514 questions

Hello,

I hope you guys can give me some information, from what I've read, I think this is the place for answers. I currently have a .040 460, 70' 429 block, stock rods with arp bolts,CJ heads(iron)ported & matched to a offy intake/ported & milled for a dominator, herberts roller cam, arias dome top 13.75/1.
I am converting to alcohol and stroking the motor with a 4.15 crank. I haven't picked the rods yet.
My first question, is there any way to use my existing pistons with this crank and a 6.7inch rod? Could the pistons be milled? I would like to maintain the compression ratio, even raise it if possible.
My second question, can the Fischer fluid balancers accept pulleys?
My last question, Do the A460, Blue thunder or any of the other aluminum heads in that category have the same combustion chamber configuration as a factory head. Again, I would like to use my pistons, they were expensive.
Thanks!!

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Author Reply
SG236
(no login)
12.77.90.77 Sorry
No score for this post September 14 2001, 12:11 AM

I have a D1VE block and the crank has been turned to 4.14 and the bore is 4.44. I have a set of Eagle 6.8 H-Beam rods with JE flattop pistons. Comp ratio is 13.2.1 or expected to be when finished with a 0 deck. I have a set of D0VE ported heads. I would like to have a good set of alum heads but have found in the past if stock heads are done right the power will be there.

Has your block 0 decked? I have heard the 460s don't like the fluid balancers, I went with a ATI Super Damper. There are several variables.

I know I didn't help much but wanted to reply!

Good Luck, that unit should haul

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

John C
(no login)
152.163.205.63 Still looking for answers to 514
No score for this post September 14 2001, 2:06 AM

My block was cleaned up, but not zero decked. I read some of the other forum messages about rods and cranks. I didn't know that the crate 514 had 6.605 rods. They may work for my setuo, but if I don't produce more power than my current setup it isn't worth it to put in a short rod combo, over the proven long rod setups.

Thanks for the response!
John

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

gregaust
(no login)
203.17.162.33 514 crate
No score for this post September 14 2001, 4:38 AM

The 514 crate does use the 6.605 cj or truck rods but it achieves 514 by using a 4.3" stroke with a standard bore.
The combo you describe has a shorter stroke of 4.15" that allows the longer rods but to get 514cubes you have to bore to 4.44".H.T.H

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

John c
(no login)
205.188.195.43 514
No score for this post September 15 2001, 1:28 AM

I'm aware of the crank stroke differences and I know that my future combo will turn out about 512 at .080. Since the crate 514 uses a standard rod 6.605, I thought I could get by with a shorter rod without losing much torque or HP over the long rods.

Thanks
John

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

George Huff
(no login)
198.81.16.168 Rods and Stroke
No score for this post September 14 2001, 6:53 PM

More stroke, longer rod! The ratio numbers are not in front of me but, if you want it to last use the longest rod you can. Rods don't make cubes.

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Mark J.
(no login)
63.29.25.6 Rods
No score for this post September 14 2001, 2:52 PM

John,
Compression ratio will rise with addition of stroke if all else remains the same. To use your same pistons with a 4.15 crank I came up with a 6.455 rod. This will give a rod/ratio of 1.56, a little better than my 598.
Blue Thunder may have stock valve angles & location but I don't think they do. The aluminum "Cobra Jet" does & will bolt right on. Kasse designed the port cores so you don't have to mess with it much.
Alcohol likes compression; this should be a romping 504.
Double check math 'cause I did not & as bad as I am I have to check & recheck to get things right.
Almost forgot, most agree that a Fluidampr is death to a BBF. Fischer is a fricton disk type. You will be better of with something like an ATI.
Hope this helps. I think I touched on all your questions. Feel free to contact me any time,
Mark J.

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Mark Shepherd
(no login)
24.4.253.20 Blue thunder heads
No score for this post September 14 2001, 5:28 PM

Will work with your pistons.Call Engine Systems in Tucker Ga. Mark Shepherd

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

John C
(no login)
205.188.195.43 Pistons
No score for this post September 15 2001, 1:21 AM

Are you saying the pistons will work with no modifications? Or do they need to be milled? Do you happen to have the phone number?
Thanks,
John

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

SG236
(no login)
12.77.90.230 Engine Systems
No score for this post September 16 2001, 9:03 AM

Number for Engine Systems located in Tucker, GA is 770-491-0583. Check out the site at www.enginesystems.com


Russ

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Walt Barnes
(no login)
206.160.223.168 BT heads are too much for just 514
No score for this post September 15 2001, 2:52 AM

Funny this topic just came up. My friend is building a 030 over, 4.5" stroke 540 and was trying to decide between stage 3 blue thunder heads and ported aluminum CJs. Using the flow numbers from the head porter I ran it through desktop dyno with a 700 lift, 295 durration cam and was surprised at the results. For just 540 cid the aluminum CJ delivered more HP. The blue thunder heads are just too big for an engine that small. Bump the CID to 600 or more and then the BT heads come alive. (I also ran a lot of combos for my street 429 engine and the Edelbrocks are the right thing for me. The Aluminum CJs are too big for that.)

