Advanced Engineering Tech For the more hardcore LS1TECH residents

OHC vs Pushrod

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-22-2007, 11:46 AM
  #1  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
 
Rawr256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default OHC vs Pushrod

I found this link on another board and thought some might find interest in it. Good read for some that may be just starting out with learning about engines and the differences.

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums...opic=15551&hl=

It basically reaffirms what most of us all say here, get the air in and get the air out. Even uses the LSx engines in its comparison to other OHC engines.

It does a good job of pointing out the Pros and Cons of each engine out there.
Old 03-22-2007, 06:44 PM
  #2  
LS1 Tech Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Steve Bryant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Wichita, Ks
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

This is an excellent link and well worth reading! I'd recommend it for anyone . . . novice and expert alike.

Steve
Old 03-22-2007, 11:23 PM
  #3  
TECH Apprentice
 
LiENUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

They left out so many things, they discussed how it was impossible to have a pushrod 4 valve per cylinder head, what about the Dominion 32 valve heads ?! They say no major advances have been made in spring technology in the past 40 years, what about beehive springs? These are two MAJOR factors they completely ommitted, If someone has an account please, notify those people of these two factors. Both of these close the gap between pushrod and OHV engines. BTW no the dominion 32 valve car is not mine, I merely hosted the pics for someone. There are at least 3 32 valve headed LT1s in existence. This is just lt1s! There is a lot of work to convert the dominion heads to the LT1 I have no idea how many dominion headed cars there are outside the LT1 arena.
Old 03-23-2007, 12:13 AM
  #4  
Launching!
 
RussStang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Exton, Pennsylvania
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Aren't the Dominion and Arao heads one and the same? If they are, I don't think there are many engines out there sporting them, which is ashame. I have never actually seen them in person, but read on boards like this that they are a great head when they are finally hooked up to block, although installation can be a nightmare.
Old 03-23-2007, 02:10 PM
  #5  
TECH Apprentice
 
LiENUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by RussStang
Aren't the Dominion and Arao heads one and the same? If they are, I don't think there are many engines out there sporting them, which is ashame. I have never actually seen them in person, but read on boards like this that they are a great head when they are finally hooked up to block, although installation can be a nightmare.
Dunno if they're the same. But still they do exist, and they have GREAT low lift flow numbers. I THINK Bret Bauer built the engine in the pics I linked to, not sure though. But when Bret builds dominion headed engines he ends up making an entirely new set of shaftmount rockers. Apparently the ones they come with have poor geometry and deflection.
Old 03-23-2007, 03:17 PM
  #6  
LS1 Tech Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Steve Bryant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Wichita, Ks
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

LiENUS and Russ,
I don't think that the write-up in the link is attempting to be comprehensive regarding the latest state of technology of pushrod engines. I think that this guy is just saying that it is a commonly held misconception that overhead cam (SOHC and DOHC) are superior in every way to pushrod engines. He's also debunking the myth that pushrod engines are outdated. The write-up also mentions that OHC engines have been around for a long time and they are not the latest nor the greatest in every respect (power versus weight, engine exterior volume versus power, etc.).

Yes there are probably a lot of other things that could be said both for OHC and pushrod designs. However, I think that this guy was just trying to set the record straight to the extent that he could.

Steve
Old 03-23-2007, 04:07 PM
  #7  
12 Second Club
 
gyrene2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Chesapeake va
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

good ****, think i might have learned something.
Old 03-23-2007, 08:57 PM
  #8  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
Louie83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Great article.

One EXTREMELY important point they missed (also something that ricers cannot get through their heads) is that the smaller an engine is, the more HP/L it is capable of. Or more precisely, the shorter an engine's stroke is, the more HP/L it is capable of.

Obvious reason being: shorter stroke enables greater RPM's. This is why tiny crotch rocket engines can achieve nearly 200 HP/L at like 14,000 RPM's.
Old 03-23-2007, 11:31 PM
  #9  
TECH Junkie
 
WECIV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Gulf Shores and DC
Posts: 3,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Very good article. Very succinct!!!

W
Old 03-29-2007, 10:10 PM
  #10  
Teching In
 
VYSSWagon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Louie83
Great article.

One EXTREMELY important point they missed (also something that ricers cannot get through their heads) is that the smaller an engine is, the more HP/L it is capable of. Or more precisely, the shorter an engine's stroke is, the more HP/L it is capable of.

Obvious reason being: shorter stroke enables greater RPM's. This is why tiny crotch rocket engines can achieve nearly 200 HP/L at like 14,000 RPM's.
I agree totally. I meam a 2.4L V8 can produce 800hp at 19,000 RPM in Formula 1 (330hp/L!!).

All the way through I was thinking to myself, "What about the bottom end?" In the end the ultimate potential to develop power in all engines is limited by piston acceleration forces.
Old 03-31-2007, 06:51 PM
  #11  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
 
nitsudls1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I understand that GM built 2 black vettes in the early 90's. One with a lt4 and the other with a lt5. Then a bunch of the GM brass went out to test each car, not knowing what engine they were driving behind. One car got complaments as pulling hard from low rpms. The other seemed to "wind up" then press you in the seat. At the end of the day the hoods were opened and the lt4 was the winner. From that point on "If I understand the story correctly" GM gave the "ls1" project the green flag to go into production.
Old 03-31-2007, 11:48 PM
  #12  
Launching!
 
