SpeedTalk Store - Opinion Columns

383 chevy long rod vs short rod

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby swatson454 » Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:31 am

I had a Scat 3.75 x 5.7 assembly that hit the cam with a .375 lobe. The skirts hit the crank too #-o
Live in such a way that those who know you but don't know God will come to know God because they know you.
swatson454
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1767
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:06 pm
Location: Dripping Springs, Texas

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby JoePorting » Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:53 am

Call up Eagle tech support. They'd have a better idea about any limitations to your idea.
Joe Facciano
JoePorting
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1741
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 2:16 pm
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby GARY C » Wed Aug 14, 2013 9:01 am

With the low cost of a Scat 4340 I beam being only $260.00 it is not worth trying to upgrade a stock rod.

http://www.jegs.com/i/Scat/942/36000/10 ... tId=761555
GARY C
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1368
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 9:58 pm

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby rfoll » Wed Aug 14, 2013 10:27 am

I think it all depends on how you feel about buying new pistons.
So much to do, so little time...
rfoll
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 996
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: St. Helens, OR

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby Wolfplace » Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:01 pm

firebuick wrote:thank you for reply i plan on using a eagle rod also and a eagle 3.75 crank internaly balance

my cam is a old comp cam 294s 248/248 at .050 525/525 lift whit 1.6 roller

my piston are flat top forge srp 40 over

head are edelbrock performer rpm 185 cc whit 70 cc chamber

this is mainly for the street whit a few 1/8 miles drag

yes i plan on balancing rotating



Internal balance with a 5.565 rod,,,,
Good luck with that :wink:
Mike
Lewis Racing Engines
4axis CNC block machining


A few of the cars I have driven & owned
A tour of my shop
The Dyno
And a few pics of the gang

"Life is tough. Life is even tougher if you're stupid"
John Wayne
User avatar
Wolfplace
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 3185
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:39 pm
Location: Mendocino County, Northern CA

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby pdq67 » Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:04 pm

Mike,

Please elaborate more here about internally balancing a 400 short-rod engine.

Thanks,

pdq67
pdq67
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 2629
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby Wolfplace » Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:11 pm

pdq67 wrote:Mike,

Please elaborate more here about internally balancing a 400 short-rod engine.

Thanks,

pdq67


Pretty simple really
How many stock 400's do your see that are internally balanced?
There is a reason GM hung all that weight on the damper & flywheel same as a 454,
Not enough room for a counterweight without the piston hitting it,,
Unless you want to spend a fortune on Tungsten of course,,
Mike
Lewis Racing Engines
4axis CNC block machining


A few of the cars I have driven & owned
A tour of my shop
The Dyno
And a few pics of the gang

"Life is tough. Life is even tougher if you're stupid"
John Wayne
User avatar
Wolfplace
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 3185
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:39 pm
Location: Mendocino County, Northern CA

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby pdq67 » Wed Aug 14, 2013 1:34 pm

Thanks for the come back.

In other words, you don't have to cam-cut the counter-weights for piston shirt clearance.

Just the added expense of installing enough heavi-metal to internally balance it.

pdq67
pdq67
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 2629
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby ProPower engines » Wed Aug 14, 2013 2:50 pm

Stay away from that eagle crap. Hard and costly to balance.
Go with the scat stuff and use the 6" rod combo because you can internal balance them easy with most pistons.

The 5.7 rod crank is more costly to balance with lighter pistons.
You can also get a " No Holes Balance" direct from scat with a complete rotating assembly at a very reasonable extra charge but the piston choice is what determines the balancing cost. Ligher pistons available today make some cranks harder to balance and there fore more costly as they were designed for a 1850ish Gram bob weight, When you get to 1700 or less most times metal has to be added which costs more money.
As for the power difference unless you dyno the engine back to back with the different rod lengths you would not see much seat of the pants difference but it will last longer and make more on top with the longer rod as long as you have decent heads to feed the engine,
JMO
Real Race Cars Don't Have Doors
ProPower engines
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 5191
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:16 pm
Location: VICTORIA BC CANADA

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby Cutlassefi » Wed Aug 14, 2013 3:07 pm

ProPower engines wrote:Lighter pistons available today make some cranks harder to balance and there fore more costly as they were designed for a 1850ish Gram bob weight, When you get to 1700 or less most times metal has to be added which costs more money.
JMO


You have that backwards. A lighter bobweight will need the counterweights cut or drilled. A heavier bobweight might require heavy metal/tungsten.

And although I prefer Scat as well, the Eagle stuff has gotten much better. I've used a bunch of their Olds H-beams lately with no issues.
Engine Builder, Accel, AEM, Erson and Lunati Dealer
Cutlassefi
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 8:17 am

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby DaveMcLain » Wed Aug 14, 2013 3:22 pm

ProPower engines wrote:Stay away from that eagle crap. Hard and costly to balance.
Go with the scat stuff and use the 6" rod combo because you can internal balance them easy with most pistons.



Eagle cranks might be wacky in some ways but I've found that their stuff is usually very easy to balance, Scat is generally harder or at least more unpredictable.



http://www.the351cforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=203
DaveMcLain
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1144
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:57 am

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby lorax » Wed Aug 14, 2013 3:25 pm

6sally6 wrote:Is there a "Chevy-type"(non custom made) rod that's a little shorter than 6" but longer thanstd 350 rod?
6sally6

5.850 SBC rods are as common as dirt.
lorax
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1691
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:00 am

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby dr5375 » Wed Aug 14, 2013 6:15 pm

I did almost the same thing many years ago (1978). 377 (400 block, 350 crank and rods ) broke crank, changed to 400 crank and 5.565 chevy rods with good bolts. Shift point dropped from 7500 to 7000 but no clearance issues with standard base circle cam (Comp Cam.650 lift, 280 @ .050) or pistons (BRC). The car was much quicker with the increased torque. Had to change from 6.50 to 5.86 rear to use it. I never had any problems with rotating assembly even though it was externally balanced. I have ran several externally balanced engines over the years with no issues at all.
dr5375
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 6:25 pm

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby rubberweasel » Wed Aug 14, 2013 6:25 pm

Is there a stock engine that uses 5.85 rods?
rubberweasel
Member
Member
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:58 pm

Re: 383 chevy long rod vs short rod

Postby wyrmrider » Wed Aug 14, 2013 9:27 pm

there are a lot more piston choices at reasonable prices for 5.7 or 6" rods
Think ahead
wyrmrider
Guru
Guru
 
Posts: 1487
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:52 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Engine Tech

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], BOOT, engineguyBill, Google [Bot], Greens Nice, jmarkaudio, mikes, MSNbot Media, woody b and 25 guests