American Sedan Forum

American Sedan Forum (http://s91730302.onlinehome.us/forums/index.php)
-   American Sedan Rules (http://s91730302.onlinehome.us/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   302 vs 350 Engine Packages (http://s91730302.onlinehome.us/forums/showthread.php?t=567)

rjmelchione 09-04-2006 02:32 AM

302 vs 350 Engine Packages
 
As this engine package is a big part of the future of the class. Most notably the engine choice will affect the cost of running in the class. I understand that the most pressing need is to level the playing field for the current cars but there is also an opportunity to take a substantial amount of cost out of the class. While I love the idea of a 302 engine package it is mostly for nostalgic reasons. These are the engines that ran in original Trans Am series. The problem I have with the 302 engine is the cost and reliability at a target output of 400 HP. To achieve this out put we are talking 7000-7500 PRM and this means a bottom end that is three times the cost of an engine that turns 6000 PRM. When we go to a Chevy 302 the Ford guys are not going to be happy because due to the longer rod of the Chevy it will make more power and be more reliable. So the Ford guys are going to want to run a 351 block so they can have a long rod too. Now with both makes running 350 blocks why are we running these expensive cranks? Not to mention the fact that I'm not sure you can get a 3" crank for a Dodge.

Now the alternative is a 350 engine package based on similar crate engines that all three manufactures offer. These engine all make ~400 HP and ~400 Ft/lbs, and they do below 6000 rpm on 91 octane fuel. These engines are available with a street price of ~$5000 or about half the cost of the 302 engine. So for half the cost you get better performance (50 -100 Ft/lbs) and better reliability (engine only turn 6000 RPM). Now you can buy the crate engine or build one your self with approved parts.

Just my opinion...

jimwheeler 09-04-2006 07:47 AM

Rob,
Thanks for the comments. Please post the part numbers or the names of these crate engines and I will be sure the information gets into the mix. There are a lot of ideas out there, but without specifics, there is no chance of a specific package being approved.
Members of AdHoc will be doing more head flow comparison in the future, so we should have some good, specific, information from that.
Jim

rjmelchione 09-04-2006 02:04 PM

No problem Jim. If the specs are similar to these types of engines you get good power and reliablity at a reasonable cost. There are more options but this is the idea.

Here are a few options

GM Part Number: 12496769
Description
The Fast Burn 385hp 350 crate engine from GM Performance Parts is the latest addition to the ZZ series crate engines. The ZZ4 short block with forged steel crankshaft and PM rods is used together with the Fast Burn aluminum heads to provide an engine combination with great reliability and plenty of power, ready when you need it. Includes intake manifold, distributor, water pump, harmonic balancer and 153 tooth flexplate for use with automatic transmissions.


Specifications
SDPC Part Number: 12496769
Manufacturer: GM Performance Parts
Horsepower : 385 hp @ 5600 rpm
Torque : 385 ft lbs. @ 4000 rpm
Compression Ratio : 9.6 to 1
Block : Cast Iron 4-Bolt, 4.000" Bore
Crankshaft : Forged Steel, 3.480" Stroke
Heads, Chamber Size : Fast Burn, 62cc
Valves (I/E) : 2.000"/1.550"
Camshaft, Lift (I/E) : 0.474"/0.510"
Camshaft Duration @ 0.050" I/E : 208/221 degrees
Intake Manifold : Aluminum Dual Plane

Ford Part # M-6007-D351FT
Description

M-6007-D351FT* Front sump T-pan (Manual Transmission)
M-6007-D351RT* Rear sump T-pan (Manual Transmission)
  • 351 cubic inch
  • 385 HP (with headers, and a 650 CFM Holley carburetor not included)
  • 377 ft./lbs. of torque @ 4500 RPM
  • 9.0:1 compression ratio (nominal)
  • Forged pistons, M-6108-Z351
  • Forged steel cap screw connecting rods, M-6200-D351
  • Hydraulic roller camshaft M-6250-Z303
  • High performance T-sump oil pan
  • Front sump fits most passenger cars that came factory equipped with front sump pan
  • Rear sump pan fit most Fox body cars
  • MSD billet distributor
  • Ford Racing aluminum GT-40 cylinder heads M-6049-X305, and GT-40 valve train
  • Single plane “Victor Jr.” intake manifold M-9424-V351
  • Great for limited budgets. It’s the fast, easy way to add performance and reduce weight in high- or low-mileage vehicles
  • New heavy duty 5.8L “Sportsman ” race block, oil and water pumps, performance oil pan, steel billet flywheel and high performance harmonic balancer
  • Can be used in kit cars, street rods, Mustangs, Fox-bodied cars, and trucks

Tim White 09-04-2006 03:40 PM

These were the two crate engines I included in my reply to the survey. There is another issue with the Fords going to a 351 is that the 351 is a little taller. There are a few models that will have clearance issues. Most likely the 79 to 93 Mustangs will require a raised cowl hood, like the 94 to 04 Mustangs get. Of course, it is about time these cars get a fiberglass hood since we don't get one today.

as4044 09-04-2006 08:14 PM

I love the idea of crate motors, but how do you handle rebuilds? The crate motors are mass porduced and don't have the best machining. THe first step would be to take your crate motor and have a pro rebuild it. Kinda like the stock miata motor that makes way more hp than a never touched stock motor. In this case you bought a 5-7K motor and have to turn around and trick it out to be competitive. THe circle track guys have figured this out on their motors. 5-6K of work on a new motor that uses production pieces and we are back at square one, 10-14k motors. It's about 25-30hp more after the rebuild.

