152 stroker

[mallen]

You can't turn a 304 into a 392. That has been discussed a few times over the years. . I therefore will say, you can't turn a 152 into a 192 and cite those discussions. I don't know about the fours per SE, but I do know that a four is just half an 8. There's not enough thickness in the walls to bore it and the deck is shorter so you can't get the stroke.

Your not missing anything, it won't work. You can get a little extra stroke, but not that much, and you can get a little bit larger bore, but not that much.

 

[mallen]

That answer doesn't address the points I made regarding cost and particularly reliability.

BTW, This forum, "Irma's Place", is supposed to be for discussions about appliances and other IH Non-Vehicle items. Then again, maybe it was appropriately chosen ......

Could be for a generator or a stationary pump for all I know...

 

[mallen]

I might be wrong here, but isn't a 196 the same as a 152, but with a longer stroke??

Sort of. But sort of not. A 152 is half a 304, and a 192 is half a 392. They even had 192IC (improved cooling) engines. The 152 and 192 blocks are as different as the 304 and 392 blocks.

 

[Dana Strong]

a 182 is half a 392.

Maybe with new math, but the way I learned (when facts mattered), 182 is half of 364 and 196 is still half of 392. Yes, I may be getting old and neither my eyes nor my fingers (what's left of them) still work as well as they used to, but I don't try typing on one of those damn small "devices" and I also try not to do it when I'm half asleep or just in from a party , either.

 

[mallen]

So

Maybe with new math, but the way I learned (when facts mattered), 182 is half of 364 and 196 is still half of 392. Yes, I may be getting old and neither my eyes nor my fingers (what's left of them) still work as well as they used to, but I don't try typing on one of those damn small "devices" and I also try not to do it when I'm half asleep or just in from a party , either.

That shows how much you know. The only thing you post on your phone when you come in from a party is a selfie if yourself covered in your own vomit hunched over a toilet.

And don't try to fall back on your facts. I refuse to admit I'm ever wrong. It's the American way!

 

[Dana Strong]

The only thing you post on your phone when you come in from a party is a selfie

You must have me confused with someone else; My phone is an old rotary landline, nobody invites me to parties, and for all I know a "selfie" is a modern spoiled kid (of any age) who thinks only his ignorant opinion is of value. I don't keep friends in that category ... (although I do know some polecaticians [Gov. Gruesom included] who belong there).

BTW, have you ever had to do analyses of vomit, stomach contents, livers etc for toxic chemicals, or did you just test the non-animal (some really aren't 'human') environment?

 

[Joe Hurley]

Let me know what's wrong with this math:

196/152 = ~1.29 so if the stroke is originally 6", to get the increased volume it will need to lengthen to 1.29 x 6" = ~7.7", an increase of 7.7 - 6 = 1.7". Won't that much offset grinding make the crankshaft have rather small rod journals?

Yes, to increase compression a bit this should work but for the reason cited here? What am I missing?

I'm not checking your math. Your thought process is incorrect from the start.

 

[mallen]

You must have me confused with someone else; My phone is an old rotary landline, nobody invites me to parties, and for all I know a "selfie" is a modern spoiled kid (of any age) who thinks only his ignorant opinion is of value. I don't keep friends in that category ... (although I do know some polecaticians [Gov. Gruesom included] who belong there).

BTW, have you ever had to do analyses of vomit, stomach contents, livers etc for toxic chemicals, or did you just test the non-animal (some really aren't 'human') environment?

I never had to do those. It was typically air samples or a unknown substance, but I bet there's some crazy stuff they find.

 

[Dana Strong]

I'm not checking your math. Your thought process is incorrect from the start.

Please explain how so. As I understood it, he wanted essentially turn a 152 into a 192 and you were suggesting how to accomplish that. Increasing the stroke by some much smaller fraction would increase power by only a small amount, not much compared to the cost of doing so, particularly considering the alternative possibilities.

 

[Dana Strong]

I never had to do those. It was typically air samples or a unknown substance, but I bet there's some crazy stuff they find.

Yes, I remember a story from the mid-70's about a fellow in Britain who told his doctor there was nothing that could be done for him; some days earlier, he'd purposely taken a particular insecticide or herbicide, and although it was now gone, the liver damage would soon be terminal. That brings up the problem for the ME's office: to what extend does it go ( in analyzing folder samples) to confirm the agent. This was before both widespread transplants, and more modern computerized equipment (with the greater sensitivity and selectivity) for GC, MS, etc.
IIRC, a crude way to confirm blood CO used CuCl2; headspace gas reduced it to elemental Cu. and the thin film could be easily seen. GC analysis could eliminate most other common causes for the reduction.

