Generation IV Internal Engine - Mild, driveable cam for 402 but want over 520RWHP

I am new to this engine and its performance

I made a thread in the Gen III section, but have decided to go with a 402...

http://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=864708

Im considering reliability and driveability over power, since Now I have bigger cubes to work with..

Im going to be using my 5.3 stage 2.5 heads on a 402 assambled bottom end from TSP...

I just wanna know what cam I should go with for good street manners and having a reliable car. Im going with a 11.2 or so CR, with the heads and gasket choice of .040" and -10cc pistons...

For me personally a Torquer 3 in a LS1 with 3.73s(M6) with the 5.3 heads wasnt very driveable for a DD... So I want a cam with better manners than that, for the 402...

what sounds like a good solid cam..

I plan on running it N/A and want around 520whp if possible please...

maybe... and thats a maybe, Ill plan on nitrous or FI, in the later future....

Im gonna be running 7.4 hardened pushrods, caddy lifters, YT rockers, which may get switched back to my LS1 rebuilt rockers from Harland sharp... Are these valvetrain components acceptable in the 402 and the cam size I plan on running?

thanks for all the help

Why not ask TSP?

If you thought the T2 was too radical for a daily driver you're not going to build a 402 w/ those heads and make 520 RWHP with the drivability you're looking for.

My $.02

As the old saying goes. You can't have your cake and eat it too. :)

Here is what you do. Trade in those heads for some AFRs, TFs, or ETPs. Get a Fast 90/90 and decent LTs. Keep the compression the same. This will allow you to do a milder cam, and still get the performance you want. Otherwise, you will have to go BIG cam and even then it's a shot in the dark getting to 520rwhp. There was a thread on here, and the average 402 was dynoing at just over 500 rwhp.

If you thought the T2 was too radical for a daily driver you're not going to build a 402 w/ those heads and make 520 RWHP with the drivability you're looking for.

My $.02



I would agree with that as well.

What is too radical??? What I mean by radical isnt the torque pull or anything... what I mean is how undriveable it is at low RPMs, and thats all I meant by radical. Maybe it was a wrong choice of words...

basically I dont wanna feel like the car is gonna stall if Im under 1500 rpms, as which the Tv3 car felt like it was gonna do...

What is too radical??? What I mean by radical isnt the torque pull or anything... what I mean is how undriveable it is at low RPMs, and thats all I meant by radical. Maybe it was a wrong choice of words...

basically I dont wanna feel like the car is gonna stall if Im under 1500 rpms, as which the Tv3 car felt like it was gonna do...

sounds to me like you need a better tuner for your setup. alot of so called 'PRO' shops sell some really haked up tunes. really big cams are not gonna drive 100% stock and have 0 glitches but a good tune will make it very much driver friendly. if you want those kind of numbers you are gonna have to have a pretty agressive cam, or alittle spray.lol

basically I dont wanna feel like the car is gonna stall if Im under 1500 rpms, as which the Tv3 car felt like it was gonna do...

As overlap and duration go up, drivability suffers. To what degree depends somewhat on the skill of your tuner but regardless a cam with 5 degrees of overlap is always going to drive better than a cam with 20 degrees. As I and others have said it's going to take not only a BIG cam but the right cam to MAYBE reach you RWHP goal. Still, it's not going to drive anywhere near as well as your current cam.

Take some time, read what's offered here and talk to as many SMART people as you can.

I understand, but if a driveable 500rwhp N/A LS1 can be built, Im pretty sure a much more driveable 520whp 402 can be built, without going to crazy with CR..

All m saying is, gimme some numbers... whats a mild cam for a 402, similar to what a 224/224 would be like to a LS1...

What is a big cam for a 402, similar to what a MS4 or T rex would be for a LS1?

I am lost in how camshafts specs should look for this engine, I am planning to build..

