Requesting guidance on a new build....

Quote:

---

OK, I'll pipe in once. I would send my heads to Todd at Marsh Performance as he has a great head guy. If you want to spend lots's and have the marque guy do them and squeeze out every CFM, call Tom Hemphill as I think he's done almost as many as Koffel. Fastlane Machine in Utah did a set of B1/MC'sfor me and they are very nice with respectable power in the 1050HP range but I don't really care about dyno numbers. My dragster is 1870#'s with me in the seat and I went [Email]7.55@174[/Email] at 7000ft corrected. I would expect 7.20's or better at sea level. Fastlne does great work, and they are reasonable, but expect to wait for 6 months. I'll give you just a brief description of my 572 builds. heads in the 410-420 Int. CFM range, cam in the 840-810 and [Email]288-298@50[/Email], 15-1 lightweight pistons, 7.100 aluminum 2.200 rods, well massaged B1 intake, 1150 CFM APD carb. There ya go. Oh...and my B1 originals that I sold Cheatham and related parts, went 8.30's at Las Vegas the year before in the same dragster. i hope this helps.

---

Quote:

---

Shifting at 7300 and across the stripe at 7700-8000.

---

Quote:

---

As requested, This is a Aluminum World block, 572" K1 rotating assembly with 91 octane pump gas assembly, Indy 440-1 heads hand ported by Mopar Engines West (These are the actual heads that they made the most power with 765 IIRC in the 2006 Mopar Muscle Engine Challenge), .750 ish Comp roller cam, Indy 440-2 dominator manifold, 1250 Holley carb, KB Gear drive. Car weighs 2750 # with me in it, 4.10 geared dana , 727 with all the good stuff. So far 9.20 @144 in 85* heat and a junk track. This picture clicked the 60' beam at 1.379 (usually 1.27 60') and still ran a 9.29 @ 1.41 with 15 mph headwind on a hot track at 4:30 in the afternoon. Shift at 6800rpm , motor sees more than 7000 through the traps. Car has been 9.04 @ 148 with 501" 14.2/1 comp motor prior, that motor would probably equal this one in these weather conditions but did not have the low end torque that the 572" makes or the weight reduction that this block provides.

---

Quote:

---

Looks like the car Marty Pearcy's kid used to drive? Love his 64 and 68, great looking cars for sure.

Anyway lots of ways to build a good running combo. My ole bucket of bolts was a 525" B1MC deal. Made 1050+hp and seemed to work well in my 2975lb pig. My junk went hundreds of laps with zero maintenance issues or failures. This is not rocket science by any means. Good components and some thought in the beginning will go a long way.

Having a plan in advance and knowing what your goals are will put you ahead in the end. Some words of advice. Plenty of block options out there. If it were me I would be buying an HP block. If you are going B1 heads, spend the money to go with the T&D paired rockers from the get go. It is a better more reliable system. Buy a good pan and pump. Get the heads to someone who knows how to make them work. GOOD cylinder head people are good cylinder head people period. Don't get hung up in the has to be a "Mopar" guy, trust me in the end you will not regret it. IMO a big cam core if you are chasing 4 digit horsepower is a must. A very good lifter, I prefer the Isky EZ roll x stuff myself. Good machine work and attention to detail during assembly are a must as well.

---

Quote:

---

Better to buy the right part once then to buy the wrong one and have to buy the right one after a failure.

The better parts are more money but you get what you pay for, PERIOD!

---

Quote:

---

In S/ST I was between 71-7450 in the lites. When I ran my heap all out we shifted at 8300 but only had about 7700 in the lites. 4.10 gear 33x15 tire as well.

I tell ya call HP Performance. You might be surprised by what you hear......

---

Quote:

---

In S/ST I was between 71-7450 in the lites. When I ran my heap all out we shifted at 8300 but only had about 7700 in the lites. 4.10 gear 33x15 tire as well.

I tell ya call HP Performance. You might be surprised by what you hear......

---

Quote:

---

Looks like the car Marty Pearcy's kid used to drive? Love his 64 and 68, great looking cars for sure.

Anyway lots of ways to build a good running combo. My ole bucket of bolts was a 525" B1MC deal. Made 1050+hp and seemed to work well in my 2975lb pig. My junk went hundreds of laps with zero maintenance issues or failures. This is not rocket science by any means. Good components and some thought in the beginning will go a long way.

