never saw that. I would think the aluminum blocks available now would make that a lot easier to dial in. **** V-4's have a reputation as a torquey engine but run out of steam on the high revs. the odd fire crank causes some weird issues I guess. yeah, but bike motors have come a LONG way in the last 20 years. 1000cc's was making just over 100hp back then now they are making like 170hp.... stock isn't an L99 the same bore and stroke as a gen 1 265?? motor would use a crank trigger ignition regardless of size.
If i could hi-jack this topic; It fascinates me mostly because of MPG reasons while still having the benefits of the SBC's easy maintenance and parts availability, familiarity, ability to bolt to most gm transmissions etc. 1) How small can you go while using and ONLY using stock parts and WITHOUT doing any "freaky" stuff like enlargening bearings etc? In other words, how small can you go with only bolt-on parts/procedures. 2) Please discuss the process/procedure of sleeving: a) the procedure---what's involved. b) the approximate prices. Can i do this at home? 3) Please discuss what's involved in de-activating some/4 of the cylinders: Can we just take out the pushrods and sparkplugs of 4 appropriate cylinders and it will work? We would have to figure out a way to keep the lifters from flying out, but that's probably not too hard?
if you want an easily maintained smaller sbc, you could use a 4.3l v6. same engine -2 cyl. with probably better economy than a small cube v8. I don't see this small cube v8 being anything like economical. thing would have to rev to the moon to make power. this will be a 10k rpm engine I'm guessing.
There was a Prefect 4dr g***er around here in that time period that would just scream near 10 Gs. It ran a de-stroked 265. Coming from a V8 g***er, It's a sound that you will never forget. Indy is one thing. Going through the gears on a 1/4 mile drag strip is another.
OK, I'm not trying to be a ****, at least this time. I don't understand what would be gained. The fours that are running in the midgets now are making about what you could expect out of the same size V8 aren't they? Would there be more tourque? Less money? 'splain me. BTW, if you ever get the chance to go to the Chili Bowl in Tulsa, go! Great show!!
Make no mistake, it's all about weight, let history be your guide. Back in the early 70s little ol' 130 c.i. VWs literaly ran the Chevy2s/Sescos off the track and into oblivion. Why?--1. Low C/G 2. low overall weight. While the heavyweight Chevy2/ Sesco guys were busy getting whoa'd up for the turns, the V-dubs drove right on by. Within a year or two you could'nt find a Chevy2 or Sesco within 10 miles of a midget race.
I don't really know what's to gain honestly. it's a thought to try something different which is one of the reasons midgets are great open wheel cars, you can have 25 cars show up at a race and have 10+ different kinds of engines. I've run everything from an a stock quad 4 in a midget to a a 130vw, to a 151 vw. weight is HUGE! I agree. was thinking this idea would be geared toward the big heavy banked tracks. thompson speedway near me is 5/8ths with 26 degrees of banking. feel like your going to fall off during a red flag! rule books and politics are still what determines what's fast in a midget. once you find a winning combo they restrict you're combo.
OK, the next questions are why would you and yes you can.............we can tease about 500 horses outta the little 4's and v-6's, weight is also a issue,,,,,,,,,,,
http://bangshift.com/blog/The-Parting-Shift-The-12000-RPM-Launcing-Nova.html listen to the music this 12 grand 276 incher makes
you can make 500hp out of 195 cube stock block motor?? or out of 166 cube race block?? alchy injected, not blown I'd like to see that dyno sheet.
making the bore smaller will shroud the valves and makes it so you have to use small valves. What you should do is leave the bore around 4.00 and reduce the stroke to 1.97 or so (2.00 makes it 201ci) to get you at 198ci. Use some good aluminum heads with LOTS OF COMPRESSION and alchohol. Then lighten EVERYTHING and use good valvetrain. If you work with a cam grinder and get a cam that works with that combo and you should have a motor with big power and 10,000 plus RPMs naturally aspirated. With forced induction, less compression and rpms (different cam) you should find 1000hp. And ballancing the f#*k out of everything (including the cam) goes without saying
<http://www.moyermade.com/chevyV8.html> this guy prolly has it covered.. about as small as you could go,, maybe?
