Go Back   Ford Mustang Forums > Mustang > 5.0 Mustang > 5.0L Tech

Welcome to our Mustang forums where Mustangers come together to hang out, discuss and enjoy their favorite Mustang hobby with fellow Mustang enthusiasts. We invite everyone to read, post, and enjoy our Mustang forum as well as the many other sections of our site.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest. By joining our community you gain access to post topics, communicate with members, upload your photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free so why wait, join our Mustang community today! If you have any problems with registration or your account login, please contact support.

5.0 Mustangs Tech Forum

5.0L Talk | 5.0L Tech | 94-95 Tech | 1979-1993   1994   1995   Upload Pictures | Timeslips | Power Adders | Mustang Tech 


Closed Thread   Post New Thread
Unread 07-27-2009   #31 (permalink)
Joel5.0 is offline GT Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,027 Threads: 4
 Joel5.0's Country Flag  View Joel5.0's HomePage
Sabana Grande
Joel5.0 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 347Vert View Post
I never said a 347 could not be built to rev or raced, I run one to 7,000rpm, but while I do I acknowledge durability is an issue when compared to the better rod/stroke 331 as I push the envelope closer to full race - that is my point. That point derived from researching Ford's choice in their 331 race crate motor.
Exactly..... it's not the things said, it's the ones not mentioned, left for interpretation, speculation, inference. And going back to the R:S and durability inference, why have I seen/serviced/worked engines (OEM and strokers) with worse R:S than the 331, or the 302, or the 289, or the 351M (1.88 R:S).... and mileage in the 250k - 350k+. You are basing your recommendation, and now past wrong decision, on FRPP's work on a single product.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 347Vert View Post
When considering between the two I would recommend someone do a complete research on pros/cons of each; not just rely on internet threads. I wish I had followed this advice and I would have been winding up a 331 instead - likely without having to refresh the motor as often. Good discussion and points made. Moving on fellas.
Correct...... or has the real life personal/business experiences I've mentioned so far still go unnoticed?
BTW.... are you refreshing your 347 often? ....

My apologies if this sounds negative, it's not intended to be, but making engine configuration selections/recommendations at this level (street or full race) solely based on a ratio number and ignoring factual data.........
__________________
ACRONYMS:
LUK=Let Us Know, GL=Good Luck, LMK=Let Me Know, JIC=Just In Case, BTSTDTRT=Been There Seen That Done That Repaired That, YCYDYP=Your Car Your Dough Your Prerogative and the classic... DILLIGAS=Do I Look Like I Give A S***
1986 GT-X303 cam, 289 heads, 1.72, Holley 700cfm DP, RG 4+1 Trans.
Joel5.0 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Unread 07-27-2009   #32 (permalink)
Jay Allen is offline Apprentice


Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 66 Threads: 0
 Jay Allen's Country Flag
SE Michiagn   Michigan
Jay Allen is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 347Vert View Post
Just do the research on why Ford Racing chose the 331 over the 347 in their all out 530hp crate motor. You can argue with me, but I'm just supporting the philosophy of Ford Racing and I happen to think they know what their doing.
These are the kinds of statements that should NEVER be allowed in a technical forum. Ideals that are based off of regurgitation and no practical experience. ie Opinions. Opinions should be kept in the Lounge.

The 331 that you eloquently talk about is 4.125" bore x 3.100" stroke. This is 331 in^3 and that is the latest thing they are preaching.

Now, I worked for the Grandfather of 347, Mr. Ronnie Crawford. We built as many as 10 x 347's per week and the vast majority were with Wiseco pistons, cast cranks that were turned down 351W pieces and Crower Sportsman rods. Yes, 351W cranks widdled down. In 1992 - 1997 there were no cranks as you all have today. The point is, I have been around this junk for a long, LONG time.

For those of you who do not know who I am, I then went to work for the best Ford guys on the planet,"The Glidden's". The 3+ years I was there coupled with what I am still exposed today would boggle your mind. I saw more junk at Glidden's in 3 years than it would take the average guy 20 years to duplicate.

Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who wishes to talk about rod length or rods to stroke is in over their head. The way IT IS DONE on the high end is you know the stroke, you know what the piston C/H must be, and WHATEVER IS LEFT IS THE ROD LENGTH. If you put any more thought into than that you have wasted your time. The key to making power is the piston design.

Now if this guy wishes to speak with experience about pistons, then start a thread and let's go.

