speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

I would like to hear some input on this from people who have tested it.

93Z2871805

iTrader: (5)

I'm interested as well. On this topic, does anyone have a picture of LS3 heads on a 4in bore from inside the crank case vs say a 2.08 intake valve head for a shrouding comparison (bonus points for measurement from cylinder to valve lip).

Tainted

iTrader: (9)

I know Pat G and tony mamo preach all the time about how bad the valve shrouding is with ls3 heads on the 4.0 bore

S10xGN

iTrader: (11)

Sounds strange, but from what I've read here the LS3 heads' exhaust valve is the prime culprit on small(er) bores...

93Z2871805

iTrader: (5)

That's kind of the reason I was wondering if someone had a picture from inside of the bore. I was under the impression that on the LS3/L92 the intake valve was pushed away from the exhaust valve (hence the offset rocker) thus shrouding the intake (on a 4in bore) and the exhaust valve never moved it's position in the bore (relative to the original LS1/6 location). So if the bore size was increased from 3.89 to 4.065 and the intake valve went from a 2.00 to 2.165 but the exhaust only went from 1.55 to 1.59 and kept its original location relative of the cylinder I don't see how the exhaust would be shrouded (+.076 bore but only +.004 valve). I was under the impression the downside of the exhaust on the LS3 was you really can't increase the valve size because the seats are so close. I would've looked further into it on my setup, however I wanted to keep the build simple and not reinvent the wheel.