230/230 cam in a 427 vs. 242/242 in a 436...who makes more power
03-20-2006, 05:52 PM
#1
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
230/230 cam in a 427 vs. 242/242 in a 436...who makes more power More details:
427 has 90/90 set-up and LS6 ported heads
436 has LS6 intake, stock TB and CNC LS1 heads
Both have the same compression.
427 makes 535 RWHP/525 RWTQ, M6
436 makes 500 RWHP/503 RWTQ, A4
Sound right? I ask "who makes more power" because it just doesn't seem right.
.
427 has 90/90 set-up and LS6 ported heads
436 has LS6 intake, stock TB and CNC LS1 heads
Both have the same compression.
427 makes 535 RWHP/525 RWTQ, M6
436 makes 500 RWHP/503 RWTQ, A4
Sound right? I ask "who makes more power" because it just doesn't seem right.
.
03-20-2006, 06:54 PM
#4
Displacement doesn't guarantee big power....it just makes it a little easier to achieve if you have the right set-up.
Good heads, manifold, matching cam, and an efficient exhaust is what bring's home the bacon. A larger motor simply makes all those factors that much more important because now you actually have to "feed" that displacement.
Big power is usually sononomys with RPM because it is a fucntion of RPM, (at least in an N/A application)....to fill the cylinders effectively on a larger motor (at RPM) requires a much stouter induction and exhaust system. TQ with big inches comes easy....horsepower on the other hand is a whole different story.
Tony M.
Good heads, manifold, matching cam, and an efficient exhaust is what bring's home the bacon. A larger motor simply makes all those factors that much more important because now you actually have to "feed" that displacement.
Big power is usually sononomys with RPM because it is a fucntion of RPM, (at least in an N/A application)....to fill the cylinders effectively on a larger motor (at RPM) requires a much stouter induction and exhaust system. TQ with big inches comes easy....horsepower on the other hand is a whole different story.
Tony M.
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; 03-20-2006 at 09:31 PM.
03-20-2006, 08:04 PM
#5
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tony Mamo @ AFR
Displacement doesn't guarantee big power....it just makes it a little easier to achieve if you have the right set-up.
Good heads, manifold, matching cam, and an efficient exhaust is what bring's home the bacon. A larger motor simply makes all those factors that much more important because now you actually have to "feed" that displacement.
Big power is usually sononomys with RPM (because it is a fucntion of RPM)....to fill the cylinders effectively on a larger motor (at RPM) requires a much stouter induction and exhaust system. TQ with big inches comes easy....horsepower on the other hand is a whole different story.
Tony M.
Good heads, manifold, matching cam, and an efficient exhaust is what bring's home the bacon. A larger motor simply makes all those factors that much more important because now you actually have to "feed" that displacement.
Big power is usually sononomys with RPM (because it is a fucntion of RPM)....to fill the cylinders effectively on a larger motor (at RPM) requires a much stouter induction and exhaust system. TQ with big inches comes easy....horsepower on the other hand is a whole different story.
Tony M.
03-20-2006, 09:37 PM
#7
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tripintaz
the 436 is also an AUTOMATIC car, which will naturally dyno lower.
about was: How can this guys engine make so much power with a much smaller cam than mine and smaller cubes? Can it all be because of the 90/90 and the LS6 heads compared to my LS6 intake, stock TB and LS1 heads? I thought the cam has to match the heads to make the power. A small cam like a 230/230 in a 427 seems like the weak link in the engine. My 242/242 .610/.610 114 lsa, to me at least, is tiny, it almost idles like stock. No lope, no shaking. A 230/230 I would think would be a complete waste of time in a big cube stroker. Trending Topics
03-20-2006, 09:58 PM
#8
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
His engine has a lot less restriction than yours. The 427 makes more power because it is pulling more air in then yours. I bet if you had the same heads(maybe even AFR, ETP, and Dart) and intake manifold/TB, you would gain at least 30rwhp probably much more.
03-21-2006, 09:26 AM
#10
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by magius231
your intake system can't flow enough to feed that motor, or even close. Work on that asap. You didn't mention exhaust but you may want to compare that as well.
Either way the A4 will dyno lower than an M6 all else being equal.
Either way the A4 will dyno lower than an M6 all else being equal.
And yes, my exhaust is kind of pathetic.
In time.
.
03-21-2006, 07:12 PM
#12
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 11 Bravo
I think a set of hand ported LS7's + LS7 intake + bigger cam = close to 100rwhp for you. MTI is almost at the 600 mark with a 427 and that setup.
Will the LS7 intake fit on a LS1/6 block?
I still think 90/90 stuff, whether FAST or LS7, is still going to be the weal link in any big cube engine. The Harrop intake has made well over 600 RWHP in a daily driver 427ci, a smaller cam than mine and just LS6 heads. And not once, there's dozens of them over there. You can see one on a video on their site start up, rev and idle.
03-21-2006, 07:52 PM
#13
Originally Posted by Quickin
Will the LS7 intake fit on a LS1/6 block?
I still think 90/90 stuff, whether FAST or LS7, is still going to be the weal link in any big cube engine. The Harrop intake has made well over 600 RWHP in a daily driver 427ci, a smaller cam than mine and just LS6 heads. And not once, there's dozens of them over there. You can see one on a video on their site start up, rev and idle.
I still think 90/90 stuff, whether FAST or LS7, is still going to be the weal link in any big cube engine. The Harrop intake has made well over 600 RWHP in a daily driver 427ci, a smaller cam than mine and just LS6 heads. And not once, there's dozens of them over there. You can see one on a video on their site start up, rev and idle.