I dont see how from 430rwhp through a LS6 manifold and 2 mufflers and moser 12 bolt. why I cant get 90 more rwhp, with a better intake manifold (thinking of fast 90/90) , 1 more liter of cubes to work with, more compression ratio.. from 10.75 to 11.2....

of course a bigger cam, but I dont want it to equate to how my Tv3 felt with the LS1...

Im fine with the pull, in fact, more of it is desired. Im not afraid of power. I drove my car for a day and got sick of how I had to rev so high to make power... was my tune really that bad? My tuner was recommended by quite a few people, and said it was worth driving 80 miles for it, and so I did....

Here is what you do. Trade in those heads for some AFRs, TFs, or ETPs. Get a Fast 90/90 and decent LTs. Keep the compression the same. This will allow you to do a milder cam, and still get the performance you want. Otherwise, you will have to go BIG cam and even then it's a shot in the dark getting to 520rwhp. There was a thread on here, and the average 402 was dynoing at just over 500 rwhp.

I though if I want a big cam, more compression is my friend. I mean I want to run a big cam, but with less compression, itll be less driveable..

So the reason im going with a higher compression ratio, is to run the biggest cam I possible can, without sacrifing a lot of drivability...

I really dont see how 520rwhp is such a hard goal to achieve.. people with 383s are doing so and even a few with LS1s..

and the biggest thing eating up RWHP for me is my 12 bolt. other than that I have an aluminum Driveshaft, Aluminum FW, underdrive pulley, etc..

I made 432rwhp through those and LS6 manifold.. and with a fast 90/90 Im sure I would have exceeded 440rwhp... with my current setup..

I dont wanna spend a lot of money, thats why I was planning on keeping the 5.3 heads, But if its gonna make such a huge difference, how will I go in and trade em in for some other heads?


I can go my cheapest route, take apart the LS1, change my reluctor wheel, polish the crank, replace bearings, maybe replace rings...

or the most expensive

go with a 427 long block...

But Im trying to keep it in the middle, and as cheap as possible. But I see it worthless to rebuild my old block as a 346 or 383, since I found out the 5.3s will work just fine on a 402, thats why I said to myself. Id rather spend a little more and get more cubes, plus Ive always preferred a larger bore than the 3.9 bore the LS1s have..

I am putting the cam out of my 403 up for sale when it comes out. It is a little too much for my 5000+ lb tbss, buit it would be great for you.

234/240 .600 .600 110+4 idles and drives nicely. Idles at 925 with an auto and a 3000 stall. It has a fairly lumpy idle, but drives nice.

Here is a clip http://www.youtube.com/awdls2

The higher up in the HP range you get, the more money it cost per HP. FWIW, I'm sure you can find a happy dyno to get you to your numbers.

http://www.sdparts.com/product/12569011/LS7IntakeManifold.aspx

Will a Ls7 intake fit the 5.3 heads? the and does it outflow a Fast 90/90?

edit:

I hope my exhaust works well with the 402 also, Im not looking to spend a lot, as mentioned. I just wanna get my car running again and instead of a rebuild I thought Id get a 402(mentioned also) But I am not hoping to change boltons parts at the moment, such as headers, and exhaust... Maybe, just maybe the Fast 90/90 combo from TSP, unless the LS7 intake flows better and adapts to my heads... I even need a new MAF...

The most drivable cam I have used in a 402 was 5 years ago and it was a 236/236 114+4 .580/.580 and it still made over 500 RWHP, this guy eventually went to a much bigger cam and didn't really pick up much power.

The most drivable cam I have used in a 402 was 5 years ago and it was a 236/236 114+4 .580/.580 and it still made over 500 RWHP, this guy eventually went to a much bigger cam and didn't really pick up much power.

Ok here's a start...

the 236/236 cam has even less lift than the Tv3 Im using, so it seems pretty small...

what ratio gears were you running with this cam?

The higher up in the HP range you get, the more money it cost per HP. FWIW, I'm sure you can find a happy dyno to get you to your numbers.

