Although i have the utmost respect for George Klass, and have used his accufab gear on almost every late model Mustang I've been able to (the ones we ran with e.f.i, that is), I have to respectfully say hes beating around the bush, on purpose. no one is debating that more cubic inches will make more power than less cubic inches, apples for apples. But what rod stroke ratio effectively does is allow for the other half of the horsepower equation to be magnified. That, of course, is RPM. Ask Mr Klass straight up if a higher rod stroke ratio decreases lateral pressure on the cylinder walls, and if a higher rod stroke ratio will, all else being equal, allow an engine to rev more freely, more quickly, and ultimately, to a higher rpm. He will undoubtedly say yes, and yes. Since we are talking about motors whose "stroker" potential pretty much ends at about 10 percent increase in displacement, we need to compensate with revs to make more power. There are a few ways to do that effectively and prolong engine life, one of which is increasing rod stroke ratio.
To go a step further, using Mr Klass' train of thought. Everyone considering building an L series motor is wasting thier time and money because for similar maching shop and parts costs they can have a 410 inch small block ford, or a 412 inch small block chevy.
I have long been a proponent of "more cubes, stupid" as an answer to anyones "how do i make more power?" questions. There are small groups of people on this board and in motorsport who are limited to certain displacements for fear of weight penalty or class change and they are mostly who this thread tailors to. I guess I'm not arguing Mr. Klass' point, I'm more arguing that its irrelevant in this specific thread.
Sorry, that was a bit of a rant.