5.0 bored to a 347 stroker engine swap

jsadamsjr1986

Registered User
I want to swap my 3.8 to a 5.0 stroker fuel injected. Could anyone tell me what i would need besides the engine, wireing harness, and computer. Any opinions welcome
 
About 5K in cash if you plan on doing all the work.

BTW - Go 331 and not 347. 347's are oil burner's.
 
Last edited:
I plan on doing this to my 5.0. I got the stroker kit, just need to do the work to the block and get the crank polished.

There's tons of info on this in the 5.0 forum of www.tccoa.com i reccomend you check it out.
 
Blk89TBSC said:
BTW - Go 331 and not 347. 347's are oil burner's.

really? I had a 347 that never burnt any oil... company car is a 347 that doesnt burn oil either. Have built a couple other 347's that were fine.

CHP had these problems a while ago cause of the ring location...


unless you are using a 69-72ish 302 block, there is no reason in making it any bigger anyway, since its a weak link and the stock rotating assembly can take more power..
 
Blown 91 Bird said:
really? I had a 347 that never burnt any oil... company car is a 347 that doesnt burn oil either. Have built a couple other 347's that were fine.

CHP had these problems a while ago cause of the ring location...


unless you are using a 69-72ish 302 block, there is no reason in making it any bigger anyway, since its a weak link and the stock rotating assembly can take more power..

So you are saying that only do this if i use a 69-72 302 block? what do you mean about the weak link and rotating assembly?
 
x182dan said:
go with a 331 its better

Dan,

I investigated the 331 vs. 347 debate for a couple months before ordering my turbo car motor. Conclusion....Due to the lack of a support ring for the lower oil control ring, where it intersects the wrist pin, a great deal of the Keith Kraft 347s had some oil control issues. That problem was fixed years ago and not something that's an issue on any of the 347 stroker kits currently being sold.

The argument about undesireable rod ratio and increased side loads with a 347 is also unsupported as many other popular motor combos have a worse rod ratio than the 347 and do not experince issues with premature cylinder wear.

I went with a 347 on my motor swap project.

David
 
I've always been told when trying to decide between a 331 and 347 is weight of car, rpm usage range and transmission type.

331 for a light weight car with more top end rpm range and a big geared manual.

347 for a heavy bodied car, more low end/mid range rpm usage and either a manual or auto car.
 
Back
Top