# 461 stroker advice



## la_belle_fermier (Dec 28, 2010)

I have a 69 gto with a 400 but do not know what the internals are.The cam has been changed and has #62 heads with an Edelbrock rpm intake and 750 edelbrock carb.The transmission is a 200r4 rebuilt to handle 550 hp into 3.55 gears.I also have a 70/71 complete 400 block with 96 heads.The engine in the car now is # numbers correct for the vehicle so I wanted to make the spare motor into a stroker.I was looking to get 400-450 hp with iron heads.I was wondering what heads would be the best to get ported.I plan on using
1-cvms
2-butler
3- Kaufmann
I want to get the rolling assembly,porting and cam from one supplier and assemble myself.
Also should I get the intake ported to the heads.

Thanks


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

You need to talk to BearGFR on this forum. He's BTDT, with good results.


----------



## ALKYGTO (Mar 29, 2010)

I have to ask, why iron heads? You can put near as much $$ into some ported iron heads as you would spend on aluminum and with the aluminum you can keep your stock compression. Not to mention the weight savings, more efficient combustion chamber, screw in studs, new valves.......


----------



## la_belle_fermier (Dec 28, 2010)

I hear ya.If i find out that aluminum heads cost roughly the same i will go that route.I was trying to go the sleeper route.I was also thinking of going back to the Quadrajet with cliff ruggles help.


----------



## kilkm68 (May 5, 2011)

I have Edelbrock aluminum heads on my 474 built by Butlers, along with their rotating assembly in my '68, and this motor screams. Butlers have great customer service and are easy people to talk to. I also have a new high performance 200 4r with 373 gears, its a great set up.


----------



## leeklm (Mar 11, 2012)

420 hp or so is in reasonable reach with low cost iron heads. From what I have seen, I would not spend money on porting iron heads. Just go to aluminum at that point...

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

The problem with iron heads on a stroker is compression - too much of it.

If you want someone else to build it, I'm a big fan of CVMS. Aluminum heads can be painted (I did mine) and if you're highly motivated you can even grind off the logos. 
I'm running an 800 cfm Qjet on my 461, on a single plane intake. The car so far has run a best of 11.86 at the track, and also made the whole Hot Rod Power Tour this summer.

Iron heads can be made to work, but you'll have to make compromises, spend almost as much as you would for aluminum, and won't make as much power.

I'd be willing to talk in more detail if you like.

Bear


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

Iron heads also put a LOT more weight right over the front axle...right where you don't want it.


----------



## la_belle_fermier (Dec 28, 2010)

Thanks for all the info.
Lots of stuff to ponder.
I really don't know if my drivetrain could handle 500 plus hp.Thats why I wanted to use iron heads but should I give up the stroker idea and build a beefy 400 with aluminum heads, would that get me in the range I was looking for.


----------



## ALKYGTO (Mar 29, 2010)

Build the motor as you wanted as a stroker and if you don't put slicks on it and/or launch it at 4000 rpm the stock drivetrain should live until you can afford to upgrade it. I ran the stock 4 speed and 10 bolt behind my blown BB for a couple of years and it lived with the street tires and no powershifting.


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

Exactly. Just because you have 500 HP doesn't mean you have to flaunt it. You can drive like a normal person and not tear your stuff up. I used to go through U-joints and trannies. Not any more. Same car, _older_ driver!!


----------



## Orion88 (Apr 24, 2012)

My car before I bought it had a 428 in it. It was running a little over 450hp and was built with mostly production pontiac parts - #13 heads with a little work done to them, a RAIV cam, stock intake, quadrajet, pontiac crank, and I believe it was bored 40 over. I can talk to my friend who had it before me and get some specs for you if you want. I do know that it was a very low cost build and he was smoking people at the drag strip who had well over $10,000 and 600hp under the hood. I can't remember the 1/4 mile time but it was somewhere in the 12's before he even managed to get it tuned and dialed in.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Lots of folks here with very good points. :agree 

Just because you're packing the power doesn't mean you are required to be _deploying_ it all the time. It's still very satisfying to me to be cruising along the freeway and have some moron with a new Camaro or some-such pull alongside and try to "mess" with me. When I don't take the bait, they invariably will blast on by, thinking that they've sure "showed the old dude". Meanwhile, I just smile to myself and understand that the reality of the situation was that they _just weren't worth my time._ 

Now and then I do have my fun though, like a couple weekends ago at the Dallas Cars and Coffee event. Leaving, going up the on-ramp to go back home, there were a couple of late-model something-or-others all over my bumper. By the time I reached the end of the on-ramp and hit the freeway, somehow they'd gotten very tiny in my rear-view  Imagine that...