I made my 432rwhp through a dyno dynamics dynamometer, which fromwhat I heard is close to a mustang dyno, but still more forgiving on numbers...

I want to make about 520whp,but if I dont its not the end of the world... Im fine with spinning the motor to 6500rpms. but Id rather peak at 6000 - 64000 anywhere in that range is fine. I just am not looking for a peaky cam that makes peak power at 6800rpm or more.. although I wouldnt mind revving that high, just I dont want that to be my peak... Just like on my LS1 I made peak Hp at 5600 rpm, but I still went to 6000 - 6200 rpm when I shifted

Basically, what kind of numbers am I looking at if I wanted to have a driveable street car through a M6 402m with a tame cam with 3.73s... and lets say I went with a fast 90/90...


I mean why am I bashing the Tv3? maybe because when I was stock with boltons, I was pretty quick I guess, But I was really used to that speed.

then suddenly I jumped from 360whp to 430whp a 70rwhp increase.. and I already got used to that power the one day I drove it, in addition to that I sacrificed low rpm drivability... So thats what disappointed me then..

So bigger cubes Im hoping for, more drivability at the same time and more power, so I wont get used to it for a while..

Maybe I need to go drive a top fuel...

if it were me building the engine, i would have the short block compleat sitting in front of me with the final head choice ready to bolt on. then measure what is the safest max lift you can run with your piston to head clearance, then look for a cam in the mid 240's duration and as close to the max lift you can get. as for LSA the wider the better street manners. get a grind on a 113-114 will be much friendlier to tune and drive than one with a tighter LSA. will sacrifice a couple of peak horsepower for more power under the curve and better bottem end. thats my $2.50

if it were me building the engine, i would have the short block compleat sitting in front of me with the final head choice ready to bolt on. then measure what is the safest max lift you can run with your piston to head clearance, then look for a cam in the mid 240's duration and as close to the max lift you can get. as for LSA the wider the better street manners. get a grind on a 113-114 will be much friendlier to tune and drive than one with a tighter LSA. will sacrifice a couple of peak horsepower for more power under the curve and better bottem end. thats my $2.50

agreed, I want something in the neighborhood of 112-114 LSA and agree with some under the curve hp, vs only peaky...

But how cam I tell if the lift is fine? TSP assured me the -10cc pistons have deep enough valve reliefs to run about any cam I desire. and since im not going too agressive, I think I should be fine....., this with a .040" gasket and the 5.3 stage 2.5 heads I believe I wanna use. unless someone would swap a better flowing head with me.. all of it should be fine for PTV clearance.

Oh and with all that listed, that should achieve about 11.2 CR...

Back to my original post -why not have TSP spec the cam for their short block, then have them tune it then you have one source responsibility?

Back to my original post -why not have TSP spec the cam for their short block, then have them tune it then you have one source responsibility?

How will they tune it? Its not running though the same setup as I...

Unlessssss they use the same heads, intake manifold, headers, and exh system. WHich isnt impossible, but will they do so?

Okay, Ill give that a shot, but I still wanna see the general publics response and whatever is beneficial I will filter that out and use what is useful and proper for my application..

crap another thing to consider, I have a breand new fuel pump inmy car, but its a stocker... and I know I have to change my injectors now... will the fuel pump be okay as well???

I understand, but if a driveable 500rwhp N/A LS1 can be built, Im pretty sure a much more driveable 520whp 402 can be built, without going to crazy with CR..

All m saying is, gimme some numbers... whats a mild cam for a 402, similar to what a 224/224 would be like to a LS1...

What is a big cam for a 402, similar to what a MS4 or T rex would be for a LS1?

I am lost in how camshafts specs should look for this engine, I am planning to build...