Having a plan in advance and knowing what your goals are will put you ahead in the end. Some words of advice. Plenty of block options out there. If it were me I would be buying an HP block. If you are going B1 heads, spend the money to go with the T&D paired rockers from the get go. It is a better more reliable system. Buy a good pan and pump. Get the heads to someone who knows how to make them work. GOOD cylinder head people are good cylinder head people period. Don't get hung up in the has to be a "Mopar" guy, trust me in the end you will not regret it. IMO a big cam core if you are chasing 4 digit horsepower is a must. A very good lifter, I prefer the Isky EZ roll x stuff myself. Good machine work and attention to detail during assembly are a must as well.

---

May I ask what all you did to get 1050hp out of your 525 B1 motor?

Quote:

---

If I was going to , lets say, be using a KB block in my build. Should I use a block girdle just for extra assurance?

---

Quote:

---

In S/ST I was between 71-7450 in the lites. When I ran my heap all out we shifted at 8300 but only had about 7700 in the lites. 4.10 gear 33x15 tire as well.

I tell ya call HP Performance. You might be surprised by what you hear......

---

Quote:

---

As requested, This is a Aluminum World block, 572" K1 rotating assembly with 91 octane pump gas assembly, Indy 440-1 heads hand ported by Mopar Engines West (These are the actual heads that they made the most power with 765 IIRC in the 2006 Mopar Muscle Engine Challenge), .750 ish Comp roller cam, Indy 440-2 dominator manifold, 1250 Holley carb, KB Gear drive. Car weighs 2750 # with me in it, 4.10 geared dana , 727 with all the good stuff. So far 9.20 @144 in 85* heat and a junk track. This picture clicked the 60' beam at 1.379 (usually 1.27 60') and still ran a 9.29 @ 1.41 with 15 mph headwind on a hot track at 4:30 in the afternoon. Shift at 6800rpm , motor sees no more than 7000 through the traps. Car has been 9.04 @ 148 with 501" 14.2/1 comp motor prior, that motor would probably equal this one in these weather conditions but did not have the low end torque that the 572" makes or the weight reduction that this block provides.

---

Quote:

---

The 525 is the motor in the Cuda. Ran it in S/ST S/C and Q16 occasionally. I would say the reason it made the power it did was the heads. The other option is RPM, we had very good heads and were not afraid of RPM.

I say it made 1050+ because we never dynoed it after the first build and went quicker with subsequent rebuilds and changes. We ended up adding about 6 mph over the years through changes made to the engine combo. The biggest gains were when we swapped cams, fuel and piston design slightly. We never really had the car itself set up to run all out, it was a S/ST car first and foremost. We needed more gear and a looser converter to really get everything out of it in the car. Having said that we did manage to go 170+ best off the stop at seal level.

It will be getting freshened this winter. Likely no changes will be made to the car as it lives in super class racing. Don't thin we can get anymore out of what is there in this environment.

If you want any specific lets me know I can supply what ever you want. But the heads are the key to making power.

---

Quote:

---

And the reason I asking about 525 B1 motor making 1050hp is, that was my target number for my 572.

---

Quote:

---

FWIW My heads went 455+ on every flow bench they were ever on. I ran a Bullet cam eventually as well. Started with LSM. My cam choices tend to have a wider LSA than most, it has always worked well for me so we keep going there.

My set up has been extremely maintenance free, just ask anyone who has seen it run. I change springs once usually between freshen ups, those occur at about 400+- runs as we use aluminum rods. I could not tell you the last time I had to adjust the valve lash. We check it occasionally but never change anything. Maintenance has basically been oil changes and filter inspections.

We ran a 1.80 straight cut glide. The motor would have been happier with three gears but once again it is a S/ST car. The KISS principle applies here. We have never geared it for all out performance and it could have used a looser converter. The best we had performance wise was a WAY loose WAY inefficient 8" that stalled 7300 and had 22% slip. I ran it and won with an ATI 8" that stalled 65-6800 depending on altitude etc.

---

Quote:

---

Cast single 4 UNPORTED, other than changing the inlet shape to oval and matching the carb bad to the gasket. Plenum was not touched. It is a very large manifold.

---

Quote:

---

I will be getting a set of T&D paired rockers too.

---

My KB build will be targeted at 850 hp with 540 CID, Indy 440-1 CNC345 heads, just over 13 CR, alcohol, Comp Cams roller, 279/290 at 0.050", 112 LSA, 0.750" net lift with T&D paired 1.65 rockers.
The flow numbers on these heads are not much different than my old 440-1 headed 511, slightly better above 0.650" lift. But I wanted the T&D system for reliability with the roller cam.

Good luck with your new build.

Quote:

---

Headers are 2 1/8 to 2 1/4 with a set of Dynomax collector mufflers.