I love discussions about how to build torque-monster Pontiacs. Truth be told, there are quite a few different ways to do it and each has its own set of merits and challenges (and costs). A big part of the enjoyment comes from planning and building an engine _your way_. If we all wanted to just be brainless copy-cats, we'd all be building little-block or LS ::cough spit:: chevys. 

Speaking of my favorite brand-to-denigrate, I learned something recently. There's a guy in our local Pontiac Club who spent many years working for Pontiac at headquarters, since the 50's. He shared with us some information at the last meeting:

Did you know that Pontiac had their V8 ready to start going into cars beginning in the 19_53_ model year? Neither did I. Chevy threw a fit and got GM to restrain them because their engine wasn't ready - it was still having big time valve train issues. They finally talked Pontiac into letting them use the _Pontiac designed_ stud and ball rocker system, which solved their problems in time for them to release their V8's starting in the 1955 model year. Then they actually _tried_ to continue blocking Pontiac from releasing their V8. That idea got squashed when Pontiac said, "ok fine, but you can't use our valve train." 

So, put that in your pipe and smoke it, chevy guys - the (admittedly) most wide-spread most "popular" engine ever built would have never come to pass had it not been for Pontiac. So there. 

Bear


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

Bear, I was aware of the rocker stud technology being borrowed by Chevrolet from Pontiac, but was unaware it was that early, or of the politics involved. Very interesting, and thanks.


----------



## dedlund400 (May 17, 2020)

BearGFR said:


> The problem with iron heads on a stroker is compression - too much of it.
> 
> If you want someone else to build it, I'm a big fan of CVMS. Aluminum heads can be painted (I did mine) and if you're highly motivated you can even grind off the logos.
> I'm running an 800 cfm Qjet on my 461, on a single plane intake. The car so far has run a best of 11.86 at the track, and also made the whole Hot Rod Power Tour this summer.
> ...


 I have a 400 in my 1970 GTO. The engine is at the machine shop ready for a rebuild. It has never been rebuilt and is in good shape. It has #62 Heads, I am running a 700R4 with 3:31 Posi gears.
My question is it necessary to go with a 461 stroker kit to get 400 hp for the street or can I just rebuild the 400 and go with a roller cam and lifters. I am running a Edelbrock Performer RPM and Holley 750. I like to drive on the freeway and since it is a convertible, I will not be at the drag strip.

Any suggestions are welcom.


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

dedlund400 said:


> I have a 400 in my 1970 GTO. The engine is at the machine shop ready for a rebuild. It has never been rebuilt and is in good shape. It has #62 Heads, I am running a 700R4 with 3:31 Posi gears.
> My question is it necessary to go with a 461 stroker kit to get 400 hp for the street or can I just rebuild the 400 and go with a roller cam and lifters. I am running a Edelbrock Performer RPM and Holley 750. I like to drive on the freeway and since it is a convertible, I will not be at the drag strip.
> 
> Any suggestions are welcom.


The stroker is a more guaranteed way and with more cubic inches, you can achieve more torque and HP with lower compression so you can use pump gas.

You can reach 400 HP with your engine, but you may have to do so using the higher factory compression which means higher octane race type gas or an octane additive.

You will have to go with a much larger cam to hit your goal and that will most likely move your power band up the RPM scale while sacrificing some lower end - which you may not want for a street build. RPM limits may also go up due to the cam profile, so engine internals need to match higher RPM use to fully take advantage of the cam's power range.

However, a roller cam can produce more power when matched against a flat tappet cam. If you go roller cam, then I highly suggest installing one of the available aftermarket lifter bore braces. This is* inexpensive insurance *that you don't bust a lifter bore with the additional side loads a roller lifter can place on them.

So you can get 400 HP out of the engine, but it will be more on the line of a race engine and require high octane gas.


----------



## dedlund400 (May 17, 2020)

PontiacJim said:


> The stroker is a more guaranteed way and with more cubic inches, you can achieve more torque and HP with lower compression so you can use pump gas.
> 
> You can reach 400 HP with your engine, but you may have to do so using the higher factory compression which means higher octane race type gas or an octane additive.
> 
> ...


Thanks Jim :I just found out that using my #62 heads is going to cost me about the same as Edelbrock Performer RPM heads. So I will be going with the Edelbrocks. Also the stroker kit is only going to cost a little over $1000 more than the stock kit.

