Re: [ihc] Which 392 makes the best builder?

[mark stegmann <truckdriver_1977@xxxxxxxxx>]

Rocky, the IC blocks & heads have different cooling
passages,so I doubt it.


--- ROCKY LEAR <rockylear@domain.elided> wrote:
> Ok, can the non IC block be converted over to the IC
> or was the IC block
> specially cast? Someone on another list has said
> that what I needed was an
> early 80's big truck engine. They said that that
> engine (the early 80's)
> would have sodium valves, steel crank and good
> flowing heads. I have accesss
> to other 392's but I need to be sure that I get the
> right info before those
> are hauled off to the scrap.
> 
> Rocky
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Allan Ericson" <lowvolt@domain.elided>
> To: "ROCKY LEAR" <rockylear@domain.elided>;
> <ihc-digest@domain.elided>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 12:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [ihc] Which 392 makes the best builder?
> 
> 
> > Neither engine has a strength advantage over the
> other. The cranks are the
> > same. So are the cams and bearings and rods.
> >
> > The non-IC engine can be given a big compression
> boost cheaply by using
> 345
> > heads. Some people like that approach, but I
> don't. I like the stock IH
> > engines. If I want something different, I will use
> something that has a
> far
> > lower weight to horsepower ratio.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com