The folks who do not understand these engines basically are new breed types. They don't understand that the 400 SBC had a 5.565" rod from the factory with a 3.75" stroke. That is a 1.484 R:S for those keeping score at home. This was done in the 1960's, 1970's and into the 1980's with JUNK cast pistons. Funny how trucks, vans and passanger cars accumilated millions upon millions of miles with such a poor R:S ratio.

Then we have the most popular "performance" engine of all time, the BBC. Yes I am a SBF guy, but if you do not recognize this, then you are a fool. A 454 BBC was a 6.135" rod with a 4.00" stroke. That is a 1.534 R:S ratio. Boy, don't see GM fixing that problem either.

How about a 393 351W stroker? 5.95 rod and a 3.85 stroke for 1.546 R:S.

I can keep going.

This is classic misinformation and it leads to internet myths. These kinds of threads are where the mods should jump in and squelch the poor information. But when the mods don't understand this stuff themselves, then how can that happen?

Is there more side load with a 347 vs a CONVENTIONAL 331? Sure there is, don't be a fool, but can anyone in this room tell me how much side load is bad? What is the DELTA change in side load from a 4.030" x 3.25" x x5.400" with a conventional pin vs a 4.030" x 3.40" x 5.400" with an off set pin? And remember, the 400 SBC and the 454 BBC examples.

To continue with that, how many of you know that a 1.090" C/H piston has an off set pin? Not many I bet. Then when you using a support rail, when the oil ring fails, it is on YOU and NOT on the design.

If you have never done it, trust me you WILL fail as I failed the first 2 times I tried it back in 1993. But you know what? I learned from my mistakes and I fixed what I was doing wrong. I did not run to the internet and make false statements just to make myself look better.

If you have an engine that -16- in^3 smaller, then you are making less power. That is a fact. The only time to build a smaller engine is if you are racing in a class where a weight/in^3 break is in effect. Then sure, smaller ~may~ be better. But for the street, take the cubes.

That is why a 331 gets a bad rap, its not as good of engine.

Now you asked.......

IMHO, Opinions are for the Lounge.

Experience & factual data are what is needed in the technical areas.

If you allow opinions [such as the ring land on the 347] then that is what leads to misinformation. Talking R:S is for bench racing with Corona and has nothing to do with an engine, per se`. A short rod accelerates quicker, resists detonation better, fills the cylinder better, and all around is a better deal.

I am still searching for a vendor so I can sell a 357 in^3 in a 302 block. This would be an 1.040" to 1.050" C/H which is STILL BETTER than a SBC 434 piston which is a 1.000" C/H.

Magazines are comic books are nothing but ads. I have been there, I have been on that side, I know the crud that goes in there.

There are those of us who do it and those of us who read it.

I speak from first hand, experience.

Last edited by ScottHalliday; 08-11-2009 at 01:09 AM. Reason: Merge Post
Jay Allen is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-27-2009   #33 (permalink)
Joel5.0 is offline GT Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,027 Threads: 4
 Joel5.0's Country Flag  View Joel5.0's HomePage
Sabana Grande
Joel5.0 is on a distinguished road
Default

Sorry but I have to say it........ if YOU choose a 331 over a 347....... the only technically based excuse to do so is a "class restriction" or the obvious need to not be able to make more power.

If reliability or setup endurance is that critical..... find yourself a reputable builder (not assembler) or LEARN from real experience.

In REAL race oriented setups BTW..... engine endurance importance is nil ..... specially if you don't WIN to be noticed; regardless of your heritage or record. Does this mean a 347 cannot outlast a 331 on the street or track?......... ... regardless of what magazines print.
__________________
ACRONYMS:
LUK=Let Us Know, GL=Good Luck, LMK=Let Me Know, JIC=Just In Case, BTSTDTRT=Been There Seen That Done That Repaired That, YCYDYP=Your Car Your Dough Your Prerogative and the classic... DILLIGAS=Do I Look Like I Give A S***
1986 GT-X303 cam, 289 heads, 1.72, Holley 700cfm DP, RG 4+1 Trans.
Joel5.0 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-28-2009   #34 (permalink)
89coupe is offline SHELBY GT 350 Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,261 Threads: 6
 89coupe's Country Flag
Cartersville   Georgia
89coupe is on a distinguished road
Default

If they dont get it by now, they never will.