Any ideas on how to get around this situation. I'm up for crate motors, but not if it goes like I think it might.

I would like to see the target power at 350hp. This way in 5-6 years it will be back to 400hp. Mustangs haven't always made this kind of power.

Ron

jkopp 09-04-2006 08:16 PM

A Fast Burn 385 is rated at 385HP with a 750cfm 3310 Holley carb. Anybody got a guess at what it would do with our currently legal 600cfm carb? Just curious.

The FB385 is also available as a circle track engine which includes a dual kickout pan and a different intake to get it to 400HP (also with a 750 carb). The P/N is 88958604. This is the crate motor I think would be more in line with what the currently legal engines are making for power with the 600 carb. It's the one I included in my survey reply. The regular FB385 looks to be more inline with the Ford engine offered. The pan would need to be changed though.

I will admit that I know very little about anything but GM crate engines. The Ford engine mentioned looks like a good setup that would be a nice option for ASedan.

Personally, I think the engine rules should be opened up to make all the new and great suggestions possible - the old engine, the new GM 302, and crate engines. Let's give the racers some options and let them choose which way to go.

-Kopp

jkopp 09-04-2006 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by as4044
I love the idea of crate motors, but how do you handle rebuilds? The crate motors are mass porduced and don't have the best machining. THe first step would be to take your crate motor and have a pro rebuild it. Kinda like the stock miata motor that makes way more hp than a never touched stock motor. In this case you bought a 5-7K motor and have to turn around and trick it out to be competitive. THe circle track guys have figured this out on their motors. 5-6K of work on a new motor that uses production pieces and we are back at square one, 10-14k motors. It's about 25-30hp more after the rebuild.

Any ideas on how to get around this situation. I'm up for crate motors, but not if it goes like I think it might.

I would like to see the target power at 350hp. This way in 5-6 years it will be back to 400hp. Mustangs haven't always made this kind of power.

Ron

Ron, this is a very good question and seems to be the number on reason lately that those against crate engines use to not allow them.

Let me ask you this, has it hurt Spec Miata any that this happens in their class as you mention? It sure doesn't look like it from their participation numbers. Sure, you are always going to have the racer/team that maximizes their position via cubic dollars. There's a gigabucks in every race series. There's also a wannabe racer looking in from the outside and wondering what it costs to get in. After all, what are we wanting to change the engine rules for? Do we want a cheap, fool proof way to have top notch horsepower or do we want to give one of those outsiders looking in a chance to be close enough to participate and have fun?

There's been a lot of talk amongst SCCA drivers and here on the forum lately about people leaving SCCA racing for other venues, lack of proactiveness towards rules and rule changes, and the overall ineffectiveness of our rules making and changing process. I really believe that we will be more successful at getting that outsider looking in to commit if we give him enough ways to do so.

-Kopp

as4044 09-04-2006 11:25 PM

I'll go with the crate motor deal if everyone thinks it will help. I'm just throwing out there some of the hidden costs of crate motors. like we have seen with the ford blocks, what happens if gm or ford decides to change up the game and discontinue the crate motor we use in our cars. That would really jam up anybody in the process of building a car, thinking of building a car, or actively running the car with a discontinued motor. I don't want to see us going back to the well for changes in 2-4 years if part numbers come and go.

As far as proactive goes, lets do something with the weight issue. Cheap, works, and simple to undo. Can't say that about anything else. If SCCA can shoot the Viper in the foot a couple months before the Runoffs, what's the big deal about starting next year out with different weights. The viper hasn't won shit compared to the vette, but they (I dont know who they is) managed to make it happen.

Miata reference was more of an example of stock vs. "stock". Miata numbers are good because you can get in cheap and be competetive for little money and there is always somebody to race with. For example, back in 02, The Glen national had 21 AS cars. That gives the slow pokes and speed demons somebody to race with. If 5 cars show up, you're racing by yourself. Even if you get housed, you had a chance to race your own class.

We are back to the rule flux issue. Pick any engine rule that equals the hp diff, do it soon, and people will come back and in for the 1st time. If I can spread the cost of a motor program over several seasons it makes sense, if there is a chance it will change again and then again, why bother. If it ain't gonna change, then we (who choose to) can get down the road to other classes and don't have to wait to see what is going to happen.

Ron

Lax17 09-05-2006 08:42 AM

crate motor
 
JASPER, spec sealed motor 302-305 or 351-350 same HP TRQ and rpm range. They use same heads, same intake as we are currently running. I did this research 2-3 years ago but nobody was interested. $5000.00 for a motor.

as4044 09-05-2006 09:35 AM

Brian,

If you still have the info, send it to me or send it to the adhoc guys to take to the comp board. Nobody cared 2-3 years ago. We care now. send it.
I like the idea of a national rebuilder, if the motor blows up. send it back and get another cheap sealed crate motor, that is hopefully of equal quality.

Ron


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.