So based on what I have found out and what you are telling me, this is what I plan to build :
1) Edelbrock Performer RPM Heads
2) Edelbrock Performer RPM Intake
3)Comp Cams Roller Rocker 1;65
4Comp Roller Cam and lifter #CCA-51-413
5) 462 Stroker Kit

Any suggestions ?


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

dedlund400 said:


> Thanks Jim :I just found out that using my #62 heads is going to cost me about the same as Edelbrock Performer RPM heads. So I will be going with the Edelbrocks. Also the stroker kit is only going to cost a little over $1000 more than the stock kit.
> 
> So based on what I have found out and what you are telling me, this is what I plan to build :
> 1) Edelbrock Performer RPM Heads
> ...


The stroker kit from Butler is probably the best bang for your buck. Your machinist will let you know the bore size so you can order your pistons. You'll have forged pistons and rods so no worriers with the bottom end, ie cast rods & pistons.

A good pump gas compression for iron heads is 9.0-9.3 and aluminum heads are said to go 1 point more in compression. I would shoot for 10.0. You can go higher, but from my reading, the higher the compression the bigger the LSA you want.

You will need the correct and matching head bolts for the E-head. Never used E-heads, but read they use their own head bolts.

I don't know squat about roller cams, but for a larger cubic inch engine, if it were a flat tappet, I would definitely go with more duration, 270/280 ish, and a 112 LSA. Looking at the specs, the cam is listed for 1,000 - 5,000 RPM's. With the forged bottom end and E-heads, I would want an RPM range a little higher 1,200 - 5,200. Lift with 1.65 rockers looks good.

Strongly suggest the Butler Pro 60 PSI blueprinted oil pump and a new steel oil pump shaft.

The rear main oli seal has been covered here. The 2 piece Viton can work, but the crank's seal surface should have serrations on the journal. If they are too rough, they can cut into the Viton seal and eat it up causing leaks. The serrations can be smoothed down with emery paper. However, many seem to like and have less issues, with the Best brand graphite rope seal. The rope seal actually takes advantage of the serrations as the purpose of the serrations is to draw in a microfilm of oil to keep the rope seal lubed up. The factory used a rope seal.

When installing your intake, always tighten the long top bolt at the timing cover where you will be putting the rubber O-ring timing cover-to-manifold seal. This will draw the manifold tight up against the seal. Then you torque down the intake bolts. If you don't draw the intake tight first, you may have a water leak at the O-ring.


----------



## dedlund400 (May 17, 2020)

Thanks Jim, your recommendations are very helpful.


----------



## Old Man Taylor (May 9, 2011)

I would speak with the Butler's for a cam recommendation, but I think the one you listed would be a stump puller. It's only 212/218 at 0.050" lift.


----------



## Lemans guy (Oct 14, 2014)

When I built mine I went to Butler’s they are near me and first rate. They cut my short block and everything they did was super. I used Iron heads but wound up putting as much in them and more time effort and money, then a set of edelbrock heads from Butler.nSo Inthink you made a good choice. I did an Eagle crank 461 stoker kit from Butler as well. I have a flat tapped cam and Harland sharp a roller rockers.

on the cam I went direct to Lunati. They are near Memphis, they have Greta cams and cut a custom cam for $50 over the price of an off the shelf cam...about $150 off the shelf...$200 custom.

Give them a call very helpful and they will go right with your combo.

good luck sounds great!


----------



## dedlund400 (May 17, 2020)

The cam is one of the milder cams they recommend on their website.


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Also talk to the folks at Bullet Cams. They built the solid roller I'm running now in my 461, and it makes .620 net valve lift after considering lash, and does it with 1.5:1 rockers. I like that because it means less stress on the rocker studs plus more pushrod to rocker clearance. 

Once you decide to deviate from stock, making sure all the nuances of setting up the valve train is not trivial. Get one thing wrong, spring pressure, pushrod length, spring height either open or closed, rocker to pushrod clearance, rocker to retainer clearance, retainer to valve guide/ stem seal clearance, and you can be in for a world of hurt. 