Theres two threads here, that has had a highly intelligent and experienced guy post on. Speaks volumes. Dang glad he knows something, since hes grinding the cam for my ride.
__________________
89 Coupe
347 in progress
89coupe is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-28-2009   #35 (permalink)
RLG34750
Guest


Posts: n/a Threads:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 89coupe View Post
If they dont get it by now, they never will.

Theres two threads here, that has had a highly intelligent and experienced guy post on. Speaks volumes. Dang glad he knows something, since hes grinding the cam for my ride.
i will agree with you on this one......

i'm just sitting back and enjoying the ride and learning something at the same time.....
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #36 (permalink)
Jay Allen is offline Apprentice


Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 66 Threads: 0
 Jay Allen's Country Flag
SE Michiagn   Michigan
Jay Allen is on a distinguished road
Default

I thought there would loads of questions and all we got are crickets chirping.
Jay Allen is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #37 (permalink)
RLG34750
Guest


Posts: n/a Threads:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Allen View Post
I thought there would loads of questions and all we got are crickets chirping.
I will agree with you on the lack of questions......

I think the problem possibly is some are afraid of being chastised for asking what could be perceived as "dumb" question....

Or really just don't know what to ask.......

In closing the only "dumb" question is the one thats not asked.....
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #38 (permalink)
Jay Allen is offline Apprentice


Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 66 Threads: 0
 Jay Allen's Country Flag
SE Michiagn   Michigan
Jay Allen is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLG34750 View Post
I think the problem possibly is some are afraid of being chastised for asking what could be perceived as "dumb" question....

Or really just don't know what to ask.......

In closing the only "dumb" question is the one thats not asked.....
Come on.......if that is the case, they would not 2 minutes with Billy! People need thicker skin. This is the internet.........If they want help and want LEARN, great. If they want warm showers with back rubs, then don't come to car tech sites.

And I agree, if you want to learn, then ask questions. Don't keep spewing crud just to sound like you are an authority.

NOTHING wrong with asking questions.

Everything wrong with answering questions when you don't know what you're answering.
Jay Allen is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #39 (permalink)
347Vert is offline Made Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 495 Threads: 17
 347Vert's Country Flag  View 347Vert's 10 photos
Benton Harbor   Michigan
347Vert is on a distinguished road
Default

Anyone research Ford's reasoning yet? It's not just to serve a simple nitch in the market, but is set on research and sound principles in building race motors. Which one of you is going to take these arguments to Ford Racing professionals, and challenge their reasoning? Let me know when you do and how far you get. An Official Amen to my fellow Mustang Brothers.......many I hope I can say in CHRIST.
__________________
1994 Vert with 347, all forged rotating assembly with 5.315 H-beam rods, windaged, girdled, Custom FTI cam, 205 AFR's, 1 3/4" LT, ported EFI Vic Jr. Spyder intake, #42 lbs injectors, BBK 75mm TB, 76mm C&L


Trouble filling the void with enough speed or power? - take GOD for a test drive


"You have made us for yourself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it rests in you." - St Augustine
347Vert is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #40 (permalink)
Jay Allen is offline Apprentice


Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 66 Threads: 0
 Jay Allen's Country Flag
SE Michiagn   Michigan
Jay Allen is on a distinguished road
Default

Its called parts laying around turned into revenue.

It has NOTHING to do with rod length! LOL

Its all about the dollar.

I know most of those cats anyways. Used to race with Brian Wolfe.
Jay Allen is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #41 (permalink)
Joel5.0 is offline GT Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,027 Threads: 4
 Joel5.0's Country Flag  View Joel5.0's HomePage
Sabana Grande
Joel5.0 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 347Vert View Post
Anyone research Ford's reasoning yet? It's not just to serve a simple nitch in the market, but is set on research and sound principles in building race motors. Which one of you is going to take these arguments to Ford Racing professionals, and challenge their reasoning? Let me know when you do and how far you get. An Official Amen to my fellow Mustang Brothers.......many I hope I can say in CHRIST.
So it doesn't address a market niche?..... did you miss to read the explanation regarding that 331 combo's "driving force?..... directly from that magazine article....