How do you define a "driveable 500rwhp N/A LS1" and expect it to meet your goals? One of the few 500rwhp numbers that are believeable around here has come from Patrick G's 238/242 112 cam. Keep in mind that one has 16* of overlap, compared to the 10.5* of your TV3 cam. By most any definition, it would be much less driveable than your example. Also, realize that Pat made those numbers through a 10-bolt, with an electric water pump, a pro-ported Fast 90, and arguably one of the best aftermarket castings available for a 346.

I dont see how from 430rwhp through a LS6 manifold and 2 mufflers and moser 12 bolt. why I cant get 90 more rwhp, with a better intake manifold (thinking of fast 90/90) , 1 more liter of cubes to work with, more compression ratio.. from 10.75 to 11.2....

of course a bigger cam, but I dont want it to equate to how my Tv3 felt with the LS1...

Im fine with the pull, in fact, more of it is desired. Im not afraid of power. I drove my car for a day and got sick of how I had to rev so high to make power... was my tune really that bad? My tuner was recommended by quite a few people, and said it was worth driving 80 miles for it, and so I did....

Lets use HP/ci to "scale" a few scenarios up from 346 to 402ci to get a feel for where you want to be. Keep in mind that a bigger arm, and the resulting cubes are going to help make more torque across the board, so lets focus for now on the HP side for the goal you've set.

"typical" 224/224 #'s: 390rwhp avg with stock castings, 420rwhp avg with heads ~ 453rwhp to 488rwhp

your TV3 rwhp #'s: 430rwhp ~ 500rwhp

Mamo "Blue Pill" combo rwhp #'s: 475rwhp ~ 551rwhp

Keep in mind that Tony's setup was also tuned to the T to get those numbers from a 224/228 cam - the best exhaust available for a C5, EWP, Pulleys + countless hours into the tune. I would expect a more typical 346 to make something like 450rwhp without the EWP and with your 12 bolt.

450rwhp ~ 523rwhp

To that end, here is some good reading for you, from the man himself.

403 w/AFR 205's (A4 with converter) puts down 490/465 (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7077332&highlight=#post7077332)
Same combo ~ build and engine dyno results (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=649674&page=1)
Through an M6, this would damn near nail your goal on the head!

Now, this one is a little wilder, probably not as driveable as you would prefer...
403 LS2 / AFR 205’s lays down 550+ RWHP (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7997625&highlight=#post7997625)

Hopefully, somewhere in this lengthy post, you find the answer you are looking for.

Good Luck!

agreed, I want something in the neighborhood of 112-114 LSA and agree with some under the curve hp, vs only peaky...

But how cam I tell if the lift is fine? TSP assured me the -10cc pistons have deep enough valve reliefs to run about any cam I desire. and since im not going too agressive, I think I should be fine....., this with a .040" gasket and the 5.3 stage 2.5 heads I believe I wanna use. unless someone would swap a better flowing head with me.. all of it should be fine for PTV clearance.

Oh and with all that listed, that should achieve about 11.2 CR...

to check PTV clearance you have a couple of options, if you have a cam to roll over in the motor then bolt the head on the engine with modeling clay(or playdo for cheap)on the top of the piston, go thru two compleat revolutions and then pull the head off and measur the thickness of the clay smashed on top of the piston, if you do it befor you have a cam then you can set the head on with a light weight checker spring installed and measure the max valve lift with a dial indicator. you need to have a degree wheel to know what lift you can achieve at what crank position as differant cams have max lift at differant intake center lines(not to be confused with lobe seperation angle) if you dont have any of the tools to do this a cheater way to get a little POM befor tq your heads down is the have the cam properly installed and set the head on the motor without a gasket, roll over and make sure it dont bind or try to lift the head, if all is good the gasket thicknessunless you are on the verge of touching or running a thin head gasket) will give you the clearance you need. as for CR well dependant on the amount of overlap the cam has you can run more static compression with high overlap and still not have as much dynamic compression with the cam in the equation. somethin to think about. as for fuel, the stock pump will support it...maybe...if its new and a good one....but will be over worked and short lived

If you thought the T2 was too radical for a daily driver you're not going to build a 402 w/ those heads and make 520 RWHP with the drivability you're looking for.