Bear


----------



## dedlund400 (May 17, 2020)

PontiacJim said:


> The stroker kit from Butler is probably the best bang for your buck. Your machinist will let you know the bore size so you can order your pistons. You'll have forged pistons and rods so no worriers with the bottom end, ie cast rods & pistons.
> 
> A good pump gas compression for iron heads is 9.0-9.3 and aluminum heads are said to go 1 point more in compression. I would shoot for 10.0. You can go higher, but from my reading, the higher the compression the bigger the LSA you want.
> 
> ...





dedlund400 said:


> Thanks Jim :I just found out that using my #62 heads is going to cost me about the same as Edelbrock Performer RPM heads. So I will be going with the Edelbrocks. Also the stroker kit is only going to cost a little over $1000 more than the stock kit.
> 
> So based on what I have found out and what you are telling me, this is what I plan to build :
> 1) Pontiac #62 Ram Air 111 Heads with .060 Head Gasket-9:5 CR
> ...


HI Jim : I made a few changes in my build.
1) I am going with a set of #62 Heads with a combined Compression Ratio of 9.5 :1.
2) My machinist asked me if I want ARP Screw in Studs on the block or bolts for the heads ?
3) Is the Comp Roller Cam # K51-413-9 right for this build ? Lift : 487/495 Lift, Duration :264/270, LSA :110
Looking for at least 400 HP


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

I strongly recommend against using thick head gaskets. They'll kill the quench properties at tdc that do good things for combustion efficiency and also help keep it safe from detonation-inducing hot spots. If you need more clearance volume to get compression down where you want it with iron heads, do it with D-shaped piston dishes that preserve the quench pad area. In a "standard" 461 with those 72cc #62 heads, and other measurements nominal for Pontiac, Mahle vc head gaskets, you'll need 27cc's of dish volume in reach piston to get down to 9.375:1.
That's quite a bit. 

Bear


----------



## dedlund400 (May 17, 2020)

I have been told that 10:1 CR is too high for a Pontiac stroker, do you agree ? If so, I may have to go back to the Edelbrock heads .What do you think ?


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

For iron heads on pump gas, I think 10:1 is too risky for the amount of benefit. For aluminum heads, that's actually a little on the low side.


----------



## Old Man Taylor (May 9, 2011)

I agree 10:1is too high for iron heads. It will be fine for aluminum heads. I ran a 400 with E-heads that was 9.9:1. It ran 10.71 at 124 in a 3500 pound car. The can was much larger, but the point is that it ran well. The cam was 271/278 on a 106 LSA wth net lift right at 0.600". As to the fasteners, if you don't take the heads off a lot, then use whatever you want. I ran one pair with bolts, and my 505 has studs.


----------



## dedlund400 (May 17, 2020)

So , how would you suggest to get the CR down to 9.5:1 ? Dished pistons are more expensive and what would that do to my quench ? Should I just go ahead and spring for the Edelbrock heads >


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

Dished pistons aren't bad as long as they're D-shaped dishes, not round ones.
Like this:









...and not like this









See the difference?

In the first photo, that area "above/behind" the valve pockets is called a quench pad and it's there to do exactly that: produce a quench effect that promotes turbulence in the cylinder as the piston nears TDC on the compression stroke. That's a good thing because it promotes a more thoroughly mixed air/fuel mixture that burns better and more evenly.

To get a little deeper into this whole topic of compression ratio (I'm home now on my PC instead of answering on my phone):
This topic is one of those that you tend to find polarizes people into two camps.

One camp says "never no-how no way build an engine that has more than the recommended compression for today's pump gas". That "rule of thumb" is in the neighborhood of the pump gas octane rating you plan to use /10 - 9.3:1 for 93 octane, 8.7:1 for 87 octane, etc.

The other camp swears you can get away with more - a lot more - if you pay attention to this thing called "dynamic compression ratio" with takes into account cam timing and duration. They'll also point to people they know of (or themselves) who are getting away with 10.x:1 and even 11:1 engines on pump gas with no problems.