---

Quote:

---

The 525 is the motor in the Cuda. Ran it in S/ST S/C and Q16 occasionally. I would say the reason it made the power it did was the heads. The other option is RPM, we had very good heads and were not afraid of RPM.

I say it made 1050+ because we never dynoed it after the first build and went quicker with subsequent rebuilds and changes. We ended up adding about 6 mph over the years through changes made to the engine combo. The biggest gains were when we swapped cams, fuel and piston design slightly. We never really had the car itself set up to run all out, it was a S/ST car first and foremost. We needed more gear and a looser converter to really get everything out of it in the car. Having said that we did manage to go 170+ best off the stop at seal level.

It will be getting freshened this winter. Likely no changes will be made to the car as it lives in super class racing. Don't thin we can get anymore out of what is there in this environment.

If you want any specific lets me know I can supply what ever you want. But the heads are the key to making power.

---

Hi Al-
In your honest opinion, should I stay with 556ci or keep moving forward on the 572? I've sold my old motor. so I'm starting fresh either way. I'm waiting on my block to get done. So I'm at that point I need to make my mind up.

Quote:

---

Not Al, but if you're starting from scratch, go 604" 4.750 x 4.500..

Why not, you don't want to rev it up..


Chris..

---

Hi Chris'sBarracuda-
I ordered a KB block. I don't think it has the clearance for a 4.750 crank. Maybe a 4.625 at the most. Then it also becomes harder to find parts. I was trying to not get greedy on the size. Also keeping it some what maintenance free. As much as possible anyways.

Quote:

---

All I can add is go with a very good crank! I put a Ohio forged crank in my 528 and cracked it at 100 passes. I had no signs of detonation, just 2432 bob weight, which is heavy. I went with a Crower center counter weighted crank ($2300, ouch!)and on the next tear down I could see that the cap walk in my old Mega block was gone. From that I assume that center weighted crank flexs a LOT less, and it should be the last crank I ever buy for that motor.

---

Oh my gosh! I was just talking to Ohio yesterday about a crank. Thank you for saying something!!! That makes me want to throw up in my mouth just thinking about it

Quote:

---

I believe it to be a great long term investment. Especially if piston speed and bob weight are high. I talked to Crower about offset grinding this crank at 4.15 stroke with 2.375 journals to 2.100 SBC journals, and the response was it would be fine!

---

Mine would be a 4.5 stroke. I've had input to the fact that I should go bigger on the stroke.
7.1 steel rod with the 2.2 journal. that comes in at 823 grams. Not sure about the 4.500 pistons yet. I'm not doing those till the block is sitting in front of me.
I'm also not familiar with a center counter weight crank.

Quote:

---

Center counter weights are just that, two more in the middle, offsetting the rod/piston balance where it needs to be, directly under the cylinders rather than the other counter weights doing the job for all. Mustang 4.6 or 5.0 motors run them, or at least some do. Look at a fueler crank, they all have them.

---

I guess I need to pay more attention. I feel stupid, But I've actually never noticed.
I am keeping in mind what you told me about Ohio. But I am checking on one of their billet cranks. Then maybe Crower.

Quote:

---

Here's a pic of a center counter weight crank. This one is a Bryant billet crank.

---

Quote:

---

It's the exact combo you are looking for. 4.5" with Chevy 2.2 journal. It's gun drilled through the mains and rods. It's an ex fueler crank I got a smoking deal on.

---

Sounds like you were at the right place at the right time!
I wish the fueler guys I know ran Mopars. I wouldn't still be looking for a crank. They are all Chevy guys

Quote:

---

It's the exact combo you are looking for. 4.5" with Chevy 2.2 journal. It's gun drilled through the mains and rods. It's an ex fueler crank I got a smoking deal on.

---

The exact combo I'm looking for?
Are you not going to use it?

Quote:

---

Defintely do yourself a favor and get the center counterweights added. Bryant, Crower, Moldex all can make you a crank but it takes time so be aware you need to get it ordered asap..

---

Quote:

---

Defintely do yourself a favor and get the center counterweights added. Bryant, Crower, Moldex all can make you a crank but it takes time so be aware you need to get it ordered asap..

---

Right after you sent this to me, I inquired about it to Crower. No response yet. Thank you again for your input.

Quote:

---

When you order, ask them what the journals will be size wise, to the ten thousandths. To get to .003 rod clearance I had to find a rather expensive + size bearing. If you have a shop do your assembly, get their input on the final journal sizes. Mine were on the small side, which caused the problem. Also ask about knife edging the counter weights. It is worth the hp to do it. Crower turns the counter weights on a lathe to balance the crank, rather than drill holes. I like that. Mine was made out of 304M steel, some pretty tuff stuff.