My $.02

I agree.

if it were me building the engine, i would have the short block compleat sitting in front of me with the final head choice ready to bolt on. then measure what is the safest max lift you can run with your piston to head clearance

Max lift has very little to do with PTV clearance. Most interference occurs at the point just before or just after TDC, and the valves are usually just off the seat at those point.

then look for a cam in the mid 240's duration and as close to the max lift you can get. as for LSA the wider the better street manners. get a grind on a 113-114 will be much friendlier to tune and drive than one with a tighter LSA. will sacrifice a couple of peak horsepower for more power under the curve and better bottem end. thats my $2.50
agreed, I want something in the neighborhood of 112-114 LSA and agree with some under the curve hp, vs only peaky...

Don't get to hung up on the LSA, as it is really just a byproduct of the right VE's to make the power where you want it. Especially consider a tighter LSA if you are thinking about going bigger than 236 or so on the duration. Remember that a wide LSA and a long duration is only going to push the power peak higher, whle costing you torque and response on the bottom end.

Everything that goes into designing a cam is a compromise of one form or another.

to check PTV clearance you have a couple of options, if you have a cam to roll over in the motor then bolt the head on the engine with modeling clay(or playdo for cheap)on the top of the piston, go thru two compleat revolutions and then pull the head off and measur the thickness of the clay smashed on top of the piston, if you do it befor you have a cam then you can set the head on with a light weight checker spring installed and measure the max valve lift with a dial indicator. you need to have a degree wheel to know what lift you can achieve at what crank position as differant cams have max lift at differant intake center lines

Here your explanation of "max lift" is spot on. However, most of the engine builders here would :buttkick: you for recommending playdoh, as it can be rather elastic, and would not give an accurate read of PTV.

Don't get to hung up on the LSA, as it is really just a byproduct of the right VE's to make the power where you want it. Especially consider a tighter LSA if you are thinking about going bigger than 236 or so on the duration. Remember that a wide LSA and a long duration is only going to push the power peak higher, whle costing you torque and response on the bottom end............

well you are right that the LSA needs to be relitive to the duration for a piticular cam but DONT rule it out of the equation by no means, no matter how perfect the tune you cant tune out the natural mechanics of the cam, i have run a 242/248 cam on a lt1 with a 113LSA although it did not make the hp # we wanted it made 40 foot pounds of tq more than peak hp, and at a low rpm. was a absolute beast on the street and track, didnt MPH great but ET was there for sure. and this was a true daily driver(sun,snow,rain)
and for the playdo.lol well you have to examine it closely, maybe do it a couple of times, you can tell if it sticks, pulls apart, or other wise not acurate if you pay close attention it can be done, although not prefered.lol

How do you define a "driveable 500rwhp N/A LS1" and expect it to meet your goals? One of the few 500rwhp numbers that are believeable around here has come from Patrick G's 238/242 112 cam. Keep in mind that one has 16* of overlap, compared to the 10.5* of your TV3 cam. By most any definition, it would be much less driveable than your example. Also, realize that Pat made those numbers through a 10-bolt, with an electric water pump, a pro-ported Fast 90, and arguably one of the best aftermarket castings available for a 346.



Lets use HP/ci to "scale" a few scenarios up from 346 to 402ci to get a feel for where you want to be. Keep in mind that a bigger arm, and the resulting cubes are going to help make more torque across the board, so lets focus for now on the HP side for the goal you've set.

"typical" 224/224 #'s: 390rwhp avg with stock castings, 420rwhp avg with heads ~ 453rwhp to 488rwhp

your TV3 rwhp #'s: 430rwhp ~ 500rwhp

Mamo "Blue Pill" combo rwhp #'s: 475rwhp ~ 551rwhp

Keep in mind that Tony's setup was also tuned to the T to get those numbers from a 224/228 cam - the best exhaust available for a C5, EWP, Pulleys + countless hours into the tune. I would expect a more typical 346 to make something like 450rwhp without the EWP and with your 12 bolt.

