Don't over think it. If you want and can afford a stroker for your cruiser then just do it. It's fine with smaller heads for your purpose. You could even use the stock cam but a little bigger one would drive very well and add a bit of power everywhere with that combo.

 

First generation Lightings have 351w engines with GT40 heads and intake. They were decently peppy back in the day. Hey....they would smoke a 454 SS Silverado back then...lol.

 

Power curve shifts to the left and up slightly

 

The stroker kit will add torque and depending on what cam you put in it you will gain more torque and some HP in the process. No question about doing the stroker. Only question is if you install a cam that will work best with the heads and intake staying the same or install a cam that is designed to work best when you eventually upgrade the heads and intake.

 

You’ll make a little bit more but….to do all that work and not slap some 11R heads and a decent cam in it makes no sense at all.

 

Thank you for the replies.



Noted. This is hypothetical, but I think that the reason is pretty well defined above.

 

If durability is one of your goals, you need to pay attention to the rod to stroke ratio. There's a reason why Ford engineered the ratio in the stock 5.0L arrangement. If a stroker is in your future, the 331 displacement is a good choice because of the favorable rod to stroke ratio will still lend itself to high RPM durability. The 347 on the other hand, has some concerns associated with it, but if high RPM is not a major requirement then you could make one live on the street for a long while. Either way, a finely balanced stock stroke 5.0L with a good set of heads and the right cam will make a ton of power so it's not necessary to stroke anything. I would focus on a good set of heads if finances support that.

 

Honestly, since discovering the world of 5.0 based strokers 20 something years ago, 331 was the one I was insterested in. Back in the day it seemed like a good balance for performance and duriability out of this platform, and the bigger stroker had other issues. IIRC oil control was a big one. Only reason for throwing the 347 into the mix is that it seems like everone says don't bother with the 331 because they cost the same and the 347's issues have been solved.

Right now finances don't support any performance endeavors on this. When finances support playing with anything, this project is secondary or tertiary. I have other projects I have got to get something accomplished on before I can spend play money on this. That said if this breaks, it becomes a priority to fix it. If I'm fixing it why not spend a little extra to upgrade? That doesn't mean I can go wild and buy/build a whole new engine though.

A build will happen eventually, but can't right now. This is exploring a hypothetical scenario where the bottom end needs to be repaired or replaced, but the rest of the engine is good. It's just as likely that the top end could go bad and the bottom be good, but I didn't really need to ask about that one. Most likely thing to happen is that it runs fine for years until I'm able to replace it with a built engine.

 

For what it's worth, I just put together a 5.0L stock stroke SBF for my '00 Merc that should produce around 400 hp. Just the typical formula that's been proven to work on these engines, which the OEM equipped with relatively anemic flowing parts. Upgraded heads, cam, intake, and exhaust will easily exceed 1 hp/cubic inch even in an unoptimized combination.

 

For what it's worth, I just put together a 5.0L stock stroke SBF for my '00 Merc...

It's possible I'll go back 5.0L as well, but I'm Interested in strokers too. Thats something I'll decide when the time comes. Had a question about stroker and stock heads, won't learn anything without asking.

 

YES, putting together a stroker and then capping it with stock heads and camshaft will "choke the engine".
So what? Those of us who have a 347 with AFR 165 heads and GT40 intake are "choking the engine" according to those who believe every single non stock rebuild needs to be an all out HP effort.
Whatever.
If you're willing and able to put together a 331/347 shortblock, do it. The extra torque will make the car loads more fun. When money allows, swap out heads and cam and make it even more fun. For that matter, with it being a cruise machine, you may never want to drop larger heads on it.
Keep in mind that you may or may not "get away" with the stock computer and mass air meter with the extra cubes. You will likely need a way to tune or have it tuned.

 

Isn’t a stock 5.0 with stock heads and intake “choking” the engine too? Build what you can, when you can, and enjoy it. If that means a lower end rebuild with the plans to upgrade later so be it. That does however, mean that you are doing a fair amount of work twice.

 

As stated,
Save up your money and get the stroker kit. You won’t regret it.
Then you’ll have a good base to throw parts at in the future

 

YES, putting together a stroker and then capping it with stock heads and camshaft will "choke the engine".
So what? Those of us who have a 347 with AFR 165 heads and GT40 intake are "choking the engine" according to those who believe every single non stock rebuild needs to be an all out HP effort.
Whatever.
If you're willing and able to put together a 331/347 shortblock, do it. The extra torque will make the car loads more fun. When money allows, swap out heads and cam and make it even more fun. For that matter, with it being a cruise machine, you may never want to drop larger heads on it.
Keep in mind that you may or may not "get away" with the stock computer and mass air meter with the extra cubes. You will likely need a way to tune or have it tuned.

So basically, what I'm getting from these replies is that it would be worth it. It will "choke the engine", but still have some gain over a stock bottom end and get even better results when/if I upgrade other parts in the future.

Yeah, this thing probably needs to be tuned anyway, so that isn't really an issue. I've also toyed with the idea of, once I get some of those other projects complete and can start with performance on this thing, possibly moving from a factory EFI to a Holley Terminator system. I've got a Sniper on a 360 in one of the other projects (68 F-100 4x4) and like it. It still needs tuning, but works great. Got to get the brakes right so it's roadworth and I can do that.

Honestly, that 360 is probably going to need major work before this 5.0L, near I can tell the bottom end has never been touched and it's 50+ years old with actual miles unknown. Dad owned the truck since the early 80s, got it from his step dad, and guestimates it to be well over 300k.

That does however, mean that you are doing a fair amount of work twice.

What's that saying? We do it right, because we do it twice. I don't mind doing it a few times over the years. I just hate doing it, only to turn around and have to do it again almost immediately.

