Another engine

[1bad442]

If you need a test bed to evaluate the feasability of the CT/LA sleve 240 sonic cylinder, with a 4mm crank and long rod combo... just let me know have the cylinder (needs bore) head ready to be recut, 4mm crank and trenched bottom end, I can order the 115 rod tomorrow....

ken is allready doing the exact engine u just mentioned for me

 

[phragle]

Sweet, he can make mistakes and get thru the learning setup curve on your motor

 

[1bad442]

Sweet, he can make mistakes and get thru the learning setup curve on your motor

lmao i hope not what your opinion on how this setup shoudl run ?? i know on my big block chevy race motors the longer the rod u put in a 632 inch motor the faster it will rev and the higher it will rev also thats why i build my motors with a 10.600 deck height and 7 inch rod instead of the conventional 9.800 deck height and 6.185 rod also it helps out the rod to stroke ratio and the compression height on the piston so im just curious how the longer rod will affect a la 240 motor

 

[phragle]

Im not a motor guy, but the CT puts out good power, the rod and stroke should put out more power over a broader range.. really depends on how it gets setup/ported.

 

[OConnor Racing]

Ummmmmmmmmmmm. I don't make mistakes and the learning curve was passed 15 years ago! Simple math.

 

[brandoz28]

Ummmmmmmmmmmm. I don't make mistakes and the learning curve was passed 15 years ago! Simple math.

that's what you want to hear from a builder!



what do you feel the gains would be on a stock bore motor? (thinking ahead a little bit)

 

[phragle]

Ummmmmmmmmmmm. I don't make mistakes and the learning curve was passed 15 years ago! Simple math.

THere is always a little tweaking when perfecting a new build, carb size, pipe choice, maybe a little more off here or a little less next time.

The people that are good always look for a bit more, the people who aren't, scratch there head and wonder why it didnt work as planned.

 

[1bad442]

id say ken is just confident in his ability. and im more than confident in having him do it nough said!!

 

[ZoMbIeCuStOmS]

you are a machineing genius

 

[sicivicdude]

So would a 115mm rod result in a 57mm stroke but the need for a spacer plate?

I may need to change my signature...

 

[OConnor Racing]

It's going to need a spacer plate and two gaskets for the long rod and yes, probably some tweaking.

 

[sicivicdude]

:-/ I have the top end off of mine right now and measured the stroke and it's 57mm BDC to TDC but I have a spacer plate. I don't know everything that was done to the engine before I got it so I assumed (apparently wrongly) stroker crank.

What sort of tweaking are we talking about here?

 

[OConnor Racing]

Jetting, reeds, compression, etc. Odd you have a spacer plate without a stroker crank. What's the squish thickness? You may have a Mac Dizzy want to be.

 

[sicivicdude]

Remember that picture of the head I sent you, the one with the incredibly small combustion chamber?

That's the head that was running for about a year (rather well I might add) before I bought the quad blown up. The guy ran it out of fuel while racing it and smeared a little bit of the piston down the cylinder wall.

It now has a stock cylinder and head on it (getting ready to get changed out to a DIY ported one) but I reused the crank and spacer plate that was in/on the bottom end for the new top end and assumed because of the spacer plate it was a +3 stroker. Last night I measured the stroke and it's 57mm. Also, on a side note... the small end bearing for a blaster does not fit my rod. The small end of my rod is a 20mm hole, not 21mm. I looked up a 20mm hole on wiseco's charts and the RZ350 rod has a 20mm hole. I didn't think anything about it until this thread.

 

[brandoz28]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm sounds like you might have a 115 rod in there... won't know until you measure

 

[sicivicdude]

Well I'm not pulling the bottom end apart just to measure the rod... But I will certainly take it if it's in there!

 

[phragle]

Remember that picture of the head I sent you, the one with the incredibly small combustion chamber?

That's the head that was running for about a year (rather well I might add) before I bought the quad blown up. The guy ran it out of fuel while racing it and smeared a little bit of the piston down the cylinder wall.

It now has a stock cylinder and head on it (getting ready to get changed out to a DIY ported one) but I reused the crank and spacer plate that was in/on the bottom end for the new top end and assumed because of the spacer plate it was a +3 stroker. Last night I measured the stroke and it's 57mm. Also, on a side note... the small end bearing for a blaster does not fit my rod. The small end of my rod is a 20mm hole, not 21mm. I looked up a 20mm hole on wiseco's charts and the RZ350 rod has a 20mm hole. I didn't think anything about it until this thread.

The RZ is a basically a banshee motor with different gearing and powervalves. The RZ350 had a 54mm stroke. The Banshee guys originally used the RD 400 (114mm) rod for the long rods. Small end bore on a banshee is 21mm

 

[sicivicdude]

Mistype, RD350 small end bearing is 16mm x 20mm x 22.5mm instead of the 21mm of the blasters and banshees.

I know I have a 20mm small end rod and that threw me for a loop when I tried to put a new bearing in it...

 

[phragle]

Wayyyyyyy back when, some of the first people that started porting blaster motors used spacer plates to get the bottom of the transfers flush with the piston at BDC then decked the top of the cylinder. there were a few strange things out there in the early days, I had a 250 cylinder for a while, built by Duane Blake at Alba that used some kind of jetski piston. Trinity had a 265 kit too.

 

[OConnor Racing]

How thick is the spacer plate?