[DeTomaso] 351C Crankshaft Question

[Göran Malmberg]

In the mid 70:s I was in a team running 351C in the Swedish "small" pro 
stock class.
The cars where running 8,5 and 270km/hr. We used 3,30-3,40 and sometimes 
stock
stroke. The Hp was for sure over 600, and without braking cranks. As I 
understood
the situation it was the RPM together with stroke that might brake the 
crank, not really
Hp. I have also had doubble turbo Pantera 351:s here where the crank seem to 
live,
high Hp but limited rpm engines.
I newer actually seen a broken 4V crank, just heard that such thing could 
happen.
Goran



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Engles" <cengles at cox.net>
To: "tony DiGiovanna" <tonydigi at optonline.net>
Cc: <detomaso at realbig.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2008 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] 351C Crankshaft Question


> Dear Tony,
>
>
>             In my opinion, a stock crank would work fine in such a
> situation.
>
>
>                            Haven't broke a crank yet,  Chuck Engles
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "tony DiGiovanna" <tonydigi at optonline.net>
> To: "Daniel C Jones" <daniel.c.jones2 at gmail.com>; <detomaso at realbig.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 11:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] 351C Crankshaft Question
>
>
>> One more time on a common debate:  For a stock-displacement Cleve of 10:1
>> compression for occasional track and street use, do we prefer a stock
>> crank,
>> cast steel crank, or forged crank????
>> Either way, I'm leaning for an internally-balanced set-up this time
>> around.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: detomaso-bounces at realbig.com
>> [mailto:detomaso-bounces at realbig.com]On Behalf Of Daniel C Jones
>> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:30 PM
>> To: detomaso at realbig.com
>> Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] 351C Crankshaft Question
>>
>>
>>> Does anyone know if this is a correct 351C crankshaft, or is it one of
>> those
>>> Windsor cranks that's been machined to fit a Cleveland, but require some
>> kind
>>> of spacer arrangement to mount the dampener?
>>
>> It requires the snout spacer.  More importantly it is designed for 6" 
>> rods
>> so you won't have to turn the OD down to clear the piston skirts.  Many
>> of the Windsor with 351C main cranks are designed for 6.2" rods and
>> when used in a 9.2" deck block with 6" rods, there is a piston skirt
>> clearance issue which requires the crank OD be reduced which then upsets
>> the balance requiring expensive Mallory metal and labor.
>>
>> The SCAT 9000 series cast crank is the only one that I'm aware of
>> that uses a true 351C snout and does not require a spacer.  The rest
>> of the SCAT forged steel cranks don't have the OD problem but they
>> do require the spacer.
>>
>> Carrillo (via their K1 subsidary) is making 351C main forged steel cranks
>> in 3.5", 3.75" and 3.9" strokes.  They are designed for 6.125" rods and
>> internal balance (the Eagle and SCAT cranks are 28.2 oz-in external).
>> They do require the snout spacer and are $729 from flatlander last I
>> checked.
>>
>> Dan Jones
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>
>> Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>>
>> DeTomaso mailing list
>> DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
>> http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>>
>> Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>>
>> DeTomaso mailing list
>> DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
>> http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>
> Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>
> DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
> http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>