Originally Posted by
3door clone
Hi Stroker, did you use the std 2.8 or 2.9 rods? you said you reamed out the small end to make it a fully floating set up but the std 2.8/2.9 rods doesn't run any bushing as it's press fit did you bush the rod or just leave it unbushed? someone also mentioned using rods from a small block 302 v8 which I think needs narrowing of the width to fit but not sure of its length compared to std rods, with the 3.3 pistons they already have a oval bowl in them so compression should not be excessive, the bowls are 0.090thou but as they are oval compression should not be too low especially if the head bowl is left alone, read up on your thread on fueling and found it very intresting, I to exposed the allen key bolt under the WUR and when mine was set up it ranged from 14-1 @ 2k to 11-1 @ 6.2k so a bit rich through out the rev range but not engine destroying, did you get any power figures while on the rollers? mine is a 3.1cc with a 74mm stroke(2.9 offset ground) and 95mm bore and a piper BP285 cam, power recorded was 195bhp @ 5600 and 210 ft lb of torque @ 3400.
Std 2.8 rods. No bushing, just have to give the gudgeon a bit of extra clearance when steel on steel so I'm told. Anyway seems to be working.
Ford SB rods are shorter than the cologne by 0.050" and yes they have to be narrowed along with the bearing. I don't think there is any advantage in using the standard Ford SB rod. The standard cologne rods with ARP rod bolts are said to be good to 6500rpm and with the much lighter stroker pistons they should be good for a bit more.
What sort of compression are you looking for? N/A you'd be wanting to run it fairly high especially with the cam your running.
The power figures for my engine were on the last page of the link I posted. Bare in mind that the figures were taken at the wheels not the flywheel.
Wow 11.1AFR, my motor would be absolutely choking at that mixture. Anything richer the 12.8AFR and my motor starts dropping HP like a stone.
Something that I find quite interesting is my motors peak torque seems to be at a much higher rpm than what I was expecting from my 270 degree cam@4000rpm.
I can't help thinking that the K-Jet control pressure is holding my engine back and controlling my whole torque curve.
