Which block for 4.185 bore
04-02-2011, 09:49 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which block for 4.185 bore Just doing some research for
My next project and I want some
Insight on blocks.
Customer wants an alloy block 440. 4.185x4.00 I tried to tell go the trusted LSX block route but it's a track car so weight is crucial. It will be n/a no adders at all and a special custom
Grind. Can i get a stock ls7 block to 4.185? Or even 4.155 to make for a 434
My next project and I want some
Insight on blocks.
Customer wants an alloy block 440. 4.185x4.00 I tried to tell go the trusted LSX block route but it's a track car so weight is crucial. It will be n/a no adders at all and a special custom
Grind. Can i get a stock ls7 block to 4.185? Or even 4.155 to make for a 434
04-02-2011, 10:00 PM
#3
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is what a thought originally he's one of those really fussy guys that doesn't understand this process. And is adamant on using a GM
Block. Oh well I'll give him the news. And just try get a RHS block.
Block. Oh well I'll give him the news. And just try get a RHS block.
04-03-2011, 09:27 AM
#7
Question is why does he want a 4.185 bore to get 440 when a sleeved LS2 using a 4.125 bore/stroke provide the same displacement?
If weight is a concern the LS2 seems like a no brainer...
Trending Topics
04-03-2011, 05:32 PM
#9
04-03-2011, 07:21 PM
#10
FormerVendor
04-03-2011, 07:47 PM
#11
04-03-2011, 07:57 PM
#12
FormerVendor
OEM LS7 sleeves are longer than Darton's which are now longer since way back when I asked Steve at RED to make them that way as a CK10 can hone lower than their previous length that was at around 5.675 and the counterweight clearance he has works quite well.
The LS7 is right at 5.900 and the newer Dartons are 5.800 or so which is nice.
An old C5R is right around 6.000 but very hard to hone correctly at the bottom.
Remember we were already doing the LSx stuff before most people had even seen one.
I am the one that was on top of the LSx piston thing already 13 years ago.
The LS7 is right at 5.900 and the newer Dartons are 5.800 or so which is nice.
An old C5R is right around 6.000 but very hard to hone correctly at the bottom.
Remember we were already doing the LSx stuff before most people had even seen one.
I am the one that was on top of the LSx piston thing already 13 years ago.
04-03-2011, 08:16 PM
#13
OEM LS7 sleeves are longer than Darton's which are now longer since way back when I asked Steve at RED to make them that way as a CK10 can hone lower than their previous length that was at around 5.675 and the counterweight clearance he has works quite well.
The LS7 is right at 5.900 and the newer Dartons are 5.800 or so which is nice.
An old C5R is right around 6.000 but very hard to hone correctly at the bottom.
Remember we were already doing the LSx stuff before most people had even seen one.
I am the one that was on top of the LSx piston thing already 13 years ago.
The LS7 is right at 5.900 and the newer Dartons are 5.800 or so which is nice.
An old C5R is right around 6.000 but very hard to hone correctly at the bottom.
Remember we were already doing the LSx stuff before most people had even seen one.
I am the one that was on top of the LSx piston thing already 13 years ago.
Last edited by ramairws6; 04-03-2011 at 08:24 PM.
04-03-2011, 10:18 PM
#14
FormerVendor
Erik, when did Darton update to the longer sleeve? I have a LS7 done by Steve at RED back in 07-08 ish. Just wondering if i have the first shorter version? That would suck to have replaced the stock longer LS7 sleeves with a shorter Darton dry liner. I wasn't aware of this till now but i did know the LS7 sleeves were much longer.....
04-03-2011, 10:33 PM
#15
I will know by tomorrow as i am in teardown mode. I will probably be ordering up some new pistons from Chris this week and already have the Morel lifters from him. Can you get the Wiseco customs any faster then 6-8 weeks? I'm going with 13.6:1 so far is the plan. Sorry for the thread high jack!
04-03-2011, 11:38 PM
#16
LS7 dry liners Erik,
The Darton LS7 Seal Tight dry sleeves were always 5.800" long. The earlier LS2 dry liners Darton came out with were 5.675" long. I only used those for jobs I did through Darton, not for jobs sent in to me directly. The lower body section was smaller on those sleeves which kept them to 4.155" bore and not the 4.185" bore I take the LS7 Seal Tight liner out to.
The Darton LS7 liners are 5.800" long around the entire thrust sides of the sleeve. The LS7 factory sleeves have a narrow tang extending down to 5.900". Even though the Darton liner is shorter, it will give much better piston support with the wider surface and because the liner is much stronger and will not deflect as will the stock gray iron tang.
The MID sleeves were increased in length roughly three years ago when Erik asked to have them made longer. The counterweight cut out blends into the crankcase so there is no decrease in clearance.
Steve
The Darton LS7 Seal Tight dry sleeves were always 5.800" long. The earlier LS2 dry liners Darton came out with were 5.675" long. I only used those for jobs I did through Darton, not for jobs sent in to me directly. The lower body section was smaller on those sleeves which kept them to 4.155" bore and not the 4.185" bore I take the LS7 Seal Tight liner out to.