Quote:
The driving force behind developing this engine combination was to capture the legend of classic small-block performance of the past, as exemplified by machines like the AC Cobras or Boss Mustangs. The reality far surpasses the fable of muscle-era powerplants. No small-block powering production or specialty cars back in the '60s or early '70s made this kind of power. Probably few true race small-block engines did, either, and certainly not with the broadly useable and streetable powerband this new Windsor stroker delivers. What Ford accomplished was taking a mythological creature from the past and making it all too real in the present day. Want a turnkey 530hp, 7,200-rpm small-block for your Cobra kit, street Mustang, or retro-rod Falcon?
If the above doesn't describe a market niche...... what does?

Furthermore (and I'm keeping it narrowed down to FRPP for a reason)..... so Ford doesn't build 347 race engine options?..... what about M-6007-Z347 or M-6007-347NST? ..... is a 50+ HP deficit when compared to the M-6007-Z331P of that article a problem (even though it made 530HP@7200 RPM in the article)? Let's break the combos down with the limited information available:

347
Boss 302 block, 4.030" bore x 3.400" stroke, CR: 9.7:1, M-6049-Z304DA inline valve heads 204cc intake 85cc exhaust "as cast" heads 63cc combustion chamber, HR camshaft .580" lift intake .602" exhaust, duration at .050" is 232/240 degrees, internally balanced.
331
Boss 302 block, 4.125" bore x 3.100" stroke, CR: 12.0:1, M-6049-Z304DA inline valve heads 204cc intake 85cc exhaust "as cast" heads fully CNC-ported unknown cc combustion chamber, SFT camshaft .565" lift intake .584" exhaust, duration at .050" is 244/252 degrees, internally balanced.
What would happen if you take door 347 and make a few changes based on the highlighted items alone?....
__________________
ACRONYMS:
LUK=Let Us Know, GL=Good Luck, LMK=Let Me Know, JIC=Just In Case, BTSTDTRT=Been There Seen That Done That Repaired That, YCYDYP=Your Car Your Dough Your Prerogative and the classic... DILLIGAS=Do I Look Like I Give A S***
1986 GT-X303 cam, 289 heads, 1.72, Holley 700cfm DP, RG 4+1 Trans.
Joel5.0 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #42 (permalink)
89coupe is offline SHELBY GT 350 Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,261 Threads: 6
 89coupe's Country Flag
Cartersville   Georgia
89coupe is on a distinguished road
Default

I know, I know, I know

The 347s low compression ratio alone should tell you something. Thats power left on the table.

Bump that up 2 points, and its a different ball game. Change the cam for the extra points in compression, now where talking.

331 is no longer ahead on the HP board.
__________________
89 Coupe
347 in progress
89coupe is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #43 (permalink)
Old man is offline PONY Member


Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 619 Threads: 41
 Old man's Country Flag
Macon   Georgia
Old man is on a distinguished road
Default

The level of maturity and humility in a debate here rivals that of congress. :hihi:
Old man is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #44 (permalink)
RLG34750
Guest


Posts: n/a Threads:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 89coupe View Post
I know, I know, I know

The 347s low compression ratio alone should tell you something. Thats power left on the table.

Bump that up 2 points, and its a different ball game. Change the cam for the extra points in compression, now where talking.

331 is no longer ahead on the HP board.
so do i.....

the comparison of the two engine shown in joel's post is like comparing apples to oranges.....

give the 347 a equal cam and compression .....

it would be the hands down winner with regards to performance......
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Unread 07-29-2009   #45 (permalink)
Joel5.0 is offline GT Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,027 Threads: 4
 Joel5.0's Country Flag  View Joel5.0's HomePage
Sabana Grande
Joel5.0 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old man View Post
The level of maturity and humility in a debate here rivals that of congress. :hihi:
And that has to do with the topic? ... good use of "Argumentum ad hominem" BTW....
__________________
ACRONYMS:
LUK=Let Us Know, GL=Good Luck, LMK=Let Me Know, JIC=Just In Case, BTSTDTRT=Been There Seen That Done That Repaired That, YCYDYP=Your Car Your Dough Your Prerogative and the classic... DILLIGAS=Do I Look Like I Give A S***
1986 GT-X303 cam, 289 heads, 1.72, Holley 700cfm DP, RG 4+1 Trans.
Joel5.0 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread   Post New Thread

Tags
331, 347, stroker



Thread Tools



Mustang Photos
Mustang Links    Top Sites    RSS    Link To Us    Add to Favorites    Archive    Terms of Use    Site Rules    Privacy    Contact    Sponsors    Advertise   
AllFordMustangs is not affiliated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company. ©Copyright 2002-2011 All Auto Enthusiasts Network

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171