RussStang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Exton, Pennsylvania
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I don't think it was an LT5. I recall the OHC motor being smaller displacement than 5.7 liters.
Old 04-01-2007, 04:40 AM
  #13  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (9)
 
mcamarols1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by nitsudls1
I understand that GM built 2 black vettes in the early 90's. One with a lt4 and the other with a lt5. Then a bunch of the GM brass went out to test each car, not knowing what engine they were driving behind. One car got complaments as pulling hard from low rpms. The other seemed to "wind up" then press you in the seat. At the end of the day the hoods were opened and the lt4 was the winner. From that point on "If I understand the story correctly" GM gave the "ls1" project the green flag to go into production.
that storie is in the the book "How to build hi-preformance Gen3 v-8" i forgot the author but it was two equally dis. engines, one being pusrod the other being OHC.

GM will never let the pushrod design die(at least i hope)
Old 04-01-2007, 04:46 AM
  #14  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (16)
 
ss1129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ft Lupton, CO
Posts: 1,507
Received 20 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by mcamarols1
that storie is in the the book "How to build hi-preformance Gen3 v-8" i forgot the author but it was two equally dis. engines, one being pusrod the other being OHC.

GM will never let the pushrod design die(at least i hope)

Unless GM dies.
Old 04-01-2007, 09:55 PM
  #15  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (9)
 
mcamarols1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Wink

Originally Posted by ss1129
Unless GM dies.
GM will never die EVER!!!!lol
Old 04-02-2007, 08:36 PM
  #16  
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
 
Phynix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Santa Ana
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by nitsudls1
I understand that GM built 2 black vettes in the early 90's. One with a lt4 and the other with a lt5. Then a bunch of the GM brass went out to test each car, not knowing what engine they were driving behind. One car got complaments as pulling hard from low rpms. The other seemed to "wind up" then press you in the seat. At the end of the day the hoods were opened and the lt4 was the winner. From that point on "If I understand the story correctly" GM gave the "ls1" project the green flag to go into production.
It wasn't an lt4 or lt5, they were both early versions of the ls1, they made an ohc version because the brass at gm was pushing for it cause thats where the industry was going, but as stated at the end of the day the ohv motor was what was voted for
Old 04-10-2007, 06:45 PM
  #17  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
 
Rawr256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by nitsudls1
I understand that GM built 2 black vettes in the early 90's. One with a lt4 and the other with a lt5. Then a bunch of the GM brass went out to test each car, not knowing what engine they were driving behind. One car got complaments as pulling hard from low rpms. The other seemed to "wind up" then press you in the seat. At the end of the day the hoods were opened and the lt4 was the winner. From that point on "If I understand the story correctly" GM gave the "ls1" project the green flag to go into production.
Complaints? For the LSx engines it isn't just down low where all the power comes in, but it can still be felt up top. Everytime I go from my GTP to my TA and go WOT, it amazes me how it is a nonstop and consistant pull on the top side, the GTP falls off after a bit and starts to struggle.
Old 04-16-2007, 06:05 PM
  #18  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (3)
 
TT632's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Any dragstrip any time
Posts: 963
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Good article with some interesting historical points. Not sure how push rod engines got labeled as being old fashion or out of date considering the ancient history of both designs. The bottom end design of both engines is the same, the last I checked they were both reciprocating engines? You can trade your 12 foot worth of chain on the dohc for 16 pushrods on the other, worst case call it a wash for valvetrain loss. The DOHC has some advantages for low lift flow, but 400 cfm potential on newer LSX heads with good torque and horsepower were race car only #'s just a year ago. With how fast the cars on this site are getting as of late I will be building an LSX motor for my next project. The design is light, compact, inexpensive, great power output over a real world rpm range, and an aftermarket controller is not needed to program the computer. Amazing how GM hit on another winner in spite of the execs.
Old 04-29-2007, 07:34 PM
  #19  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
 
Silver6sp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Osceola IN
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

another factor is that people say with ohc engines that there is less parts and drag. in fact there is the smae amount or more moving parts then a pushrod.

and yes you can have a pushrod 4valve cyl head. the ford 6.0L TDI, yes a diesel but still a pushrod, the rockers on that engine control two valves, why no one else tried this theroy in a performance engine i dont know,
but i think it would be a good idea for more airflow IMO
Old 05-11-2007, 11:31 PM
  #20  
Teching In
 
ThinkingGTM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

HI all,

I'm new to both this forum, and the world of large displacement V8s.

Q:

Does anyone know anything about the heads on this engine:

http://tinyurl.com/3bu277

(I was hoping for something other than the evils of the OHc layout...)

Thanks

Last edited by ThinkingGTM; 05-12-2007 at 11:52 AM.


Quick Reply: OHC vs Pushrod



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:45 AM.