[eman88]

ok so i got my 88 put in the shop to have a cam and intake and roller rockers and alot of shit installed where it bent a valve so i dont want to put just a new top end in the car so in personal experience which has been better the 347 or 331 and why

[Hunt_chevs]

Originally Posted by e3sean depends if u want more or less power.... 331 less power 347 more power

.

[HMUSN]

don't 347's tend to burn oil?







347 ftw.

[trueblue01]

393

[Iownastang]

454 sbf

[cybertech]

331 if you want something for the street that will last

[fogged306]

Originally Posted by cybertech 331 if you want something for the street that will last

do you own a flame suit?

[Iownastang]

Originally Posted by cybertech 331 if you want something for the street that will last

Please explain yourself. DO YOU HAVE FACTS TO Prove that a 331 is better than a 347? Have you ever had a 347? Please prove to me and the rest of the people on this site how a 331 is better than a 347?

[Avaric3]

go wit the 347 and never look back

[Pure Stock]

347. Why? Lets just say the 331.68 c.i.d. makes 1.5 FWHP and the 346.95 makes the same power per c.i.d. The 347 would be making 520.43 FWHP and the 331.68 would be making 497.52 FWHP. And if the examples are of the 4.03 bore family the 347 is going to come ahead in the torque production because of the mechanical advantage the increased stroke offers. It's a win win situation. Everything else being equal.

[thatdavidkid]

the ONLY downfall to 347's that i've seen personally is that they burn oil... they all do, it's because the piston wrist pin is very far up on the piston, so far, in fact, that the oil control ring is at the same spot... therfore, oil gets by... therfore they burn oil... if you are wanting a weekend cruiser, 347 all the way.. if you want to drive it often, like almost every day, i'd say go for a low comp. 331 and supercharge it...

[Iownastang]

Originally Posted by thatdavidkid the ONLY downfall to 347's that i've seen personally is that they burn oil... they all do, it's because the piston wrist pin is very far up on the piston, so far, in fact, that the oil control ring is at the same spot... therfore, oil gets by... therfore they burn oil... if you are wanting a weekend cruiser, 347 all the way.. if you want to drive it often, like almost every day, i'd say go for a low comp. 331 and supercharge it...

[fogged306]

Originally Posted by Pure Stock 347. Why? Lets just say the 331.68 c.i.d. makes 1.5 FWHP and the 346.95 makes the same power per c.i.d. The 347 would be making 520.43 FWHP and the 331.68 would be making 497.52 FWHP. And if the examples are of the 4.03 bore family the 347 is going to come ahead in the torque production because of the mechanical advantage the increased stroke offers. It's a win win situation. Everything else being equal.

You need to stop by this site and post more often... so do TMoss and Woody for that matter!

[e3sean]

Originally Posted by thatdavidkid the ONLY downfall to 347's that i've seen personally is that they burn oil... they all do, it's because the piston wrist pin is very far up on the piston, so far, in fact, that the oil control ring is at the same spot... therfore, oil gets by... therfore they burn oil... if you are wanting a weekend cruiser, 347 all the way.. if you want to drive it often, like almost every day, i'd say go for a low comp. 331 and supercharge it...

read my sig....... NUFF SAID!!!!!

i am pretty sure myself and about 20 other people that i know that i race with have a 347 and not one of us burn oil.... maybe whoever built the engines that were burning the oil you are thinking of needs to learn hot to build an engine.....

[e3sean]

347!!!

20080816221643.flv - Video - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

20080816221643.flv - Video - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

[Sleeper_Stang_89]

the only reason to go lower cubes is a class restiction... cubic inches makes power...plain and simple...

[Sleeper_Stang_89]

also remember 302 parts make 302 power... Im assuming you have a set of heads in mind? an intake? cam?

[trueblue01]

No doubt that you get more cubes for the same money 331 vs. 347. The rod aspect ratio is almost ideal in the 331 while the 347 goes past that point. You end up with some wasted motion which translates into lost "potential" HP which is more than compensated for by the increase in displacement. The statement that 347s burn oil is part myth part fact. With the improved design of 347 stroker pistons over the past 10 years most of the issues have been addressed and rectified. Don't kill the mensenger here. What still remains is the fact that due to the exagerated rod aspect ratio of the 347 there is more side loading of the piston skirt to the cylinder wall and as a result increased wear which will eventually result in a rocking motion of the piston in the bore. This will translate into increased oil consumption and loss of compression which all translate into a reduction in power. Now if you are building a race oriented engine that will be torn down regularlly and isn't expected to go 50 or 60,000 miles, probably no big deal. I would also think that at higher RPM levels the 331 would have an advantage over the 347 as far as stresses placed on the reciprocating assembly as well. There has been more than one engine builder that has discovered they can make as good or better numbers using less cubic inches. It all comes down to optimizing all of you components and choosing them wisely so that they work together. Some people like a challenge and go a different route. Do your research and make your own choices. I don't have any plans to change my 327 (standard bore pistons) to a 347 and I would build the exact same engine if I had it to do over again.

[1slo5.0]

I can't believe we are having this discussion again..........

As far as you fools go that think 347s burn oil, you need to get an education so you can actually know what you are talking about when you flap your gums.

[1slo5.0]

Originally Posted by trueblue01 Can't overcome the laws of physics

Please tell me what laws of physics make a 347 burn oil or have a short life. Show me a 347 that burns oil and I'll show you an incompetent engine builder. I've never seen a 347 or any other engine that has the wrist pin intersecting the oil ring groove (yes, there are several engine built this way) burn any oil or suffer reliability issues. Anyone that talks about rod to stroke ratios having ill effects on a 347 obviously doesn't know how foolish they look. A look at other popular factory engines will show a 347 actually has a more favorable rod to stroke ratio. Its also been proven over and over again that rod to stroke ratio means nothing. It doesn't have anything to do with wear and tear and it doesn't have anything to do with power production.