So who's right? Well they both are, kinda. Let me explain.
The whole 'dynamic compression ratio' theory is that with lots of duration and a relatively 'late' intake valve closing event, the cylinders can't begin to compress the incoming air/fuel charge until the intake valve closes, so the later that happens, the less cylinder pressure will result from compression and the less likely you are to get into detonation. That sort of seems to make sense, until you dig deeper. It all has to do with air flow, and the fact that air (and fuel) have mass. Because they have mass, they're subject to Newtonian mechanics (Newton's laws) especially the one that says when you start pushing on something it's going to take SOME TIME for it starts moving, and how much time that takes is proportional to how much mass it has. 
But hold on --- what's really happening with a long duration, late intake closing cam? We know that as a cam gets more radical it causes both peak torque (and therefore peak horsepower) to happen at a higher and higher RPM. Howzit doo that? The key concept is in this engine property called Volumetric Efficiency --- how "full" is the engine able to get its cylinders before it lights the fire and starts the burn. The RPM where an engine reaches its maximum VE (does the best job of getting its cylinders full) is where it will make the highest torque, because that's where it's burning the most fuel, and releasing the most energy from the fuel it burns. So what that long duration cam is actually doing, is it's MOVING the point of max VE (best cylinder filling) to a higher RPM by changing when the valves open/close and how long they're held open. It's compensating for how, as RPM goes up there is less time to fill the cylinders. That column of air/fuel mixture that's sitting behind that closed intake valve doesn't know or care about RPM. It's going to take the same amount of time to get off its butt and get moving when that valve opens, regardless of RPM. So the only way to get those cylinders full as RPM goes up is to open the valve "earlier" and hold it open "longer" in terms of the number of degrees of crankshaft rotation. In our old engines with fixed cam shafts, we have to choose the RPM where we want the engine to be most efficient and install a cam that provides that. This is why an engine with a "hot" cam runs like crap at idle. At low RPM the valves are being held open WAY too long - so much so that the air flow in the engine can actually reverse and flow backwards, sucking exhaust back into the cylinders and pushing fresh air/fuel back out through the still open intake valve - a phenomonon called reversion. That lumpy idle that everyone associates with a hot engine is actually an engine that's having to struggle just to stay running. "Modern" engines with VVT (variable valve timing) have the ability to ALTER their valve timing in real time via computer control - that's one of the reasons that they're able to produce good power over such a wide operating range. But until/if someone makes a VVT system we can retrofit onto our old Pontiacs, we'll have to pick a cam with fixed valve timings/lift/duration and live with it.

That's the fallacy of the 'dynamic compression ratio' idea. Once you reach peak VE RPM, the cylinders are getting their maximum fill (due to flow inertia and the 'ram effect' of the fast moving air flow through the engine) and they are building maximum compression. If there's any advantage to avoiding detonation, it's because at the higher RPM there is less TIME for it to happen - not because there's any less cylinder pressure because of the late intake closing. 

Where am I on this whole deal? Keep reading. 
It's true that a long duration, late intake closing event will reduce cylinder pressure AT LOW RPM (where detonation is more likely). I also believe that there are at least some people who are successfully 'getting away with' lots more compression on pump gas with iron heads than the first camp thinks possible. 
However, to be successful -everything- has to be, and be kept perfect. The cooling system has to be right, the fuel mixture has to be near perfect at all times, and you have to constantly stay "on top of things" to keep them that way.

What's the benefit?
Here's an ugly truth. In a 461 in the 500 HP range like we're talking about, the difference in power output between 9.5:1 and 10.5:1, all else kept equal - will amount to maybe about 8 or so horsepower. 8 - No where near enough for you to feel in your pants or to measure anywhere except on a dyno or perhaps see on a drag strip time slip. Is that 8 hp difference important enough to you to offset having an engine that you have to constantly babysit, tune, and fret about vs. one that you just drive and enjoy? I know the answer for me is "not on your life" - but I can't make that decision for anyone else.

Now if you're building a pure race car, sure - you want every shred of power you can milk out of it. But for a street car? Nah, not worth it to me.

You makes your choices, pays your money, and takes your chances.

Bear


----------



## BearGFR (Aug 25, 2008)

dedlund400 said:


> Should I just go ahead and spring for the Edelbrock heads


Depends...
* First of all, even out of the box and untouched Edelbrock's are going to outflow and outperform any Factory Pontiac head, with the possible exception of RA V's.
(If you do choose that, buy the heads "bare" (without springs or valves) and have them finished out/prepped by someone who knows what they're doing. The 'complete' heads with springs and valves tend to use lower quality stuff. There are some youtube videos out there on the subject you should find and watch with regard to 'ready to run' heads). 

The aftermarket heads are also going to have hardened exhaust seats for unleaded fuel, whereas the stock heads prior to when unleaded fuel was mandated won't. There's debate about how much that matters too, but that decision is up to you.
They aren't cheap. A set of aftermarket heads properly prepped (bought bare and outfitted) is going to set you back about $3000 once it's all said and done. Checkout the Butler site for their ready to run E-heads (which in fact they buy bare and outfit with 'the good stuff' like Ferrea valves themselves.)
Depending on which specific heads you choose, you still might need non-standard/custom pistons so be careful.
A set of dished pistons to work with your iron heads can cost anywhere from about $600-$700 (if you're lucky enough to be able to use an in-stock more or less 'off the shelf' piston) to around $1100 for a full custom, made to spec set.
Regardless, don't try to use/reuse the factory rods. By the time you get them resized and prepped, you'll spend almost as much as you would for a decent set of aftermarket forged rods and you'll still have "just factory rods" - which are known to be the weak link in these engines. 