---

Quote:

---

Bigcube-
How'd it go? Did you get it running?

---

Yes, very happy with the results

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...e=1#Post8180299

Quote:

---

FWIW My heads went 455+ on every flow bench they were ever on. I ran a Bullet cam eventually as well. Started with LSM. My cam choices tend to have a wider LSA than most, it has always worked well for me so we keep going there.

My set up has been extremely maintenance free, just ask anyone who has seen it run. I change springs once usually between freshen ups, those occur at about 400+- runs as we use aluminum rods. I could not tell you the last time I had to adjust the valve lash. We check it occasionally but never change anything. Maintenance has basically been oil changes and filter inspections.

We ran a 1.80 straight cut glide. The motor would have been happier with three gears but once again it is a S/ST car. The KISS principle applies here. We have never geared it for all out performance and it could have used a looser converter. The best we had performance wise was a WAY loose WAY inefficient 8" that stalled 7300 and had 22% slip. I ran it and won with an ATI 8" that stalled 65-6800 depending on altitude etc.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, we're doing that now with a 55mm cam and standard cam height, Oliver rods. It should be together soon.

---

Quote:

---

Cam was on a 117 lobe center fwiw. I tend to generally be at 113+.

Our new engine is a 4.75 stoke deal with an Oliver rod and 60MM cam. But it is a raised cam deal as well. I am not a an of the big stroke stuff and we will see how this works. The large stroke pushed me to go with a dry sump as well to decrease windage from all that arm in there. Hopefully we will get some numbers by the end of August wit it. Already been on the dyno and were unhappy and block is getting some additional work in the lifter area as well as going to a dry sump.

---

What kind of RPM are you running with it? The reason I'm asking is because I am a little stuck as what to run. A 4.500 stroke or 4.625 stroke crank. I've been waiting around for parts for so long that I'm second guessing my build.

Quote:

---

Personally, I see no point in going with big stroke when you are cylinder head limited. Bore means more than stroke, as far as making the heads work better. The move from 4.500 to 4.750, in my opinion would gain you nothing, given the cylinder heads you have.

Monte

---

Quote:

---

I agree with Monte. I prefer not to go with the big stroke but have been convinced to try it. I also have a new crank on order to make this a smaller engine later. I will be curious to see the results of what going to a smaller cube deal will show later over this big one. If I were you I would look to stay at or UNDER 4.500". I am not a fan of even the 4.5" stroke deals. Most don't seem to run that well. Just my .02

Bore makes power. Unfortunately in a Mopar we are limited there for sure. My new deal is a Predator motor but these heads are still "nothing special" for sure. Just the only option to date I have not tried. The sad part is I will be giving up 150ish+ HP over what my 99 Hemi made at 499". FWIW that was a 4.700" stroke deal.

My new deal made peak at 7600 when we has it on the dyno.

---

Quote:

---

As Monte pointed out Bore has a much bigger affect than stroke on how much power is made. With Mopar heads just not sure the added stroke is worth the hassles. Look at the GM stuff, compare a 540 to a 555 to a 565. The difference is bore diameter. Stroke is the same on each of these engines and no question a 565 makes more power. All the GM motors make more power because they have a larger bore to work with. 4.600 is a big deal over a 4.500 bore for sure.

---

Quote:

---

I agree with Monte. I prefer not to go with the big stroke but have been convinced to try it. I also have a new crank on order to make this a smaller engine later. I will be curious to see the results of what going to a smaller cube deal will show later over this big one. If I were you I would look to stay at or UNDER 4.500". I am not a fan of even the 4.5" stroke deals. Most don't seem to run that well. Just my .02

Bore makes power. Unfortunately in a Mopar we are limited there for sure. My new deal is a Predator motor but these heads are still "nothing special" for sure. Just the only option to date I have not tried. The sad part is I will be giving up 150ish+ HP over what my 99 Hemi made at 499". FWIW that was a 4.700" stroke deal.

My new deal made peak at 7600 when we has it on the dyno.

---

Quote:

---

All I can add is go with a very good crank! I put a Ohio forged crank in my 528 and cracked it at 100 passes. I had no signs of detonation, just 2432 bob weight, which is heavy. I went with a Crower center counter weighted crank ($2300, ouch!)and on the next tear down I could see that the cap walk in my old Mega block was gone. From that I assume that center weighted crank flexs a LOT less, and it should be the last crank I ever buy for that motor.

