Yes, there are benefits to be had. But, too often people mistake benefit to mean HP! And that simply isn't the case.
And for the cost of having to buy rods and pistons, he could have spent the same amount for pistons and had the same result.

_________________
There's no such thing as too much cam....only not enough engine!

Well, taller pistons and lighter pistons go different ways. I understand how a lighter piston can give you more HP (same stresses will give you higher RPMs). I guess today you can find that combination (taller and lighter), but as you said it depends on the investment. Also, I guess you might be able to use the same light pistons if you mill more the head and the block (with all the work in the pushing rods and geometry (that might also be required in the long rod)). I don't know how much money csheehy put on the whole thing, and it will depend on what he had available.

However, I will agree with you: I "believe" you can get similar gains without the long rods, but the long rods will mess up less the engine's overall geometry.

Csheehy thanks for the recipe, one option on many. Thanks to Dr Dodge for all his work (and his book!). And good luck to everybody trying new things. The slant in my Charger is tired, at some point I'll need to overhaul it, and recipes like these help making something good better.

_________________
/6 Dodge Charger 69
...there's nothing like using the "Search" link above to solve most of your problems...

I built my first long rod 225 engines in 1982, right after Chrysler introduced the 2.2 four cylinder. (1981)

The idea came out of rebuilding a 198 engine with a spun rod bearing, thinking it was a 225. I installed a replacement 225 crank into the 198 and needless to say, the pistons stuck way out of the bores.

This got me looking for some shorter pistons and the "new" 2.2 had the needed "shorter" compression height and the same piston pin size.
Bit the bullet and bored the engine .045 oversize (I was a broke collage kid) and put the new combo together.
This SL6 engine ran much better then any 225 I ever owned but the engine did ping on regular fuel. (at the time, i did not realize that this combo increases the compression by over a point!)

I built a lot more of these, just because the 198 rods could be found in junk yards and the pistons were inexpensive at the time. I also learned that the pistons came with different geometries, so the compression could be adjusted by choosing a vision with a flat top or bigger dish.

So for us "youngsters", back in the 1980's, we stumbled into a simple way to increase the static compression ratio with-out a lot of head / block "cutting" and that was the main benefit.

The lighter piston, thinner rings and slightly better rod ratio also helps the engine but not nearly as much as getting the compression where it needs to be, while maintaining good block and head rigidity.
DD

My decision to go-long; was to simply make for a more interesting and unconventional build that might spark conversation.
Well.., interesting is subjective, unconventional is proven, and it certainly has sparked conversation ;)

The discussions here (on .org) are certainly not restrictive or boring - I appreciate everyone's input and point-of-view. It is through these discussions that our individual and collective knowledge grow. I appreciate you all!
-Chris

_________________
'68 Barracuda - taking advice on increasing street torque, power, & road handling. Click To See It