Awww, just fork over the $30k for a Mopar 4 banger Hemi like what Poteet runs in his Blowfish Barracuda Or run a stroked Subaru boxer motor, that would be fun to try out for the hell of it...or an aluminum block 170 slant 6? You could fill it with stock forged crank and rods (or aftermarket billet crank and I think BB Mopar H-Beam rods can be trimmed to fit), with BB Mopar aftermarket aluminum roller rockers and some other goodies like a main girdle and custom intake you can get them to spin 9k rpm's...
My 1933 Ford Vicky LSR car runs E/CGALT I have a 255 cu in SBC. We used a 305 Block, 20 over bore, splayed 4 bolt main caps, bottom end girdle, custom de stroked crank, all balanced forges internals. Custom 1 off 18 degree Brodix heads, notched cylinders so big valves did not hit, Shaft Rockers, etc,,, NA motor with 1 carb (850 quick fuel) originally made 2 HP per cube, and set 3 Standing Mile Land Speed Records in cl***. Now with some R and D should be at or just over 600 HP and in new 53 Stude we are building, hope to break the exisiting 217mph record,,, but who knows,,, have to break 200 first at Loring in July/Aug 2010. Charles
No WAY you're gonna get a V8 combo light enough to be compe***ive in a midget... UNLESS you've got a friend on an F1 team. (2.4L, 700+ hp normally aspirated...at 19000 rpm) BTW, Honda beat this horse way past death with the NS500...
Some one mentioned the 500 cc Moto Guzzi racing V8. Looks like this,DOHC,78 hp from 30 cubic inches in 1957
And if you can get your hands on one, you will NEVER need ****** again... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TG7f2imRQo&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLB2799CC792B6F7AF
i asked this question to my friend Dave Lewis who wrote the "small block chevy interchange manual" this is his reply; The smallest Small Block is easily built using a 1981 267 block with a 3.50 Bore, a large journal 3.00 inch stroke crank from a 1969 Z28 (302), and the 5.940 length rods from a 1995 4.3L V-8 (265 cubic inch engine). The pistons come right to the top because the pin height of the 267 pistons is the same as the 350, 305, 267, & that 265 4.3 engine that uses the odd length rod. The longer STOCK GM rod is light powdered metal but since this little small block from STOCK parts only displaces 231 cubic inches or 3.8L, there is no problem. That longer rod is a gem... I have built several engines using that long rod.
What is the rod journal ID with the 4.3L V8 rods? Could the crank's rod journals be offset ground to decrease the stroke further (like with a 2.100" journal offset ground to 2.00" and using small journal rods)? Steve
i had Dave read your question and this is what he wrote back;"The Chevrolet Small Block 5.940 length connecting rods were only available in the 265 cubic inch (4.3 L) reverse-flow tuned port Caprice engines starting in 1995. They are large journal which is why I used the steel 3 inch stroke large journal crank with them. I used TRW 2256 flat-top forged pistons to build 302 cubic inches with 58cc fast burn GM Corvette Aluminum heads. The 2256 number is a 350 piston. The longer rod allows this piston/pin height combo to travel just to the top of the bore. I did not want 302 Pistons with a big dome providing a compression ratio beyond what today's pump gas could handle. The 5.940 rods are available as service parts. I got my last set mail order from Texas. You could just build a 265 cubic inch (4.3) using the nodular Iron crank from the 1995 reverse-flow engine in a 1986 and newer 305 one-piece rear main seal block if you bore the 305 .014 to bring the bore size up to 3.75. Interchange started getting harder when GM changed the small block rear main seal design from 2 section inside the main cap to a single section external appliance. I like the idea of using small journal parts too but why bother searching junk yards for really old stuff with short strokes when Storm Crankshaft has so many crankshafts on hand and ready to run for very reasonable prices. A 1975 262 cubic Inch crank with a 3.10 stroke can be ground-down to use a small journal rod while t******* it to a true 3.00 stroke... It is good for using old-style 283 cubic inch parts in a more modern block. Interchanging parts to make your own custom combination Small Block is fun!"
The Jalopy Journal
