Gold Founding Member
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: the Seasonally Frozen Wastelands
Within the general limits of production V-8 car engines produced from WWII to about 1995 or so, I think that Bore/Stroke ratio is overemphasized.
Look at the difference between Buick 455 and Olds 455 engines:
Buick has 4.32 bore and 3.9 stroke. Big bore, short stroke. Very oversquare.
Olds has 4.125 bore and 4.250 stroke. Small bore, long stroke. Very undersquare.
The Buick should be a high rpm screamer, and the Olds could go into a John Deere tractor...
Except BOTH engines are famed for low rpm grunt, and neither one will rev like a 454 Chevy.
Ford used to advertise thier 427 as being like a "race engine" because of the big bore/ short stroke.
Chevy's 427 has almost identical Bore/stroke, and Chevy stuffed them in two ton potato trucks, in addition to L-88 Corvettes.
True enough, bore/stroke makes a difference when you're talking Formula 1, Nascar, even some wild ass motorcycles (Suzuki's GSXR 750's come to mind, also Honda's oval piston wonder/nightmare.)
For all the rest of us, Carburation and manifolding is MUCH more important. Cylinder head flow capacity is MUCH more important, Combustion chamber quench and swirl is MUCH more important, reciprocating/rotating weight is more important and perhaps rod length is more important, too.
Far too many engines are blown up because the valve train was over-revved, rather than the bottom end fragging because of a long stroke.