Aftermarket Cranks

[Rusty2211]

Larry, "Cheater Cam" was probably a poor choice of words. I like "enhanced cam specs" better. I think the 427 guys need to get the pencil and paper out and go after that extra 2 thou. That would certainly level the playing field with the Drag Packs, Copos and new CJs.
Rusty

[69Cobra]

Rusty,
Crower already has the honda rod in motion for the FE's. They've submitted the paper work to NHRA for approval and its supposed to be accepted next year. I've already got my name on the waiting list with Crower. They are going to call it the "Larry Hill" rod

[CaptCobrajet]

Originally Posted by Larry Hill

Does this mean the FE Fords will loose the Chevy rod rod size? Or will the new cranks be turned from 2.437" to 2.200" before installation?

Ohio Crankshaft makes a cast iron (just like the real ones) 428 FE crank with stock mains and stock crank pins (2.437" just like the real ones) for about $500.

That would be a great way to turn some more racers away from NHRA. When Stockers inherited the Super Stock rod list...............way before spacer bearings were an issue in Super Stock, some combos (not just the FE by the way) were blessed with rods that had been on the SS list for a long time. FE Stockers went to the barn at INDY with the pans off a long time ago, and were legal with the rod you bitch about. It would be the wrong thing for NHRA to do at this point, to take away parts from ANY make or combo, that racers have already spent their money on, that are (were) legal when they bought them.

NHRA tech knows that the intent of that language you quote on the undersizes was put there to keep SPACER BEARINGS out of Stockers............so a guy with a 440 Chrysler like yourself couldn't put a Honda bearing in a spacer, in a Stocker. The FE is not the only engine that has a rod approved with other than a stock journal......it just happens to be the engine that runs your class. If, for whatever reason, a connecting rod showed up on the list for a 440 with even a 2" crankpin, I'd wager that not one Ford racer would belly ache and whine about it.

I guess no one runs a 400 block in a 440 combo in Stock either, right? No journal issue there is there Larry?

The newer cars have such an advantage over the old ones that it is really a non-issue. Those rods were approved at a time when availability of parts (cranks and rods) was not what it is today. Removing approved parts from any combo of any make will only reduce car count and make it a show for the brand new cars, in the end.

For class racing to survive, there has to be some admendments here and there. The vast majority of Stockers are still OLD CARS. There are going to be changes that affect all combos either positively or negatively, from time to time. The changes, while upsetting to the purist, must come here and there to keep class racing alive. The challenge for NHRA is to try to make rule amendments, like the crankshafts this time, that help the racers keep racing. If some Hudson Hornet gets a part that it did not have, or a spec it did not have, the Factoring System will fix it way before it fixes the factors on the newer combos. Any part that helps any combo in terms of reliability and or availability should not be a sore spot at this point, for anyone who realizes that most of us are working with 30-40, even 50 year old stuff, and alot of it is not made anymore. The only answer is for NHRA to try to make changes that are rational and reasonable. I think that is harder to do than it looks.

BTW, Ohio crank doesn't MAKE a $500 FE crank. Cheap cranks are imported from China. I would not put a cheap Chinese iron crankshaft in my wheelchair. I would rather buy a good American set of Crower rods, and use a Ford crank, so NHRA won't have to pick up a bunch of Chinese iron off the racetrack when it flies apart and kills a block that is not made anymore. Most who take advantage of the new crank rule will not be buying junk..........that is the whole point of the amendment.........so racers don't have to use junk that they can't find anyway.

[Phillip marvetz]

Lots of bad info on 440s in that post, WOW!
Please tell us who is using a 400 block and claiming it as a 440 in STOCK....

[treessavoy]

Originally Posted by CaptCobrajet

That would be a great way to turn some more racers away from NHRA. When Stockers inherited the Super Stock rod list...............way before spacer bearings were an issue in Super Stock, some combos (not just the FE by the way) were blessed with rods that had been on the SS list for a long time. FE Stockers went to the barn at INDY with the pans off a long time ago, and were legal with the rod you bitch about. It would be the wrong thing for NHRA to do at this point, to take away parts from ANY make or combo, that racers have already spent their money on, that are (were) legal when they bought them.