Just one example:
A set of Butler's 87 cc, 300 CFM round port heads: $3000
https://butlerperformance.com/i-244...72cc-edl-rdport-300.html?ref=category:1394343

461 rotating assembly - cast crank, pistons, forged rods, rings) : $1800
(My opinion is that you don't NEED a forged crank until you're at 600+ horsepower)
https://butlerperformance.com/i-316...-400-block-4-250str.html?ref=category:1459542

If you zero deck the block (pistons are level with the top of the deck at TDC) you'll end up with 10:1 compression in an engine that will be boatloads of fun on the street, will run on just about any pump gas, and you won't have to sweat bullets about keeping it tuned.

But, it won't look stock - even if you paint the heads Pontiac blue.

Hard to argue with that...
Bear


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

dedlund400 said:


> HI Jim : I made a few changes in my build.
> 1) I am going with a set of #62 Heads with a combined Compression Ratio of 9.5 :1.
> 2) My machinist asked me if I want ARP Screw in Studs on the block or bolts for the heads ?
> 3) Is the Comp Roller Cam # K51-413-9 right for this build ? Lift : 487/495 Lift, Duration :264/270, LSA :110
> Looking for at least 400 HP


Re-read my post #18.

Factory Pontiac bolts are good and can be re-used. I just preferred to use the ARP main studs and head studs - just because I can and have the budget to do so.

Do not like a 110 LSA as it will build additional cylinder pressure, as Bear explained, called "Dynamic Compression." This is counter-productive in what you want, lower compression which means lower cylinder pressure. 112-114 LSA would be a better choice. Lift & duration look OK because the roller will open faster, stay open a bit longer, and without doing any major port work, the lift should be good.

The 461 stroker kit will include Ross pistons which you can order with the needed CC's/Dish to work with the #62 heads to get your compression under 9.5, but better to be 9.3 and under. 
1.) You machinist needs to CC one head chamber with the new valves to have an accurate volume in CC's of the chamber. 
2.) Then he will need to know how far down in the cylinder the piston top is. Seeing that you will be using Ross custom pistons, you can have the wrist pin moved to raise the piston higher in the bore - which eliminates any need to "zero deck" the block.
3.) Quench/Squish should be .040-.045". If you adjust the piston pin height and get "zero deck," then you can use a standard Felpro head gasket and won't need a high dollar head gasket.

STOP worrying about HP numbers unless you plan on putting on the dyno just for bragging rights. Shoot for good torque numbers as torque is what moves the car.

If you go with the stroker build, you will need the better flowing E-head (and 10.0-10.5 compression) as the stock heads will not flow enough CFM's without being modified for more CFM's. I'll work, but you may find the engine will only (as an example) rev to 5,000 RPM's because it can't take in any more air - the head flow has been max'd out.

So the 400CI if using the iron heads will work a lot better because the engine won't need the extra CFM's. In this way, you can use the iron heads, and all your other parts. You will need forged rods, forged dished pistons as Bear has stated, your stock crank should be good as long as it checks out. Then you will have it all balanced. With forged rods/pistons, you should have no issues turning 6K and then you want a cam that will compliment the higher RPM's. But, NO ONE CAM DOES IT ALL - so getting a cam to work in the upper RPM's may sacrifice some lower RPM's and that is why a higher stall converter/better gearing is used and recommended by the cam grinders. EVERYTHING has to match, stuff in the engine, the engine to the trans, the trans to the rear gearing. You could have 400 HP and not feel like it if wrong driveline parts are selected. On the other hand, you could have 350HP and feel like 425HP beacuse the gearing makes the car go like a rocket ship. So, a lot of things have to be thought out so you get what you want out of the engine & car itself.

Yep, it is difficult to come up with a game plan and have 100 suggestions from 100 guys, so it might be better to be honest and have a budget and then see what kind of HP you can get out of it. Roller cam, E-heads, 461 stroker, machine work, etc. is a high dollar build and will put out way more than 500 HP, but may be quite radical on the street and not a comfortable car to drive around town at low speeds - not to mention you want to buy stocks in a gasoline company as you drain that gas tank real easy.


----------

