Stroker kit from GN1. Regular or long rod for street?

[LEGACY_GN]

I will drive the car at least 15k miles a year with AC, stereo, loaded. Not my daily driver but I do like it better than my V. Will race at track maybe 4 times a year. Is the long rod too much?

Also, any recomendations on roller cam is greatly appreciated.

 

[750H.P.V6]

If the long rod is in the 6.200" to 6.300" range with a 3.625" stroke that would probably be best. It will give you a better rod to stroke ratio. The shorter rods will work too. I seem to think Mike Licht prefers shorter rods but I don't recall why. Maybe he'll chime in.

Neal

 

[Nick Micale]

There is NO way you will see or find any difference in performance between the stock length rod or the 6.350" rod with either a stock stroke crank or the 3.625" stroke.

I have personally run various combinations of stroke and rod length rods and have never seen any difference in competition performance with any of these builds.

Since I may not be a qualified expert in this area of discussion, my experience is also verified by Ken Dutweiller who actually made a similar statement concerning a 2000 HP build in a national magazine!

 

[750H.P.V6]

Nick is right in terms of H.P. difference. A couple of decades ago the conventional wisdom was that long rods make more H.P. which isn't true. In general (not specifically Buicks) if you run a very short rod you can run into an interference problem between the crankshaft counterweight and the piston skirt. Conversely if you run a very long rod you can run into a stack up problem running a long stroke crank. The stock rod to stroke ratio is 1.75 to 1 and a 3.625" stroke with a 6.350" rod Nick mentioned would be 1.75 also. Long story short either combo will work fine. I'd run the longer rod myself but that's just my opinion.

Neal

 

[SGRIM]

Please buy from a vendor that supports the board! The community is shrinking as it is, we need to help each other....

 

[turboclam]

Maybe not performance gain but what about piston side load. Less side load has to mean longevity. Duttweiler can build 2000 hp motors but most Buick guys that run on the street want to get thousands of miles out of their motors without a rebuild. As for a street build, longer rod with the longer piston skirt. Go with the better ratio.

 

[turbobitt]

Maybe not performance gain but what about piston side load. Less side load has to mean longevity. Duttweiler can build 2000 hp motors but most Buick guys that run on the street want to get thousands of miles out of their motors without a rebuild. As for a street build, longer rod with the longer piston skirt. Go with the better ratio.

X2
There is a major thrust side on each bank. Not shure when the exact maximum loading occurs but may be half way between BDC and TDC where rod angle is the worst. Of course, needs to be kept in balance with compression height to maintain piston skirt life.

As stated above, it is more of a wear and durability concern than power.

Allan G.

 

[turbofabricator]

No down side to a longer rod. If they are the same price. Most of the stock length rods use the. 940" wrist pin. Longer rods use the .927" Chevy pins which is a benifit due to reduced weight. Unless you are making more than 1000hp. Which at that point the BBC pins may be needed. If the shorter rod is available with the .927" pin then there would be no measurable gain or loss in each build. If the longer rod is more money.......skip 'em. Just my opinion on this highly debated topic. Google it and spend hours and hours reading and then feel even more confused.

 

[Mike Licht]

I Ilke the short rod, if you calculate the difference in rod angle it is next to nothing. Long rods have more dwell time for the piston at TDC which will build more cylinder pressure. My opinion is that motors are easier to tune and some can tolerate more timing with the short rod. Take that for what it is worth. The difference is small for sure there is NO difference in HP with the same tune up.
Mike