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

StickBBF
(no login)
205.158.104.42 Edelbrock heads-to port or not?
No score for this post September 20 2001, 8:48 AM

Hey Walt,
Awhile ago you were looking for flow data on ported Edelbrock heads - did you ever get that data?

What flow numbers would your Desktop Dyno program 'recommend' for my small-slicked, Jerico-shifted, race-only, 3200# 501"?

I'm trying to determine if I should plan to have my Edelbrocks ported (& if so, to what degree/how much) or leave them box-stock...I plan to spin 6800-7100rpms using 75cc Edelbrock heads (12.1CR), a mech roller cam of 260/268 dur with 726"/726" lift; on LS of 108.

Thanks for any input, StickBBF

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Walt Barnes
(no login)
206.160.223.168 Ported Edelbrock data
No score for this post September 21 2001, 2:30 PM

OK - you got me off my butt. I've added the ported Edelbrock data to my site. I left the graph alone since it was too busy already, but the updates are in the table and in the excel file.

Short answer, the Edelbrock heads respond well to porting. But, and this is a big but, I couldn't get any specific info on how the heads were ported. My plan is to get the Edelbrock heads and just do the very basic porting

http://www.walt-n-anne.com/Ranchero/385heads.htm

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

StickBBF
(no login)
205.158.104.42 Thanks, Walt!
No score for this post September 21 2001, 2:41 PM

...you can go back to sleep now.

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Bob M
(no login)
63.25.254.59 Desktop Dyno vs. real world...
No score for this post September 21 2001, 11:04 PM

With all due respect...You guys are taking these computer simulations WAY too seriousely.
The Dsktop Dyno is a cool tool to build theoretical engines and get fairly close to a combo that will work, but there are far too many variables that are not considered in the equation. Like port cross-section in this case.
A high flow rate does not necessarily mean that the port has low velosity. and visa-versa. And I think that is what the computer simulation is assuming.
The Blue-Thunders have virtually the same intake port volume as the Aluminum CJ's. and if they flow better with the same port volume, that is a GOOD thing and will undoubtedly make more power if it's cammed correctly.
The FRPP aluminum CJ's exhaust ports absolutely suck compared to the intake port. The Blue Thunders on the other hand have higher, better flowing exhaust ports, and flow even better when ordered with the better shaped BBC ex. port (great for N2O combos).
High flow is NOT necessarily a bad thing...Too big a port, and slow port velosity IS a bad thing.

I do agree however, that the Edelbrock heads are the best ones to use in all but the larger and/or more radical combinations.

The above is just my opinion, and was worth about $.02 a couple weeks ago. \=^)

Bob

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Mark Shepherd
(no login)
24.4.252.4 Right you are.
No score for this post September 23 2001, 3:31 PM

Blue thunder is the best head out there right now for 460-557+. A460 is better but hard to find and is expensive.

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Walt Barnes
(no login)
206.160.223.168 SW v. real world - BT v. CJ
No score for this post September 23 2001, 9:01 PM

I completely agree the desktop SW isn't the end-all for engine choices. It is just a tool, but it is better than nothing which is what most engine builder use, LOL.

I got flow data for "stage III" ported BT heads from the company that was going to do the porting. What surprised me was the BT heads with the CH***Y exhaust ports design didn't have much better flow than ported CJ heads.

If anyone has accurate flow data for BT heads, ported or unported, please post it or email it to me. Maybe the data I got was bogus.

Score 1 2 3 4 5 (5=Excellent) Edit Message Delete Message Lock Thread Respond to this message

Bob M
(no login)
63.25.252.34 Engine Systems...
No score for this post September 24 2001, 7:06 PM

Should have flow data for both the B.Thunder's and CJ's.
Also...I would like to see flow data from another source other than Edelbrock for their heads...They have been accused of inflating dyno & flow-bench #'s in the past. If that's true I don't know...But it's always better to have results from an unbiased source.

Nothing tells the tail better than bolting them on though.