NHRA tech knows that the intent of that language you quote on the undersizes was put there to keep SPACER BEARINGS out of Stockers............so a guy with a 440 Chrysler like yourself couldn't put a Honda bearing in a spacer, in a Stocker. The FE is not the only engine that has a rod approved with other than a stock journal......it just happens to be the engine that runs your class. If, for whatever reason, a connecting rod showed up on the list for a 440 with even a 2" crankpin, I'd wager that not one Ford racer would belly ache and whine about it.

I guess no one runs a 400 block in a 440 combo in Stock either, right? No journal issue there is there Larry?

The newer cars have such an advantage over the old ones that it is really a non-issue. Those rods were approved at a time when availability of parts (cranks and rods) was not what it is today. Removing approved parts from any combo of any make will only reduce car count and make it a show for the brand new cars, in the end.

For class racing to survive, there has to be some admendments here and there. The vast majority of Stockers are still OLD CARS. There are going to be changes that affect all combos either positively or negatively, from time to time. The changes, while upsetting to the purist, must come here and there to keep class racing alive. The challenge for NHRA is to try to make rule amendments, like the crankshafts this time, that help the racers keep racing. If some Hudson Hornet gets a part that it did not have, or a spec it did not have, the Factoring System will fix it way before it fixes the factors on the newer combos. Any part that helps any combo in terms of reliability and or availability should not be a sore spot at this point, for anyone who realizes that most of us are working with 30-40, even 50 year old stuff, and alot of it is not made anymore. The only answer is for NHRA to try to make changes that are rational and reasonable. I think that is harder to do than it looks.

BTW, Ohio crank doesn't MAKE a $500 FE crank. Cheap cranks are imported from China. I would not put a cheap Chinese iron crankshaft in my wheelchair. I would rather buy a good American set of Crower rods, and use a Ford crank, so NHRA won't have to pick up a bunch of Chinese iron off the racetrack when it flies apart and kills a block that is not made anymore. Most who take advantage of the new crank rule will not be buying junk..........that is the whole point of the amendment.........so racers don't have to use junk that they can't find anyway.

OK, you are obviously total ignorant about Mopar big blocks. First, the 400 and 440 are completely different physical sizes easily seen by just looking at them; second, there's a big raised pad on the front of a 440 that says: 440, the 400 has a machined pad on the left side of the block that says: 400, both have the block size cast on the side of the block. Different blocks, different sizes and clearly identified. Who would want to give up 40 inches?

JimR

[CaptCobrajet]

Originally Posted by treessavoy

OK, you are obviously total ignorant about Mopar big blocks. First, the 400 and 440 are completely different physical sizes easily seen by just looking at them; second, there's a big raised pad on the front of a 440 that says: 440, the 400 has a machined pad on the left side of the block that says: 400, both have the block size cast on the side of the block. Different blocks, different sizes and clearly identified. Who would want to give up 40 inches?

JimR

Jim, not TOTALLY ignorant, but maybe somewhat ignorant. I'm not beating up on 440's in general. I actually like them. Also not interested in calling anyone out, but it is doable, and has been done.......not to give up inches, but to shorten the C/H on the piston. Lately, there is a spec for C/H, so it would be caught if a rod and piston were pulled now anyway. I was just responding to the consistent comments by Mr. Hill on the Ford FE. I only used the 440 as an example because that happens to be what Larry runs, and I'm sure his stuff is completely legal. Ignorant yes, just not totally ignorant.

Blair Patrick

[Larry Hill]

..

[Jeff Lee]

Ahmmm....For whatever it's worth the 413 & 426 wedge also shares the 440 block structure.

[Michael K]

Originally Posted by CaptCobrajet

I guess no one runs a 400 block in a 440 combo in Stock either, right?

I have heard this claim before. Always wondered how the correct 440 intake manifold could possibly fit the 400?

[Paul Precht]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Ahmmm....For whatever it's worth the 413 & 426 wedge also shares the 440 block structure.

Yes but the Maxi mani doesn't fit a low block (400) without obvious mods but the Edelbrock 383 6 Pak mani fits a 400 block just fine and it's been done. The 400 block is stronger and 25 lbs or so lighter plus the advantage of the lighter piston and rod.