
496 BB said:
Forgive me as Im still learning the technical side of engine building but why do people like the zero deck height? Ive heard you want to be a total of around .022" "total in the hole" and with zero you would have to make that up with head gasket(s) right? What is the advantage then if it all works out to be the same .022"? Quench? Would you have to stack gaskets?
Click to expand...

No difference to me, just get the piston to head clearance you need either way. IMO
 
That was my thinking as well but just didnt want to come across as dumb when maybe there was a reason for it...lol. Thanks you guys are really helping me along. Ive already built one engine last year that ran great and plan on another 2 this year. Love this place!

So was what Buhl27 saying is that it will be minimal difference going to a 2.815" bore with a max stroke crank? Or did I read that wrong? Theres really not much difference in price when buying a regular bore with new rod, wiseco piston, and rod and such. Hell might as well! Great foundation for a future stroker...lol.
 
Also Im assuming a s/a carb is out of the question with that bore size? Would a Mikuni work? Im not a huge carb guy so I'll be buying a blueprinted one off of someone. Just not sure who as Dover does not offer Mikuni from what I seen on their website.
 
The bore will make a difference but I was speaking about the max stroke crank vs a take out crank with unknown stroke as the clones vary. The max stroke was intended for the bsp class to stay under and close to the max stroke rule. Check out Dover's online store, they have clone cranks that exceed the bsp rule for stroke. I got on that was 2.143 but they vary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top