450rwhp ~ 523rwhp

To that end, here is some good reading for you, from the man himself.

403 w/AFR 205's (A4 with converter) puts down 490/465 (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7077332&highlight=#post7077332)
Same combo ~ build and engine dyno results (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=649674&page=1)
Through an M6, this would damn near nail your goal on the head!

Now, this one is a little wilder, probably not as driveable as you would prefer...
403 LS2 / AFR 205’s lays down 550+ RWHP (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7997625&highlight=#post7997625)

Hopefully, somewhere in this lengthy post, you find the answer you are looking for.

Good Luck!

Ok answer me this, through my Tv3, if I was running a higher CR would i go from 430rwhp to about 440+rwhp? and would it also not be mroe drivable since more cr = more tq, generally speaking and if so, lets take that figure, Ill run a Fast 90/90 and letssay I gain no power through it, since its needed for a 402 to run larger diameter runners to feet the bigger cubes, through bigger ports and valves... So with the 440whp figure translating that to a 402 would make about 511rwhp, in which would be acceptable, only if its more drivable than a tv3....

So based on that, I wouldnt see it being too difficult making a a figure near 520whp... 510whp is acceptable, but just isnt my goal.. Im shooting for 520, but im not gonna whine if it makes 510. Its good enough, under one condition.... if and ONLY IF its more drivable than my Tv3 was..

exsplain more specificly the issues you were having with your previous cam/combo, surging,bucking,stalling.....???what rpm did it idle at? what gear was run with it, what stall(or manual)? and more of what driving conditions you do with it. pleasure weekend drives with occasional track blast? daily comute to work? everyone has there own oppion on what is a DD or streetable.

Ok answer me this, through my Tv3, if I was running a higher CR would i go from 430rwhp to about 440+rwhp? and would it also not be mroe drivable since more cr = more tq, generally speaking and if so, lets take that figure, Ill run a Fast 90/90 and letssay I gain no power through it, since its needed for a 402 to run larger diameter runners to feet the bigger cubes, through bigger ports and valves... So with the 440whp figure translating that to a 402 would make about 511rwhp, in which would be acceptable, only if its more drivable than a tv3....

So based on that, I wouldnt see it being too difficult making a a figure near 520whp... 510whp is acceptable, but just isnt my goal.. Im shooting for 520, but im not gonna whine if it makes 510. Its good enough, under one condition.... if and ONLY IF its more drivable than my Tv3 was..

Three things that appear to have been at fault for poor drivability, IMO.

1) Low compression (10.75 if I found it right)
2) Larger than needed ports = no air velocity (not a big fan of ported stock castings)
3) TUNE, TUNE, TUNE!

It's also worth asking if the cam was degreed, and you are sure of the ICL it was installed at, as well as whether or not the 10.75:1 compression was measured or assumed. Cams of that size need closer to 11.5:1.

Three things that appear to have been at fault for poor drivability, IMO.

1) Low compression (10.75 if I found it right)
2) Larger than needed ports = no air velocity (not a big fan of ported stock castings)
3) TUNE, TUNE, TUNE!

It's also worth asking if the cam was degreed, and you are sure of the ICL it was installed at, as well as whether or not the 10.75:1 compression was measured or assumed. Cams of that size need closer to 11.5:1.

well the guy has a pretty respected name, besides being a newbie(compared to other tuners) He is a young guy, Id say looks mid 20s. and his shop is fairly new(like 1 year old) But has many satisfied customers...

yes 10.75 compression ratio... that is low? I mean compared to the stock CR which is 10.0 :1 Id say its an improvement,I wonder how cam only Tv3 guys feel... and I am only running a 3.73 gear, vs many who go 4.10 with a cam such as mine...