03-21-2006, 08:09 PM
#14
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 11 Bravo
The LS7 heads and intake will bolt up to your block. I agree the Harrop intake will make crazy power. Probably more. How much power over an LS7 setup I doubt anyone knows, it's too early. But if MTI is getting 586 on the first try, I can only imagine what kind of numbers we will see in the future. But just get the Harrop and let us know how it does
When I spoke to Ken at Harrop he said they have several customers with 427's, LS6 heads, smaller than a 242/242 cam and the Harrop intake making over 600 RWHP. Their independant tests have shown a 220% improvement over the FAST 90 in flow. Imagine if they had some ETP 265's and little bit larger cam to match? Close to 700 RWHP for sure.
03-21-2006, 08:16 PM
#15
The other engine is simply more efficent. It moves more air, easier, so it makes more power. As far as the Harrop goes, it has made 70 rwhp more than the FAST on a 427. ITB's take away almost all the restriction. My harrop is on order. Hopefully they'll ship it in the next week or 2. Still no short block though.
03-21-2006, 08:23 PM
#16
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Beast96Z
The other engine is simply more efficent. It moves more air, easier, so it makes more power. As far as the Harrop goes, it has made 70 rwhp more than the FAST on a 427. ITB's take away almost all the restriction. My harrop is on order. Hopefully they'll ship it in the next week or 2. Still no short block though.
Got a question for ya. The shop here in town that is rebuilding my heads for me just got finished custom building a Harrop style intake for a guys Viper. He said it was a bitch but he made it work perfectly. BUT....I mentioned the Harrop and he asked me how the "progressive throttle" works for it. Do you know what Harrop sends with that intake to make the throttle work properly?
He explained that if you were to hook it up to our throttle cable, the amount we would normally push the pedal down to start going down the road would be way too much because now we're opening 8 separate TB's. So say a 1/4" of travel on our pedal needs to open these 8 TB's less than our single regualr TB. So he said we have to be able to lessen the amount the TB's open for the same amount of travel we impose on the pedal.
Any idea?
03-21-2006, 08:36 PM
#17
Originally Posted by Quickin
I'm pretty sure the Aussie's have seen 25-30 over a FAST 90/90 with the Harrop. The LS7 intake isn't any better than the FAST 90 intake from what I've read/heard. Have you heard the same about the LS7 and FAST 90?
When I spoke to Ken at Harrop he said they have several customers with 427's, LS6 heads, smaller than a 242/242 cam and the Harrop intake making over 600 RWHP. Their independant tests have shown a 220% improvement over the FAST 90 in flow. Imagine if they had some ETP 265's and little bit larger cam to match? Close to 700 RWHP for sure.
When I spoke to Ken at Harrop he said they have several customers with 427's, LS6 heads, smaller than a 242/242 cam and the Harrop intake making over 600 RWHP. Their independant tests have shown a 220% improvement over the FAST 90 in flow. Imagine if they had some ETP 265's and little bit larger cam to match? Close to 700 RWHP for sure.
03-21-2006, 08:51 PM
#18
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 11 Bravo
From my research, I believe the LS7 intake flows more than the FAST. I also believe the LS7 heads out perform the ETP's by a good margin. The ETP's are impressive, but I guess they don't impress me as much as they do most others. I have seen nothing that proves they are taking the big motors to a different level like I had hoped. But IMO the LS7's do. I remember when LS1's were new and getting 400rwhp was a big deal. I think the same is true for the LS7's and we will see the day when a 427+ with worked over LS7's will be considered weak if a motor makes less than 600rwhp. I would be shocked if you got 700rwhp with a Harrop. But I don't have enough knowledge to have an educated assumption.
.600 367 intake 240 exhasut
LS7 heads 4.155 bore
.600 370 intake 243 exhasut
Very little difference, but the ETP 265's were flowed on a smaller 4.100 bore.
The LS7's are cheaper in the end though, right?
03-22-2006, 07:59 PM
#20
Originally Posted by Quickin
Hey man, whats up?
Got a question for ya. The shop here in town that is rebuilding my heads for me just got finished custom building a Harrop style intake for a guys Viper. He said it was a bitch but he made it work perfectly. BUT....I mentioned the Harrop and he asked me how the "progressive throttle" works for it. Do you know what Harrop sends with that intake to make the throttle work properly?
He explained that if you were to hook it up to our throttle cable, the amount we would normally push the pedal down to start going down the road would be way too much because now we're opening 8 separate TB's. So say a 1/4" of travel on our pedal needs to open these 8 TB's less than our single regualr TB. So he said we have to be able to lessen the amount the TB's open for the same amount of travel we impose on the pedal.
Any idea?
Got a question for ya. The shop here in town that is rebuilding my heads for me just got finished custom building a Harrop style intake for a guys Viper. He said it was a bitch but he made it work perfectly. BUT....I mentioned the Harrop and he asked me how the "progressive throttle" works for it. Do you know what Harrop sends with that intake to make the throttle work properly?
He explained that if you were to hook it up to our throttle cable, the amount we would normally push the pedal down to start going down the road would be way too much because now we're opening 8 separate TB's. So say a 1/4" of travel on our pedal needs to open these 8 TB's less than our single regualr TB. So he said we have to be able to lessen the amount the TB's open for the same amount of travel we impose on the pedal.
Any idea?
It's really all in the linkage. If enginered properly, everything should work just right. 
