|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: JohnRR]
#1265110
07/11/12 11:17 AM
07/11/12 11:17 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 185
east bay ca
torqueaddict
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 185
east bay ca
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I am really debating on what I am gonna do. I already have most of the components for the 4.15 stroke. .................... If I get the refund ..................I really dont know what to do.
If they WILL give you a refund and NOT a credit you may have a choice.
A few more cubes isn't worth the stress. Build what you have and learn from it for the next shortblock. 
I think your right but I am just really upset about how hughes has treated me and acted as if it were my fault. They will refund me at a 400 dollar restocking fee, that means I am only gonna get around 1600 back. If I keep the it I have to pay them 200 dollars for them to send me the correct pistons and 250 to balance it from my local machine shop. Or I can take my money and go to 440source. If I go to 440source at least I can get a custom kit that works put of the box.
Did you tell Hughes exactly what you were looking for? Did they offer you, or tell you, that there was a dish piston option?
I've had my share of issues with Dave , but from reading your posts on this whole build subject I really don't think Hughes is totally at fault here.
Do you really think that a cheap charlies chinese junk stroker kit, from anyone, is going to be good to go out of the box ?  ...
Yes I was clear as day in terms of what I wanted from hughes. The pistons needed to give me the right compression were not a regular item for them. They had to order them, 440source a more diverse piston selection. Rather than tell me hey we dont have the parts you need sir. They sold me a kit that was not good for a pumped gas street car. Thats what happened.
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: torqueaddict]
#1265111
07/11/12 12:38 PM
07/11/12 12:38 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Yes I was clear as day in terms of what I wanted from hughes. The pistons needed to give me the right compression were not a regular item for them. They had to order them, 440source a more diverse piston selection. Rather than tell me hey we dont have the parts you need sir. They sold me a kit that was not good for a pumped gas street car. Thats what happened.
Did they tell you that about the pistons up front or did this info come out AFTER you found out yourr compression was going to be too high ??
Oh , by the by , We built a 12.2 compression 470" engine that ran on 91 octane fuel ... but that's over and above a cheap charlies discount chinese junk build budget ...
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: torqueaddict]
#1265115
07/11/12 03:20 PM
07/11/12 03:20 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
If I were to use the original pistons it would be 11.5, if I get the new pistons it would be 10.5 If I get the big cam I will end up spending alot of money on making my stealth heads useable. New springs retainers and locks the whole sort. I dont really want that radical a cam anyway. I kinda want a sleeper for my car. I really want to surprise people.
Oh, so you are HOPING the heads are going to be ready to run out of the box ???
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: torqueaddict]
#1265116
07/11/12 03:21 PM
07/11/12 03:21 PM
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 270
Washington, IL
Hughes
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 270
Washington, IL
|
Anthony, You are not telling these guys the entire story. The stroker kit I sold you would have ended up being approximatley 11.3:1 compression ratio. A 496 cubic inch stroker, along with a set of 85cc Stealth heads and our HEH5055Bl cam would net out at approximately 185 pounds of cranking cylinder pressure. This will easily run on pump gas without any detonation. Now, because of peer pressure from people who have nothing invested in your car (money like you or reputation like me)you are afraid to build anything over 10 or 10.5:1. I have explained to you multiple times in a calm and respectful manner, that cranking cylinder pressure is what you really care about, not just the compression ratio. 2 weeks ago you told me that you wanted pistons that would give you closer to 10.5:1 no matter what. I gave in and agreed to take back the pistons you have and get you a set of new pistons with the dish in them you want. I DID tell you that they would cost more and that this would require balancing the new pistons and then making up a new bobweight and balaning the crank. You agreed to all of this. Now, the pistons are here and you are getting cold feet again about the compression and you don't want to pay for the pistons or the freight etc... I understand how frustrating this is for you which is why I have spent, literally, hours on the phone with you teaching and explaining how I helped you choose the parts. This is the difference between us and someplace like Summit or Jegs where you just order parts online and hope it all works. There are a lot of good reputable engine builders out there who can confirm that 185psi cranking cylinder pressure will work fine for you. JohnRR is giving you good advice. Put it together and enjoy it. Now, if your whole problem is that you have changed your mind and now want a 4.250" stroke instead of a 4.150 stroke...that is another story. We also spent a lot of time discussing that issue. Like JohnRR said, there really is no difference on a build like yours. With the heads flowing no more than they are and the pump gas compression you won't be able to feel any difference.
I just wanted to clear this up and explain my side of this issue. You being happy when this done is our best advertising. I would not suggest parts that wouldn't give you what you need. You can beleive me or not believe me. That is your choice. I am not going to beg you to build it right. I guess I should have just sold you a 10:1 kit like you first asked for and not worried about how it ran. But that is not how I like to do things. I would rather exceed your goals than see you disappointed.