My ports may be larger than needed, Im not gonna say no. I dunno how the 862 casting 5.3 stage 2.5 heads from TSp compare with stock 241s...

So maybe after all the 5.3s will be better with the bigger cube 402...

So it may be one of those issue, I agree.

So can you tune a cam of mine to be tame at idle. could i leave off idle by slowly relasing the clutch with a cam like that? or must I rev it past 1500 rpms? Or maybe Ill just increase my idle so I dont have to deal with that issue I dunno...

also sometimes the idle which is set at a stock 800rpms, would fluctuate and drop down to 500, is that all to do with the tune or is that a normal thing you will experience with a cam of that size, regardless...?

exsplain more specificly the issues you were having with your previous cam/combo, surging,bucking,stalling.....???what rpm did it idle at? what gear was run with it, what stall(or manual)? and more of what driving conditions you do with it. pleasure weekend drives with occasional track blast? daily comute to work? everyone has there own oppion on what is a DD or streetable.

Well Im not new to LS1s, but I am new with the 402.. But that doesnt change anything..

If someone was to properly explain to me, the definition of surging, bucking, and stalling(which Im pretty sure I know what stalling means) but just for kicks, someoe plase give me the proper definitions of these words so I can tell you which of those I am experienceing and would like to avoid with my new setup, I am about to decide on...


The car is a 2002 Z28, I have all supporting intake and exhaust bolt ons, aluminum flywheel and LS7 clutch, PSt aluminum DS, Moser 12 bolt, trutrac 3.73s.. I have a T-56, in which I rebuilt in my trans class and have a minor issue downshifting to 2nd gear only after I shifted past 2nd gear to 3rd, 4th, whatever...

It idles at stock 800, I believe... I dont remember because I only drove the car for a day, but Im pretty sure...

Now for some reason I felt like explaining how the whole issue started:

When they dynoed my car, We heard some rattling, which appeared to be coming from the drivetrain.. They didnt know what it was. They took off the valvecovers and checked all the rockerarms, but I think a rocker bolt was loose, or maybe they just said that and found nothing wrong, either way, the problem was supposedly fixed.

The rattling went away... they dynoed the car more and gave it to me. It idles fine, didnt die, like it did when it was untuned... I already could tell, I was sacrificing low RPMs, when I would accelerate from a stoplight, that Id have to give a bit more throttle before I fully depressed the clutch pedal... But I felt the pull at high RPMs and I enjoyed it, the day was kinda rainy as well. SO I didnt get to go WOT too much withoutspinning, but did a few placed on the way home...

anyhow long story short, the car I noticed would drop idle once in a while but fix itself... by the time I drove home, which was about 80 miles from the shop.. I noticed the rattling came back.

I parked the car and said Ill deal with it tomorrow.


the next day, I started the car and was on my way to the mechanic, the car died in the middle of the road a 1/4 miled down the road from my house...
My mechanic shop was just 1/8 of a mile down the road, I walked there and asked if they can push it there... I exlplained to them my problem and they came with carb cleaner and sprayed in my TB and it fired up...

they didnt wanna push itto the shop So I called a tow truck and towed it there, then from there I towed it to another shop and there they changed my fuel pump... the car still wouldnt fire up. they diagnosed it and a DTC came up Po336, CKP cant recognize tdc.

they changed the CKP sensor, checked the cam sensor, everything.. they caouldnt find anything wrong. SO I had it towed all the way to my tuner and after a week they found out it was a broken reluctor wheel..