The Darton LS7 liners are 5.800" long around the entire thrust sides of the sleeve. The LS7 factory sleeves have a narrow tang extending down to 5.900". Even though the Darton liner is shorter, it will give much better piston support with the wider surface and because the liner is much stronger and will not deflect as will the stock gray iron tang.
The MID sleeves were increased in length roughly three years ago when Erik asked to have them made longer. The counterweight cut out blends into the crankcase so there is no decrease in clearance.
Steve
__________________
Steve Demirjian
Race Engine Development
Oceanside, Ca.
760-630-0450
web: www.raceenginedevelopment.com/
e-mail: race-engine-development@***.net
Steve Demirjian
Race Engine Development
Oceanside, Ca.
760-630-0450
web: www.raceenginedevelopment.com/
e-mail: race-engine-development@***.net
04-04-2011, 09:32 AM
#18
FormerVendor
When I refer to the LS7 I only mean the OEM LS7 not the Darton "LS7" thicker sleeve that Steve brought out already at 5.800 like the others. At 5.800 long all the Darton sleeves now also work with every deal we do at normal deck height great. The skirts and ring stacks along with the corresponding strokes and rod lengths we use all work out such that at TDC and BDC we are still good with all of the Darton stuff now thanks to Steve making all these sleeves 5.800 now.
Not all cylinders in all LSx deals and blocks are as nice though and some of the other aftermarket blocks have cylinders or parts of cylinders much higher than the Darton stuff. Normal deck Warhawk is only 5.375. Normal deck RHS has parts of the lower bore gone where it was grossly over clearanced for the 4.600 crank even in standard deck height form even though only the tall deck can be run with that crank.
In the case of the RHS and the LS7 you don't actually have full length cylinders like Steve's Darton stuff has as he says above. You do have a longer tang that keeps BDC rock down though and the rings are in the bore or course which is 90% of the battle but the longer part of the cylinder is really the tang. So far this has worked just great but I do like the full round termination of the Darton sleeves more especially for honing.
The tall decks of course naturally have much longer cylinders for the longer super stroker stuff we do over 4.250 stroke and they seem to work just fine as well.
Not all cylinders in all LSx deals and blocks are as nice though and some of the other aftermarket blocks have cylinders or parts of cylinders much higher than the Darton stuff. Normal deck Warhawk is only 5.375. Normal deck RHS has parts of the lower bore gone where it was grossly over clearanced for the 4.600 crank even in standard deck height form even though only the tall deck can be run with that crank.
In the case of the RHS and the LS7 you don't actually have full length cylinders like Steve's Darton stuff has as he says above. You do have a longer tang that keeps BDC rock down though and the rings are in the bore or course which is 90% of the battle but the longer part of the cylinder is really the tang. So far this has worked just great but I do like the full round termination of the Darton sleeves more especially for honing.
The tall decks of course naturally have much longer cylinders for the longer super stroker stuff we do over 4.250 stroke and they seem to work just fine as well.
04-04-2011, 09:35 AM
#19
FormerVendor
04-19-2011, 02:42 PM
#20
TECH Enthusiast
Speaking of a 4.185" bore . . . A couple of questions, if you guys don't mind ?
The application is a 2000 Firebird Formula . . . 4L80E . . . Strange S60 Dana w/ 3.54 - 3.73 gears
I am looking at doing a 427, mainly as a "Sleeper" Daily-Driver ( approx. 12,000 -15,000 miles/yr ), so longevity, reliability, etc are primary concerns of mine. I don't want to have to rebuild or freshen it up frequently . . .
This would be N/A and never see any Power-Adders . . .
I am looking at TWO different ways to achieve 427 cid:
(1) 4.125" Bore X 4.000" Stroke
(2) 4.185" Bore X 3.900" Stroke ( K1 makes a Forged 4340 3.900" Crank )
I am trying to avoid the oil consumption problems that are prevalent in many LS Stroker motors .
Also, I want to minimize problems arising from rod angularity issues. . . Obviously, I would not want a 4.125" stroke under any circumstances.
THOUGHTS & INPUT ???
Thanks, in advance !
Dave
The application is a 2000 Firebird Formula . . . 4L80E . . . Strange S60 Dana w/ 3.54 - 3.73 gears
I am looking at doing a 427, mainly as a "Sleeper" Daily-Driver ( approx. 12,000 -15,000 miles/yr ), so longevity, reliability, etc are primary concerns of mine. I don't want to have to rebuild or freshen it up frequently . . .
This would be N/A and never see any Power-Adders . . .
I am looking at TWO different ways to achieve 427 cid:
(1) 4.125" Bore X 4.000" Stroke
(2) 4.185" Bore X 3.900" Stroke ( K1 makes a Forged 4340 3.900" Crank )
I am trying to avoid the oil consumption problems that are prevalent in many LS Stroker motors .
Also, I want to minimize problems arising from rod angularity issues. . . Obviously, I would not want a 4.125" stroke under any circumstances.
THOUGHTS & INPUT ???
Thanks, in advance !
Dave
Last edited by ez2cdave; 04-19-2011 at 03:57 PM.