Last edited by Hughes; 07/11/12 03:28 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: Hughes]
#1265117
07/11/12 03:28 PM
07/11/12 03:28 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Anthony, You are not telling these guys the entire story. The stroker kit I sold you would have ended up bing approximatley 11.3:1 compression ratio. A 496 cubic inch stroker, along with a set of 85cc Stealth heads and our HEH5055Bl cam would net out at approxiamtely 185 pounds of cranking cylinder pressure. This will easily run on pump gas without any detonation. Now, because of peer pressure from people who have nothing invested in your car (money like you or reputation like me)you are afraid to build anything over 10 or 10.5:1. I have explained to you multiple times in a calm and respectful manner, that cranking cylinder pressure is what you really care about, not just the compression ratio. 2 weeks ago you told me that you wanted pistons that would give you closer to 10.5:1 no matter what. I gave in and agreed to take back the pistons you have and get you a set of new pistons with the dish in them you want. I DID tell you that they would cost more and that this would require balancing the new pistons and then making up a new bobweight and balaning the crank. You agreed to all of this. Now, the pistons are here and you are getting cold feet again about the compression and you don;t want to pay for the pistons or the freight etc... I understand how frustrating this is for you which is why I have spent, literally, hours on the phone with you teaching and explaining how I helped you choose the parts. This is the difference between us and someplace like Summit or Jegs where you just order parts online and hope it all works. There are a lot of good reputable engine builders out there who can cnofirm that 185psi cranking cylinder pressure will work fine for you. JohnRR is giving you good advice. Put it together and enjoy it. Now, if your whole problem is that you have changed your mind and now want a 4.250" stroke instead of a 4.150 stroke...that is another story. We also spent a lot of time discussing that issue. Like JohnRR said, there really is no difference on a build like yours. With the heads flowing no more than they are and the pump gas compression you won't be able to feel any difference.
I just wanted to clear this up and explain my side of this issue. You being happy when this done is our best advertising. I would not suggest parts that wouldn't give you what you need. You can beleive me or not believe me. That is your choice. I am notgoing to beg you to build it right. I guess I should have just sold you a 10:1 kit like you first asked for and not worried about how it ran. But that is not how I like to do things. I would rather exceed your goals than see you disappointed.
Good to hear the other side of the story. Very sound reasoning, I don't see the issue other than the up sell of the compression ratio but the cam fixes that ... well I do but that is a subject for a thread in the general section ...
His only problem is he ASSuMEd that the current stealths were 84cc advertised, more like 86 actual ... and they are now advertised as 80cc advertised ... I think 82 is actual ...
Good luck ...
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: Hughes]
#1265119
07/11/12 04:48 PM
07/11/12 04:48 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 185
east bay ca
torqueaddict
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 185
east bay ca
|
Quote:
Anthony, You are not telling these guys the entire story. The stroker kit I sold you would have ended up being approximatley 11.3:1 compression ratio. A 496 cubic inch stroker, along with a set of 85cc Stealth heads and our HEH5055Bl cam would net out at approximately 185 pounds of cranking cylinder pressure. This will easily run on pump gas without any detonation. Now, because of peer pressure from people who have nothing invested in your car (money like you or reputation like me)you are afraid to build anything over 10 or 10.5:1. I have explained to you multiple times in a calm and respectful manner, that cranking cylinder pressure is what you really care about, not just the compression ratio. 2 weeks ago you told me that you wanted pistons that would give you closer to 10.5:1 no matter what. I gave in and agreed to take back the pistons you have and get you a set of new pistons with the dish in them you want. I DID tell you that they would cost more and that this would require balancing the new pistons and then making up a new bobweight and balaning the crank. You agreed to all of this. Now, the pistons are here and you are getting cold feet again about the compression and you don't want to pay for the pistons or the freight etc... I understand how frustrating this is for you which is why I have spent, literally, hours on the phone with you teaching and explaining how I helped you choose the parts. This is the difference between us and someplace like Summit or Jegs where you just order parts online and hope it all works. There are a lot of good reputable engine builders out there who can confirm that 185psi cranking cylinder pressure will work fine for you. JohnRR is giving you good advice. Put it together and enjoy it. Now, if your whole problem is that you have changed your mind and now want a 4.250" stroke instead of a 4.150 stroke...that is another story. We also spent a lot of time discussing that issue. Like JohnRR said, there really is no difference on a build like yours. With the heads flowing no more than they are and the pump gas compression you won't be able to feel any difference.
I just wanted to clear this up and explain my side of this issue. You being happy when this done is our best advertising. I would not suggest parts that wouldn't give you what you need. You can beleive me or not believe me. That is your choice. I am not going to beg you to build it right. I guess I should have just sold you a 10:1 kit like you first asked for and not worried about how it ran. But that is not how I like to do things. I would rather exceed your goals than see you disappointed.
