327 LT1 Destroker?
#1
327 LT1 Destroker?
i would like to destroke ym lt1 to a 327. has very many people done this? with a nice solid roller cam bigger valves headers and a port i would make decent power. Im looking form a higher rpm Hp not so muhc a torque sum bish any commenst?
greg
greg
#2
There have been a few threads on "destroking"... a search on "destroke" will turn up a some of them. An example:
http://web.camaross.com/forums/showt...light=destroke
http://web.camaross.com/forums/showt...light=destroke
#3
Re: 327 LT1 Destroker?
Originally posted by SnortinLT1
i would like to destroke ym lt1 to a 327. has very many people done this? with a nice solid roller cam bigger valves headers and a port i would make decent power. Im looking form a higher rpm Hp not so muhc a torque sum bish any commenst?
greg
i would like to destroke ym lt1 to a 327. has very many people done this? with a nice solid roller cam bigger valves headers and a port i would make decent power. Im looking form a higher rpm Hp not so muhc a torque sum bish any commenst?
greg
- The LT1 PCMs top out around 7200 rpms.
- Connecting Rods Bolts are the highest-stressed part of the whole car... and RPM's are what kill 'em... not hp. This is quick way to dissasemble an engine
It's totally doable... but a 383, 388, or 396 that turn to 7000 rpms will eat you alive rev for rev.
You could hit 8000+ with exotic rods/bolts/valve-train and a $3000+ aftermarket computer... but is it worth it in terms of $$/hp? In that light a $9000 stroker looks like a steal in my books.
#4
the only time when it makes any sense is when you have a maximum displacement rule or a pound per inch rule Keep this in mind, how often do you see MINIMUM displacement rules in racing classes?
#7
destroking is a cool idea, but from what I have read is just not gonna be worth the $$$ getting all those exotic parts in there compared to building a bigger inch motor that will make more power and cost less.
#9
It may give a better perspective if viewed from the other side. The 350 is actually a stroked 327. This done for more torque. The 327 was a stroked and bored 283, again a step UP. The 327 was a great alternative when compared to the 283. But to again visit that displacement, with the 350 a reality, would be a step down, for the various reasons given above.
#11
Originally posted by AdioSS
and a 400 is basically a bored and stroked 350
and a 400 is basically a bored and stroked 350
Regardless of the boring impossibilities, the 400 also has different bearing sizes.
Now if you were to look at a Little-M, Motown, Bow-Tie, Rocket-block, or any other SBC aftermarket block you could go with any combination of bearings, deck hieghts, cam heights, etc... and "technically" it would still be a SBC... but I'd hesitate to call any of those just bored and stroked 350's either.
Last edited by Steve in Seattle; 06-01-2004 at 09:57 PM.
#13
Originally posted by AdioSS
a 572 could be called a bored and stroked 396
I realize there are a few differences with the SBC 350 and 400, but externally, can you tell the difference?
a 572 could be called a bored and stroked 396
I realize there are a few differences with the SBC 350 and 400, but externally, can you tell the difference?
#15
The 400 is based on a different casting, with different journal sizes, and siamiesed cylinders. Consequently, I do not consider the 400 to be a progression (stroked/bored) of the previous sbc engines. If the 4.0" oem bore sbc could be physically overbored (forget about safely) to 400 specs, I might reconsider. AFAIC, ain't gonna happen.