yobabiesdaddy2001

iTrader: (20)

How many of you guys are killing stroked ls1s no matter what size it is?
The reason I ask is because alot of the stocked cubed ls1s around here dog the stroked cars. Is it just around here or is it the same in your neck of the woodss?

SDB

iTrader: (7)

nice kill! Way to go boy! Keep em coming! Now get some more mods and really show em who's boss! Put some spray on now! Get those imports! Kill them slobras! Way to go. Cool vid!

SDB

BLKWS.6

UNIT, relocate?

slowmofo

iTrader: (6)

IBTL!!!

But yes seems like the stock cubed ls1's here are quicker for some reason....

necrocannibal

iTrader: (5)

Not here, not anywhere close actually. Stroked LS1s are destroying stock cubed LS1s.

V-seriesTech

iTrader: (5)

Are we talking about a stock cubed LS1 on spray? against an ALL motor big cubic inch car?

Sure....anything is possible....but, a STOCK CUBED car NA against a BUILT MOTOR car NA...the cubed motor WILL win everytime.

Now, if you have **** drivers running around your town with big cubes, and no skill....thats possible.

Nitrous is a hell of a drug.

slowmofo

iTrader: (6)

the two Stock cubed cars that I know of around here are on the jug, one is reaaaallllyyy on the crack. Surprised he hasn't blown it up. Hes a member on here

25psi

Theres a misconception that stroking your motor will actually make power(horsepower). Typically torque is whats augmented when increasing displacement.

Lets take a supra for an example. There are people making more power with less boost on a stock 2jz than there are with an HKS stroker with the exact same setup.

Same with the mr2 community. Theres a debate going on now, if theres any benifits on going stroker. From my experience, I haven't noticed any real difference or seen on a dyno any mind blowing changes.

Another example is the S2000. It gained an additional .2 liters of displacement, but kept the same hp. Is it any faster. NO!

The larger you go up in displacement, the harder it is to make power.

SDB

iTrader: (7)

****....25psi, are you ever going to let the import thing die???? jesus....stroking doesn't make HP, it only augments torque? Are you that dumb about cars? Cubic inches make both HP and TQE!!! What a concept, I must be a rocket scientist!

"The larger you go up in displacement, the harder it is to make power"....that is SUCH a ricer thing to say.

I have a 382 which has killed every stock cube LS1 I have raced, even those on nitrous.

What a fucktard!!!!!

SDB

V-seriesTech

iTrader: (5)

My cousin 427 C5R makes 580 rwhp on motor. About 100 more rwhp then a good heads and cam package alone on a stock displacement bottom end. Roughly.

25psi

I wouldnt expect you to understand anything I said.


http://www.v8914.com/Horsepower-v-torque.htm

Sparetire

Sigh.

More cubes will tend to make more torque and more power sure. Buts about as general as you can get.

When you get down to reality and real setups from real people with real budgets and time constraints, it gets a bit more complex.

If you have the same heads, valves, cam, manifolds,etc. then the only way more cubes burn more air and fuel and make more power is in the fact that they pull more air in by having a bigger void to fill. Effectively, making more vacum to suck the mix in. As you get to higher rpms and the peak power levels, theres less and less time to fill that bigger space. So you dont suck in a whole lot more air and fuel. So no, you dont see a whole lot more *peak* power if the rest of the setup is not up to it. If you have a maxed out induction setup, more cubes will just move the power band down the rpm range some and not increase it much at all.

If you have the heads, valves, cams, manifold etc to supply the additional cubes, then you will get more power. You will also get a fatter torque band most of the time no matter what your induction setup is.

Being that LS1s have decent heads and all, more cubes with no other changes results in more power. The setup is capable feeding the engine enough air to make use of that extra displacement.

Oh wait. This post is incomplete...

So take that you ricer fucktard gay ********!!!!

There, now I'm cool like everybody else......

chevydan

iTrader: (4)

So maybe John Force should start using a 2.0L and turn it 20,000 and use his big block for a boat anchor!!

NoGamesLS1

iTrader: (16)

I dont know what your talking about. My 393 all motor smoked my friends stock cube with gears and a 150 shot Maybe you should race some people who have built their motors correctly

2001z

iTrader: (32)

dcmercury2

iTrader: (9)

the only reason they stroked the s2000 motor was because all the whiny owners were complaining about having no torque at low rpms. big suprise. so they stroked the motor and did nothing else to it so it made no more power than before. the torque curve is a little better and you dont have to rev it to 7000 like before to start moving somewhat fast. im sure if they revised the heads and cam it would take advantage of the displacement and make more power at a higher rpm but sacrifice the low end torque at lower rpms they were going after to begin with. 25psi you are such a morond when it comes to some ****. I cant believe you even gave such a gay example. You have to be the ultimate ricer fanboy.

Sparetire

You obviously did not get the sarcasm part of my last post in this thread.....


If you people simply add in the word high rpm before power what he said makes perfect sense. The longer the stroke, the harder it is to make screaming top end power from an engineering standpoint. The stresses on the engine are exponentially higher, the cylinders have a harder time filling well per rev given a certain bore and valve curtain area to work with, etc. The post above is a great example actually. They did not change the induction setup on the motor, so it does not make more peak power. And the peak power is moved down the rev range. At the same time, think about the stress on those rod bearings. Much higher with the longer stroke and more extreme rod angles.

So if your trying to move you torque into the high rpm ranges, like 7K, a long stroke motor presents more of a challenge than a short storke. Take a look at where a fast 327 makes power versus a 383. Much easier to make a nasty high rpm screamer of the 327. You dont need oversize crank journals, long rods, etc. You might make more peak power in the 383 (almost certanly) but it will also be lower in the rev range. You might even get to a point where the redline is moved lower and you actually do loose peak power because of your inability to rev high enough to pump a lot of air in a given time frame, even with more displacement. Thats a very extreme case though, especially with modern motors like LS1s, K20s, etc.

So it would have been more accurate to say, its harder to make high rpm power. Hey, lets all get really pissed off about it! Cool! Then we can all feel like real badasses online!

So those of you who dont even understand what I'm talking about regarding cylinder filling, curtain area, oversize journals, long rods, and such can feel free to spout off e-tard-net wisdom and bad mouth people who actually assemble motors and learn ****.

I'll go ahead and get us started...

Ricers!

Fuktards!

Loosers!

Morons! (oh, I'm sorry, moronds)

Hey, this is fun!

NemeSS

iTrader: (127)

HOLY ****!
MISCONCEPTION more like MISINFORMATION
The larger you go up in displacement,the harder it is to make power.

DAM! That knocked me off my seat and my sides feel like theyre splitting
from laffing so hard

u really need to go do some more valid research before u post the stuff
u do
there are a lot more variables than just slapping in a stroker crank in the main
housings .
as for the S2000, i suspect that the head airflow is pretty much tapped out
even on the stock displacement,therefore any additional stroke will show no improvement with out improved airflow,i believe same goes for the mr2 engine

Sparetire

People are incapable of reading.

25psi

I know!