Kevin that's nice but when we first started the thing the thi gs I said in my original talk was I wanted a 4.25 stroke kit with dished pistons. In fact my order was put in online and that's what I ordered at first. You told me that what I needed was the flat top pistons and a very radical cam. I told you from the start I wanted a non radical cam. I don't like super lopey idles. If you had told me the things I wanted for
The start were not available or costed extra I would have went elsewhere. You may have meant well but you talked me into something I didnt want from the beginning. The stealth heads I have are supposedly 80cc by the way. The machinist I work with and the guy building my motor tell me that it's not worth the risk. If my motor were to detonate from having to much compression all you will be able to is say your sorry. And I will be up crap creek. Why would I even want to risk it? It's not like you guaranteed it would. It detonate. Why should I take such a big risk just. Because you say so? I k ow you meant well but now no matter what I lose.
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: torqueaddict]
#1265121
07/11/12 05:13 PM
07/11/12 05:13 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 10,228
Colleyville
3hundred
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 10,228
Colleyville
|
Too many cooks. Pick the one you trust and go with it.  Robert
'68 Fury Convertible
'69 300 Convertible
'15 Durango 5.7 Hemi
'16 300 S Hemi
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: Triple Threat]
#1265122
07/11/12 05:17 PM
07/11/12 05:17 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 185
east bay ca
torqueaddict
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 185
east bay ca
|
Quote:
My stroked small block has 11.3:1 compression and runs on 92 octane pump gas all day long. 
That's another thing I have been tryin to explain to everyone is that here in comifornia they only have 91. That's it. If we do have 92 or 93 somewhere it's nowhere near me.
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: 3hundred]
#1265124
07/11/12 06:29 PM
07/11/12 06:29 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,020
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Too many cooks. Pick the one you trust and go with it.
Robert
WINNER .....
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: 3hundred]
#1265125
07/11/12 08:26 PM
07/11/12 08:26 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,716
Baltimore/Denver
64Post
master
|
master
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,716
Baltimore/Denver
|
Quote:
Too many crooks. Pick the one you trust and go with it.
Robert
More like it...
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: RUNCHARGER]
#1265127
07/11/12 11:45 PM
07/11/12 11:45 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,154
Its a TRAP!
DARTH V8Я
Oh No!! I just had a moron attack!
|
Oh No!! I just had a moron attack!
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,154
Its a TRAP!
|
Well not so fast my good sir. While I do agree with Hughes Engines theory, I do not think it would be the best set up for the street. IMO a dished "D shaped" piston promoted a better flame front, with less chance of detonation and one can get away with a higher CR on 91 octane. Again, just my humble opinion.
When it takes more than a sweet mullet to prove you rule at the trailer park..
|
|
|
Re: 4.15 stroke vs 4.25 stroke what are the pros and cons
[Re: torqueaddict]
#1265128
07/12/12 02:53 AM
07/12/12 02:53 AM
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399
Aurora, Colorado
451Mopar
master
|
master
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,399
Aurora, Colorado
|
I guess there was more to this thread than just which crank to use Really the Stealth heads are pretty small for either stroke length, so as mentioned earlier the small difference in stroke is not a big deal. On my 505" stroker, I only used the Stealth head because I wanted the stock look and the engine will not be turning high RPM levels. I have the earlier stealth castings and they cc at 84cc as advertised. For comparison, my smaller 500" stroker has Max wedge port sized Edelbrock Victor heads, but this engine can see 7,000+ RPM. The parts Hughes suggested can work, but with 80cc heads and zero deck pistons, the static compression ratio is fairly high (about 11.79:1) With a cam intake closing point of 70-degrees (a cam that has advertised duration around 290ish), ABDC, cranking cylinder pressure should be about 180 PSI. The biggest difference I see between using a 4.15" kit and the 4.25" kit is that the stack-up of the stroke, rod length, and piston compression height of the 4.15" kit puts the piston slightly lower below the deck height than the 4.25" kit, so you would have to cut the block a bit more (about 0.010" more than the 4.25" kit) to get the pistons at zero deck? It is also easier to lower your compression ratio than increase it. Without changing the quench distance, you can work the chambers of the heads to unshroud the valves and polish the combustion chambers. The piston valve notches can be enlarged. As mentioned earlier, "D" cup dish pistons can be used. You could also not zero deck the block. Having the piston 0.006" below deck with a 4.375" bore is 1.478cc added to the chamber volume. Using a 4.50" bore gasket adds 0.413cc compared to a 4.410 " bore head gasket of the same thickness. Just having 84cc chamber heads vs 80cc will lower the compression ratio to 11.35:1 and with the same 70 ABDC intake closing point, cranking pressure drops to 171 PSI. I would guess the Hughes HEH5055 cam would have peak power around 5500 RPM? in a 500" stroker? If you do want to use a milider cam, then you would want to drop the compression.
|
|
|
|
|
