reliability
06-01-2006, 10:53 AM
#2
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Damn, that's a good question. I guess it depends on how hard you drive your car.
I am sure there will be plenty of theories. I'd like to know the answer to that question also.
I am sure there will be plenty of theories. I'd like to know the answer to that question also.
06-01-2006, 11:13 AM
#3
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa Bay Area, FL
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, a H/C package that will achieve 500 rwhp on a 346 will be pretty damn aggressive. You'll have to flycut your pistons, run a gigantic cam, spin the motor to 7k. You will wear out springs faster. Other than that, a H/C package is simply making the motor more efficient.
Also, I think you're going to need more than 5 psi to make 500 rwhp on a bone stock LS1. I could be wrong though. Also, 500 rwhp from a Procharger will not be as a fast as 500 rwhp from a H/C package since the boost pressure from a Procharger increases exponentially to redline meaning that if you pulley the SC to make 6 psi at 6k RPM you will only make around 1 psi at 3k RPM.
I think making 500 rwhp from a H/C package is just too unrealistic so I really can't answer the question.
Also, I think you're going to need more than 5 psi to make 500 rwhp on a bone stock LS1. I could be wrong though. Also, 500 rwhp from a Procharger will not be as a fast as 500 rwhp from a H/C package since the boost pressure from a Procharger increases exponentially to redline meaning that if you pulley the SC to make 6 psi at 6k RPM you will only make around 1 psi at 3k RPM.
I think making 500 rwhp from a H/C package is just too unrealistic so I really can't answer the question.
06-01-2006, 11:20 AM
#4
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
That's no problem piano. I would've been at 500 rwhp easily had I went with the G5X4 cam and the 90/90 Fast/Throttle Body combo.
Made 473 rwhp and 431 rwhp using the G5X3 and FAST 78 mm with a ported throttle body.
But you are right, that would've been more aggressive then I'd have liked. I was shooting for 480 rwhp and 435 rwtq. I should get it with a little more tuning and a quick K&N filter clean and reoil.
My car with the bigger cam, intake and T/b would've made around 510 rwhp 450 rwtq maybe more.
Made 473 rwhp and 431 rwhp using the G5X3 and FAST 78 mm with a ported throttle body.
But you are right, that would've been more aggressive then I'd have liked. I was shooting for 480 rwhp and 435 rwtq. I should get it with a little more tuning and a quick K&N filter clean and reoil.
My car with the bigger cam, intake and T/b would've made around 510 rwhp 450 rwtq maybe more.
06-01-2006, 11:30 AM
#5
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa Bay Area, FL
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by allngn_c5
That's no problem piano. I would've been at 500 rwhp easily had I went with the G5X4 cam and the 90/90 Fast/Throttle Body combo.
Made 473 rwhp and 431 rwhp using the G5X3 and FAST 78 mm with a ported throttle body.
But you are right, that would've been more aggressive then I'd have liked. I was shooting for 480 rwhp and 435 rwtq. I should get it with a little more tuning and a quick K&N filter clean and reoil.
My car with the bigger cam, intake and T/b would've made around 510 rwhp 450 rwtq maybe more.
Made 473 rwhp and 431 rwhp using the G5X3 and FAST 78 mm with a ported throttle body.
But you are right, that would've been more aggressive then I'd have liked. I was shooting for 480 rwhp and 435 rwtq. I should get it with a little more tuning and a quick K&N filter clean and reoil.
My car with the bigger cam, intake and T/b would've made around 510 rwhp 450 rwtq maybe more.
06-01-2006, 01:14 PM
#7
Banned
Thread Starter
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the procharged ls1 will be cammed w/full boltons and 5psi for around 500rwhp and spin to 6500rpms.
now under which setup do you think the bottom end will last longer?
now under which setup do you think the bottom end will last longer?
Last edited by c5_ls1_6spd; 06-01-2006 at 01:22 PM.
Trending Topics
06-01-2006, 01:16 PM
#8
Banned
Thread Starter
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by allngn_c5
That's no problem piano. I would've been at 500 rwhp easily had I went with the G5X4 cam and the 90/90 Fast/Throttle Body combo.
Made 473 rwhp and 431 rwhp using the G5X3 and FAST 78 mm with a ported throttle body.
But you are right, that would've been more aggressive then I'd have liked. I was shooting for 480 rwhp and 435 rwtq. I should get it with a little more tuning and a quick K&N filter clean and reoil.
My car with the bigger cam, intake and T/b would've made around 510 rwhp 450 rwtq maybe more.
Made 473 rwhp and 431 rwhp using the G5X3 and FAST 78 mm with a ported throttle body.
But you are right, that would've been more aggressive then I'd have liked. I was shooting for 480 rwhp and 435 rwtq. I should get it with a little more tuning and a quick K&N filter clean and reoil.
My car with the bigger cam, intake and T/b would've made around 510 rwhp 450 rwtq maybe more.
you're going to have to flycut with that g5x4 cam on milled AFR 205s, and that drop the compression a lil.....
06-01-2006, 08:02 PM
#9
Originally Posted by c5_ls1_6spd
what would be more reliable in terms of the stock ls1 bottom end holding up longer.....H/C package @ 500rwhp or a procharged ls1 5psi @ 500rwhp?