Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*destroke\s+302\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*destroke\s+302\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: "Phillip Landry" <saltracer@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:00:33 -0600; what are the advantages (and possibilities) of destroking a 302 ford to make a 260? as compared to using the 255 block to begin with. I understand the 255 bore is pretty small 3.68, but has the same; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00079.html (7,244 bytes)
2. RE: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: "Doug Anderson" <boogiewoogie12@hotmail.com>; Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 01:32:13 +0000; Hi Phil how you ? Bigger bores allow bigger valves. ...hmmmmm 'your way' sounds nice to me. -oughtta be good for over 12,000 rpm whoooomBah! and cheers, -it's your ol' pal, "Dirt Track Doug" forever; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00081.html (8,707 bytes)
3. RE: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: <ddahlgren@snet.net>; Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 20:55:08 -0500; That might require a very special set of cylinder heads..; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00082.html (6,944 bytes)
4. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: Askotto@aol.com; Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 21:31:52 EST; Just theory wise wouldn't it be better to have the 4.0 bore of the 302 and whatever short stroke is required to reach 260? Hi Phil Big bore, short stroke is the way to go. All brands of Nascar engine; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00083.html (7,264 bytes)
5. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: "J.D. Tone" <gmc6power@earthlink.net>; Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 18:53:52 -0800; I don't know how quick you want what you are doing but Fontana Automotive of Gardena Ca. is real close to haveing their aluminum Windsor block out. The first 25 are already spoken for but cylinder li; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00086.html (7,677 bytes)
6. RE: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: <ddahlgren@snet.net>; Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 21:56:43 -0500; Rod length is cylinder head dependant trust me been there done that for a lot of projetcts. The longest is not the best for certain.Sorry otto you know nothing of what you speak if you think longer i; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00087.html (7,807 bytes)
7. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: Doug Odom <dlodom@charter.net>; Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:32:43 -0800; Yep, Just like Mike's tag line on Landracing.com " Without Data Your just Another Guy with an Opinion " Doug Odom in big ditch; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00089.html (7,939 bytes)
8. RE: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: "Doug Anderson" <boogiewoogie12@hotmail.com>; Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 05:17:35 +0000; schiet, I donno Bobby ! I ain't no expert ! Hell I'm just a 'bus driver'. -you know,... like Ralph Cramden ;- ) I'd hafta guess though, that something that could breath as good as thet puppydawg ough; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00091.html (9,434 bytes)
9. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: Bryan Savage <b.a.savage@wildblue.net>; Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 11:20:05 -0800; Dave, I think you always know what you are talking about. Otto, I think you have an enormous amount of very valuable experience related information, that needs to be shared with others on the list.; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00100.html (8,139 bytes)
10. RE: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: "Phillip Landry" <saltracer@hotmail.com>; Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 20:59:53 -0600; found this on HotRod's site regarding rod length to stroke ratio http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/marlan_davis_technical_advise/ideal_%20rod_ratios.html; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00122.html (8,771 bytes)
11. RE: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: <ddahlgren@snet.net>; Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 22:28:00 -0500; Ok tell me what you actually learned from that very little I suspect. There is very little offered as info and only a very quick explanation Dave found this on HotRod's site regarding rod length to s; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00123.html (9,171 bytes)
12. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: Doug Odom <dlodom@charter.net>; Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 19:44:04 -0800; OK Phil from that article what is the ideal rod length? I run a V8 'E" that holds a few records. 3 at Bonneville, 1 at Muroc, 1 at El Mirage and even 1 in Australia. Remember a motor is a piece of ma; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00124.html (9,414 bytes)
13. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: drmayf <drmayf@mayfco.com>; Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 19:46:56 -0800; Hey, Phil, nice catch on the rod ratio thingy. But the article points out something I raised earlier. Everything in this article is anecdotal. There is not one piece of real evidence or data in it. I; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00125.html (9,763 bytes)
14. RE: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: Ray Buck <rbuck@aros.net>; Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 21:21:36 -0700; Here's another study of connecting rod length (based on a Chevy 400 or 383) that was done by a friend who has a little engineering experience, Team Leader on the Apollo moon shots. Take it for what i; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00126.html (9,052 bytes)
15. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: "J.D. Tone" <gmc6power@earthlink.net>; Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 20:58:43 -0800; I have no idea what's right. But I just went from a 7" rod at a 1.75 ratio to an 8" rod at a 2.0 ratio. The shorter pistons and the rods sure look bitchen.. My sons engine just went from a 1.63 ratio; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00127.html (7,483 bytes)
16. Re: destroke 302 (score: 1): Author: Askotto@aol.com; Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 00:19:41 EST; found this on HotRod's site regarding rod length to stroke ratio _http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/marlan_davis_technical_advise/ideal_%20rod _ratios.html_ (http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/marla; /html/land-speed/2007-01/msg00129.html (7,599 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 16
Page: [1]