|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
01-17-2021, 09:46 AM | #21 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,177
|
Re: 266 versus 276 CI?
Quote:
|
|
01-17-2021, 10:26 AM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlotte NC KiWi-L100 available here
Posts: 2,954
|
Re: 266 versus 276 CI?
^^^^^^291.39ci.
|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
01-17-2021, 11:19 AM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Minnesota, Florida Keys
Posts: 10,304
|
Re: 266 versus 276 CI?
I'm with "Ol' Ron" in liking a 258 ci flathead (3 5/16" X 3 3/4"). Three more cubic inches than a 4 inch Merc crank will give you with a stock bore for a lot less money. (Lower piston speeds, too; not that it makes much difference with a flathead.)
|
01-17-2021, 12:57 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Southern Oregon
Posts: 782
|
Re: 266 versus 276 CI?
The term "spindly rods" may have come from someone when looking at a flathead rod
__________________
Frank '35 Ford Model 51 '48 Ford F3 '54 Ford Tudor Mainline |
01-17-2021, 12:58 PM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Christchurch New Zealand
Posts: 1,610
|
Re: 266 versus 276 CI?
Quote:
Above is exactly what I am running in a 46 Merc. Coupe. Just running a single 97 Stromberg carb up a couple sizes on jets and PV and standard NOS heads with 45 thou piston to head clearance. To date have approx 750 miles on engine since full rebuild. For my street use it suits me well. Phil NZ |
|
01-17-2021, 07:16 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,177
|
Re: 266 versus 276 CI?
|
01-17-2021, 07:33 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 286
|
Re: 266 versus 276 CI?
|
|
|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|