Please keep you mind out of the gutter, that "it" is a completely different story.

 

So basically, what I'm getting from these replies is that it would be worth it. It will "choke the engine", but still have some gain over a stock bottom end and get even better results when/if I upgrade other parts in the future.

It might be just right for what you want out of it too.....

 

If you're going to go with a stroker and looking for reliability, a smaller stroker such as a 331 would be ideal. It is much less aggressive on the cylinder walls and block. 347s tend to wear out quicker by design. That being said while you would benefit more with a cam and heads, you would still have noticeable gains in hp and torque with the same top end.

 

I want to reframe some of the idea’s people are trying to make.

stock 302 with quality a H/C/I is going to outperform 331 with gt40 stuff.
that’s the best way I can put it.
By all means, build a 331 stroker with gt40s it’ll still be fun I’m sure.

 

I want to reframe some of the idea’s people are trying to make.

stock 302 with quality a H/C/I is going to outperform 331 with gt40 stuff.
that’s the best way I can put it.

Out perform it how?

 

Financially, a stroker kit is not that much more expensive than rebuilding a stock bottom end. It's a good chunk of change, but by the time you consider pistons to match the overbore, machine work and balancing on the rotating assembly, new bearings, etc... it evens out.

No. The cost is much higher. You have the cost of a crank, rods, balancer, and flywheel. How is that evening out?

 

There is only one person in this thread telling you not to do the stroker. That should tell you what to do

 

Whatever you do, power ain't cheap, so it's probably prudent to start saving regardless of whether you decide to stroke or not.

 

You might be surprised on what a person with years upon years of doing this **** will say.

At that time, that guy had atleast 30 years doing this ****. He was well known and good at it. I don't know if he still is doing it or if they closed up shop. This really is a hypothetical, the engine is high miles but running good. The high miles and unknown history before I got it makes me wonder about the bottom end, but it probably has a lot of life left.

Whatever you do, power ain't cheap, so it's probably prudent to start saving regardless of whether you decide to stroke or not.

Oh I'm saving, also have other options to fund the work if needed, but this isn't at the top of the list for spending. Got a F-100 that is likely going to need a lot of work before this truck. I am also going to start clearing land to build a shop on my property in the next year or two and that's going to cost quite a bit. Depending on how things go at work it's also possible for my cashflow to improve nicely in a couple of years which will affect everything.

 

Ok I understand. i would bring all your parts you currently have to the local reputable engine builder then and see what he says before buying a stroker kit. You might be surprised on what a person with years upon years of doing this **** will say.

You'd be surprised on how much money you'll save in the long run.

If OP can save ~1000 by sticking with a 302/306 then entry level pedestal heads and a better intake, even if its a exploder manifold with a ported lower would be better. Throw some roller rockers on it when money allows and youre set. I was making the assumption that OP already did this research (based on the original post). If OP doesnt have a quote from a shop, then yeah, i agree this should be the first step.

 

I was making the assumption that OP already did this research (based on the original post). If OP doesnt have a quote from a shop, then yeah, i agree this should be the first step.

I've said from the beginning that this is a hypothetical situation. That means that it hasn't happened, but what if. I set the scenario as if machine work was needed to fix crank and rods, and the block needed to be bored to clean up cylinders. Of course it it happens the first thing to do is access the damage, see what needs to be done, then make a plan from there.

I did borsecope the engine when I got it, at that time the cylinder walls looked good, definitely not like the 180k+ miles it had. It's not the 5.0L Explorer engine I've been able to say that about either. Most likely if I do have to go into the bottom end I'll get away with a refresh, new rings and bearings and rock on until I can build.

The ideal (and intent) is after I have my shop built to start collecting parts and build a complete engine to swap in. I can't help but think about the what ifs though.

 

It's there something wrong that makes you think you'll need to rebuild it? Ive got an explorer motor in my truck with 180k on it. Compression and leak down are fine, no oil burning. I just regasketed it. Now it's got a blower. If you don't have any issues the mileage doesn't mean it needs a rebuild soon if it had the oil changed. Besides that, explorer motors in stock form don't see the abuse a mustang engine sees.

 

It's there something wrong that makes you think you'll need to rebuild it? Ive got an explorer motor in my truck with 180k on it. Compression and leak down are fine, no oil burning. I just regasketed it. Now it's got a blower. If you don't have any issues the mileage doesn't mean it needs a rebuild soon if it had the oil changed. Besides that, explorer motors in stock form don't see the abuse a mustang engine sees.

See:

This really is a hypothetical, the engine is high miles but running good. The high miles and unknown history before I got it makes me wonder about the bottom end, but it probably has a lot of life left.

I can't help but think about the what ifs though.

 

If you don't have problems right now, check the health with a leak down test. If it comes back good you're hypothetical didn't apply to your engine and the money is better spent on HCI. I misunderstood your original post. If the motor comes back bad then check pricing before committing to a stroker

 

If it’s an Explorer engine, I can attest to the fact that even after the 150K I put on mine (Mountaineer), the engine did not leak, had power everywhere just as it was when new and didn’t burn oil. In fact it ran like a champ despite being ragged on all the time and did not need to be torn down at all, it was just my insatiable need for speed that resulted in it coming out and getting seriously upgraded.

The cylinder walls and piston skirts looked perfect, so the walls were cleaned up with a hone, some forged slugs went in, file fit rings, new bearings and all the upgrades needed to reliably hike the power output up to over 400 hp. Anyway, as long as the oil was changed regularly I have never seen a late model 302 show any significant wear anywhere.

 

if its still running, leave it alone until you have to do something. Since its just a cruiser it will be fine. no point on spending $2000+ on 25ftlbs. maybe more.