 

[Joe Hurley]

Please explain how so. As I understood it, he wanted essentially turn a 152 into a 192 and you were suggesting how to accomplish that. Increasing the stroke by some much smaller fraction would increase power by only a small amount, not much compared to the cost of doing so, particularly considering the alternative possibilities.

Nonsense. I never suggested he could increase the stroke enough to make 196 ci.

 

[Dana Strong]

Nonsense. I never suggested he could increase the stroke enough to make 196 ci.

I didn't say you said that, but isn't that what he's trying to do? As I said, the work makes little sense if he only gets 5 or even 10% increase in power.

 

[mallen]

My thought is, if your going to put the money into a rebuild, especially if your goal was more power, you would be better off starting with the 192. That's a big increase right there and anything else you get on top of that is gravy.

If your willing to dump money into it, go turbo with fuel injection. There ain't no replacement for displacement, except for forced induction. If you don't get greedy, it should work well, but don't get greedy.

But still, it seems if your going that direction start with a larger engine.

 

[kingben01]

My thought is, if your going to put the money into a rebuild, especially if your goal was more power, you would be better off starting with the 19#. That's a big increase right there and anything else you get on top of that is gravy.

If your willing to dump money into it, go turbo with fuel injection. There ain't no replacement for displacement, except for forced induction. If you don't get greedy, it should work well, but don't get greedy.

But still, it seems if your going that direction start with a larger engine.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Robert Kenney]

I have a 152 crank that I had professionally welded and offset ground to 3.75 stroke. It uses BBC rods and bearings. Will be combined with a 4" bore. It is a back burner project at the moment but should be a good runner and better stroke to bore and rod ratio.
Photos with a mock up piston with compression height giving 0 deck. Using a NOS 152 block that I sounded for core shift and wall thickness.
A note on the crank work, the grinder/welder did not extend the big end rod thrust faces. I will need to address that.
Displacements
@ 4.00 bore 188.5 CID
@ 4.03 bore 191 CID
@ 4.06 bore 194 CID

 

[jeff campbell]

I have a 152 crank that I had professionally welded and offset ground to 3.75 stroke. It uses BBC rods and bearings. Will be combined with a 4" bore. It is a back burner project at the moment but should be a good runner and better stroke to bore and rod ratio.
Photos with a mock up piston with compression height giving 0 deck. Using a NOS 152 block that I sounded for core shift and wall thickness.
A note on the crank work, the grinder/welder did not extend the big end rod thrust faces. I will need to address that.
Displacements
@ 4.00 bore 188.5 CID
@ 4.03 bore 191 CID
@ 4.06 bore 194 CID

View attachment 209867 View attachment 209868 View attachment 209869

Been wondering how you was getting along with it. Nice to see !

 

[GNIKK]

Have a couple of questions, I am not a BBC guy. I was looking at your rod cap, the only ones I have seen like that were for tractors/pullers, they stroke them. Also do you have to recess the pistons for valve clearance? Or new pistons.

 

[Robert Kenney]

Have a couple of questions, I am not a BBC guy. I was looking at your rod cap, the only ones I have seen like that were for tractors/pullers, they stroke them. Also do you have to recess the pistons for valve clearance? Or new pistons.

Those are off the shelf 6.135 C to C Scat Pro Comp BBC rods. Common in rebuilding mild performance engines.
Valve reliefs on the IH will be small if any. The lift at TDC is where things can get tight. With a flat top piston and the conservative cam duration it should be fine but, the clearance will be thoroughly mapped ,

 

[jeff campbell]

Those are off the shelf 6.135 C to C Scat Pro Comp BBC rods. Common in rebuilding mild performance engines.
Valve reliefs on the IH will be small if any. The lift at TDC is where things can get tight. With a flat top piston and the conservative cam duration it should be fine but, the clearance will be thoroughly mapped ,

What will lift be

 

[Robert Kenney]

Lift around .525/.550. Fully prepped head flow @ lift will probably paint that picture for me. I have a line on a roller cam maker who is interested. That will change the personality of this a bunch. Still up in the air on many details.