Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:
View Poll Results: Would you buy Small cube L92 heads?
YES!
86.00%
no.
14.00%
Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll

Small Cube L92 Heads?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-28-2007, 05:14 PM
  #1  
On The Tree
Thread Starter
 
01LS6SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Small Cube L92 Heads?

The new GM HIGH TECH PERF showed rumors of GM producing an L92 head for LS1/LS6/truck application. Whould you buy this head? I say "sign me up, I'll take two"!
Old 02-28-2007, 05:16 PM
  #2  
Kleeborp the Moderator™
iTrader: (11)
 
MeentSS02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 10,317
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Nope...not until someone proves that they can make better numbers than a cathedral head given our typical RPM ranges. The L92s out now flow some great numbers, but don't do much on a dyno with those numbers. Maybe if people get some better cams out for them...
Old 02-28-2007, 05:18 PM
  #3  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
vettenuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Little Rhody
Posts: 8,092
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts

Default

What intake would be used with them?
Old 02-28-2007, 05:21 PM
  #4  
On The Tree
Thread Starter
 
01LS6SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

L92 intake.
Old 02-28-2007, 06:06 PM
  #5  
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
98RedZone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Bloomington, MN
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

The L76 would probably be the intake. These heads and intake made 44hp over LS2 head/intake combo in a previous issue.
Old 02-28-2007, 06:59 PM
  #6  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
Mike94ZLT1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Livonia, Mi
Posts: 1,455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I don't think a stock cube LS1 can really take advantage of those until they get high up in the RPM range.
Old 02-28-2007, 08:06 PM
  #7  
TECH Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
phoenix1987's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MeentSS02
Nope...not until someone proves that they can make better numbers than a cathedral head given our typical RPM ranges. The L92s out now flow some great numbers, but don't do much on a dyno with those numbers. Maybe if people get some better cams out for them...
I agree. It is exciting news though!
Old 03-01-2007, 10:48 AM
  #8  
TECH Fanatic
 
LS1W66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Clair Shores Mi.
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

If they can make the adjustments and still sell them for a similar price it should force the aftermarket to drop their prices on the cathedral port Heads.
So It is a good thing that may work out for all of us.
Old 03-01-2007, 12:37 PM
  #9  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (13)
 
LS1Formulation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 2,458
Received 443 Likes on 354 Posts

Default

I'm looking forward to seeing how well they work. Hopefully using a smaller port volume to increase velocity for us small cubers!
Old 03-11-2007, 08:00 AM
  #10  
UNDER PRESSURE MOD
iTrader: (19)
 
The Alchemist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Doylestown PA
Posts: 10,813
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts

Default

I would be interested, and from what I've read, the biggest issue is getting the combustion chambers down in size by milling the heads. Look at everyone who runs and makes good power with the AFR heads, almost all of them have milled the heads to bump up the compression ratio, both static and dynamic.

I think dynamic compression ratio is too frequently overlooked when it comes to making power.
Old 03-11-2007, 09:08 AM
  #11  
TECH Senior Member
 
PREDATOR-Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

Well just looking at stock L92s they lack in the exhaust area a lot. I would be curious to test them with a cam like a 231/242 .643/.610 110+4

Either that or port the exhaust only to 75/80% of intake. and shorten the split with less exhaust bias.
Old 03-11-2007, 02:13 PM
  #12  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
 
00Vette's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 3,576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

If these heads were priced inexpenisively like the bigger bore heads, I would pick them up quick!! And a new cam to go with it.

I just can't justify buying cylinder heads for over 2g's. If I could get an assebled set like these for under a grand..............I'd be all over than like stink on ****!!!
Old 03-12-2007, 05:05 PM
  #13  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
 
KONG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I believe I will just stay with proven parts. Big ports on a small cube motor=beatdowns by small port small cube motor. Those heads are ideal for Forced Induction motors were port velocity doesnt matter. Until I see a solid combination put together, and not a dyno queen, i'll keep my money in the wifes purse.
Old 03-12-2007, 05:48 PM
  #14  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
GuitsBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 6,249
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

Id be afraid of losing low end with those large runners and smaller valves. Would be nice to be able to use the l76 intake though.

If good numbers started rolling in, it would certainly grab my attention.
Old 03-13-2007, 01:27 PM
  #15  
12 Second Club
 
WARP211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fairfield, Cali
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

GMHTP says its suppose to be 44% more hp than the LS-6 heads.. They already have the heads for big bore engines like the LS-2 or LS-7.. If that is the case and flow more than the LS-6.. Save your money and just wait..
Old 03-13-2007, 01:45 PM
  #16  
Kleeborp the Moderator™
iTrader: (11)
 
MeentSS02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 10,317
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by WARP211
GMHTP says its suppose to be 44% more hp than the LS-6 heads.. They already have the heads for big bore engines like the LS-2 or LS-7.. If that is the case and flow more than the LS-6.. Save your money and just wait..
That 44% could be interpreted a number of ways...44% more TOTAL horsepower I'll raise the BS flag on.
Old 03-13-2007, 04:23 PM
  #17  
On The Tree
Thread Starter
 
01LS6SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I think it was 44 HP, not 44%. LOL
Old 03-17-2007, 11:17 AM
  #18  
LS1Tech Sponsor
iTrader: (9)
 
Rob@EFIAlchemy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ponte Vedra Beach Fl
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

l92 heads only run about 850 bux for the pair assembled from gm ive call but they wont fit anything smaller then a 6.0
Old 03-17-2007, 12:47 PM
  #19  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
 
KONG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bluenyghthawk
l92 heads only run about 850 bux for the pair assembled from gm ive call but they wont fit anything smaller then a 6.0
The thread is about the ones they MIGHT produce for a small cube motor aka LS1.
Old 03-17-2007, 12:57 PM
  #20  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (28)
 
studderin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 5,556
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts

Default

google Adds Suck
Ib Sucks

Last edited by studderin; 01-10-2008 at 11:11 PM. Reason: [COLOR="Red"][SIZE="7"][b]google Adds Suck



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:39 AM.