|
08-02-2017, 04:40 PM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 16
|
Stroker vs Stock Displacement
Will a cammed stroker reduce gas mileage more than a cammed motor of stock displacement with equal grade cams?
|
08-03-2017, 10:32 AM | #2 |
finally paid for
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ypsilanti Twp, Mi
Posts: 4,077
|
Re: Stroker vs Stock Displacement
all variables being the same...it shouldn't BUT you have a lot of variables to control.
__________________
2004 mach 1-turbo build in progress.. Fast xfi 2.0 OLD combo- 826rwhp/720 trq -100 shot NX 9.13@154 on 100 shot NEW- in progress... |
08-03-2017, 10:51 AM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 16
|
Re: Stroker vs Stock Displacement
Thank you! That is what I'm asking. Assuming all variables, spark, timing, AF ratio are the same, that a cammed stroker would still be daily driver friendly. It seems like with more air, a larger cam would be needed for the stroker, but I didn't know if a larger cam ALWAYS means more fuel burned. I would like to go with a forged 302 stroker kit and get custom grind cams, but not if it means my daily driver will get 10mpg around the city.
I am about to swap a t56 into the Mach though, so that should help slightly. |
08-03-2017, 11:00 AM | #4 |
it's soo-tack
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Fairmont, WV
Posts: 2,082
|
Re: Stroker vs Stock Displacement
More displacement and longer duration cam means more air which will require more fuel. If no more fuel is added then the mixture would be lean. The difference between 281 and 302 shouldn't be much, though.
__________________
mark 2004 DSG Mach 1. Built motor. Turbo. 667whp 2006 Sonic Blue Focus. Built motor. Turbo. 12.4 @ 115mph (sold) 2003 DSG Mach 1. 12.65 @ 106 (sold) |
08-03-2017, 11:11 AM | #5 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 16
|
Re: Stroker vs Stock Displacement
Any idea what a ballpark figure would be for combined mpg with a cammed 302 stroker paired with a t56 using 4.10 gears? Comp cams 106100's are about the aggression level I'm shooting for.
I want to go stroker because of the added power, but also because of the benefit of having more power lower in the rpm's. The car will have a p&p 10" short runner on it. I know that plus cams shifts power upward and helps it wind out farther, but that generally detracts from the low end as well. |
08-03-2017, 11:50 AM | #6 | |
SVT
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 812
|
Re: Stroker vs Stock Displacement
Quote:
I thought id want a stroker super bad for the torque and easy ability to make power, but Compression also allows the motor to make good power! One day ill have a BB stroker setup though
__________________
2001 Zinc yellow SVT Cobra Forged 11.5CR 284ci Comp 106500 cams - Degreed 01 cobra Heads - tastefully modded Roys ported/polished Intake Kooks longtubes, Magnaflow catback D&D T3650, Mgw shifted FTB Goodies, 4.30s, FRPP diff cover, 31 splined IRS 04 cobra interior , black termy seats, Speedhut gauges Tubular K, MM coilovers/ Koni SA yellows Starkweather tuned, 24* timing on 91 octane 11.7 @ 117mph 1.62 60ft. Raceweight 3200lbs Next up:Sullivan intake and hat, self tuning.. |
|
08-03-2017, 01:26 PM | #7 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 16
|
Re: Stroker vs Stock Displacement
I thank you for that! It looks like it depends on he cam and tune that goes along with it. You have a pretty hefty cam in there too! I see that your cobra has the exact suspension I'm looking at, besides the IRS part. Can you tell me, so you consider the cost of the MM coilovers, tubular a-arms, tubular k-member, and the Koni SA Yellows to be worth the cost even if it's mostly a street car that might only see 3-4 1/4 mile passes a year?
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|