---

gregsdart-
You too please...Read the last few posts. It refers to crank and head sizes. I'd like to hear your opinion on this as well

Quote:

---

Here's a pic of a center counter weight crank. This one is a Bryant billet crank.

---

Bigcube-
You should probably give your if you don't mind.
Read the last few posts. It's talking about crank stroke and head size. I would like to hear your opinion on this too. please?

Quote:

---

Monte and Al are spot on IMHO, and much more experienced with combos than me for sure. Looking at my latest combo, I chose a 4.15 stroke/4.500 bore over a 4.50 stroke 4.500 bore because I didn't feel I had the head flow to support a 572. I have about 375 cfm head flow at net valve lift in my motor, and it is all done making power at 6900 to 7000 rpm. A 604 motor would need 428 cfm of head flow to equal what I have, and still is hampered by the same size bore as I have, and hoping to push more air through it.
IMHO I would go 4.25 stroke 4.500 bore for 540 cubes. It is a great combo, and a local Supergas racer ran this combo in a low deck KB block with B1Mc heads twenty years ago, and was going as fast as anyone I have heard of since with those heads.

---

Quote:

---

So any suggestions on who I should go with on the pistons, rods, and crank?
I want to keep the max RPM to around 7000 to 7100, if that helps . If there is something I should keep in mind as well, please speak your mind.

---

Well Greg.. In your own words.

That's why I said to go bigger.
I totally agree with Monte and Al, as I have a 540" B1. But it likes to make power up above where you want to be.
I actually liked my 528" better.
A good set of B1's should flow near 415-420 range.. They work well up to 555" range IMO.
If you don't want to spin the motor up above 7500+ then go bigger and make sure you get a cam, converter, and gear to match the low end power.
It really depends on what you intend to do with the car..


Chris.

Quote:

---

Yes I have run 4.5 stroke stuff and IMO they ran like poo..Last one was a Stage V Hemi in my Barracuda car went 8.70's with that at 3000lbs. What a turd!!! The Stage V stuff was ok but it will be the last time I RACE an old school hemi unless I have a blower for sure. Had a lot f money in that motor for it performing like it did.

I do not understand why Mopar guys are so afraid of RPM. Only a few ways to make power and RPM is one of them. Especially if you are cylinder head limited RPM is the ONLY way to make power. If you build it right they will last just fine at a tad more RPM, but you have to have your comfort zone I suppose. IMO 8000-8500 in the traps is not gonna hurt anything and can be very durable if done right.

---

Quote:

---

Yes I have run 4.5 stroke stuff and IMO they ran like poo..Last one was a Stage V Hemi in my Barracuda car went 8.70's with that at 3000lbs. What a turd!!! The Stage V stuff was ok but it will be the last time I RACE an old school hemi unless I have a blower for sure. Had a lot f money in that motor for it performing like it did.

I do not understand why Mopar guys are so afraid of RPM. Only a few ways to make power and RPM is one of them. Especially if you are cylinder head limited RPM is the ONLY way to make power. If you build it right they will last just fine at a tad more RPM, but you have to have your comfort zone I suppose. IMO 8000-8500 in the traps is not gonna hurt anything and can be very durable if done right.

---

I agree 100%... I have always been a rpm guy.. and
if you look at how HP/torque is measured... the number
of pulses in a minute(pulse being a firing) and the
more pulses you get in that minute the more power
it will make... its just a matter of building the
engine with light parts and good balance... most times
I turn down the counter weights on the crank to move
the weight in closer to the center line... then use
light pistons... big stroke makes a ton of torque
but that can cause issues at the line to maintain
traction... I always look at what a pro stock engine
is.. short stroke with big bores and a ton of rpm...
but you have to have heads and induction to support
the rpm then also you need good exhaust to get it out..
What I said before about running meth is that burns
2X the amount of fuels and that takes volume/area
to get that quantity in and out... if you were to
look at heads sold by different manufactures you will
see that they have larger valves and flow over the
gas versions of the same head

Quote:

---

Honest, I'm not being a smart alec. How do you account for the same motor, going from race fuel to alcohol, making more power, if the extra alcohol is taking up more room and is cutting back on the much needed oxygen?


They usually make more torque, but less HP at sea level tracks.. The idea is the more fuel you can put in an engine, the more air you get through it, and alcohol carries it's own oxygen molecule allowing better power in high altitude situations. At sea level, not so much. Also, alcohol is very consistent.

---

That is the main reason why I want to use it in this motor that I'm building. More consistency. Our actual elevation at the track is 2720 feet. Oh and the other reason I want to use alcohol is that it is WAY cheaper than C-16
Thank you for explaining about the alcohol carrying it's own oxygen molecule.