1. CR not to low but not optimal
2. port velocity not optimal for low end power
3. not optimal but not to far off that it could not be tuned to drive good,just not as much power as could be acheived if they were optimal
4. stumbling diping idle is deff a tuning issue, the idle needs to be raised within reason, base running airflow need to be dialed in, adaptive idle need to be fixed. alot of so called tunners just add an ass load of idle timing to mask other issues. if its somethin that happens very rarely and it makes you think hum what was that. that is normal. not somethin you live with contantly, thats poor tuning.
5. yes i could tune it.as i am sure there is someone compitent in your area with HP tuners. im doing a cam only MS4 as soon as he gets it back in together and is his ONLY car. i didnt recomend this cam for power under the curve but he is 17 and heard a sound clip on Utube.lol

1. CR not to low but not optimal
2. port velocity not optimal for low end power
3. not optimal but not to far off that it could not be tuned to drive good,just not as much power as could be acheived if they were optimal
4. stumbling diping idle is deff a tuning issue, the idle needs to be raised within reason, base running airflow need to be dialed in, adaptive idle need to be fixed. alot of so called tunners just add an ass load of idle timing to mask other issues. if its somethin that happens very rarely and it makes you think hum what was that. that is normal. not somethin you live with contantly, thats poor tuning.
5. yes i could tune it. im doing a cam only MS4 as soon as he gets it back in together and is his ONLY car. i didnt recomend this cam for power under the curve but he is 17 and heard a sound clip on Utube.lol

sorry another thing I forgot to mention was my use of the vehicle

The car is a Daily driver, it sees the dragstrip a few passes per month, and it will see a roadcourse a few times a year to. So it is used in almsot every application...

if they tuned it with obvious mechanical issues then that was the first mistake, any machanical issues should have been addressed first. if it had a bad pump then all the fueling tables they set up were off, bad reluctor wheel then ignition problems and who knows what they did to try and tune around it? mechanical issues will make you chase your tail all day long tryin to tune it out. you just go in circles and get nowhere

sorry another thing I forgot to mention was my use of the vehicle

The car is a Daily driver, it sees the dragstrip a few passes per month, and it will see a roadcourse a few times a year to. So it is used in almsot every application...

well if you want that kind of HP na then you will have to comprimise somewhere, you are gonna give up some bottem end, you will have to rev alittle more off the line, but as soon as it is rolling you should have all the power you need. it should not dip down way under idle while coming to a stop, it sould not constantly search for a idle while sitting at a light,it should not ramdomly die. it should have somewhat of a consistant(for lack of better word)choppy lope. that much cam is likely to surge under low rpm, low load conditions,example if you are trying to idle thru a large parking lot or thru heavy traffic at a light with little to no throttle being given. you can make it very livable but not compleatly go away with very large cams. espeacialy when you are in between the optimal gear if you are not pulling or decelerating. i think you will not be happy with more than a 236-242 range cam for the lower rpm power you want to feel, if you dont get the # you are after then its time to think about AFR's or something to keep that low end velocity up and still make #'s . you will think and feel like you have more power with a smaller cam than with maxed out cam on the street for your conditions tho the dyno #'s wont reflect it the seat of the pants will

well if you want that kind of HP na then you will have to comprimise somewhere, you are gonna give up some bottem end, you will have to rev alittle more off the line, but as soon as it is rolling you should have all the power you need. it should not dip down way under idle while coming to a stop, it sould not constantly search for a idle while sitting at a light,it should not ramdomly die. it should have somewhat of a consistant(for lack of better word)choppy lope. that much cam is likely to surge under low rpm, low load conditions,example if you are trying to idle thru a large parking lot or thru heavy traffic at a light with little to no throttle being given. you can make it very livable but not compleatly go away with very large cams. espeacialy when you are in between the optimal gear if you are not pulling or decelerating. i think you will not be happy with more than a 236-242 range cam for the lower rpm power you want to feel, if you dont get the # you are after then its time to think about AFR's or something to keep that low end velocity up and still make #'s . you will think and feel like you have more power with a smaller cam than with maxed out cam on the street for your conditions tho the dyno #'s wont reflect it the seat of the pants will

If its that imposible with the heads Im running, then Im fine with lower than 520whp, but around what numbers should I be making then?

If at the moment I run a driveable small/mild cam, LS6 manifold and my pacesetter ceramic coated headers, and the 5.3 heads though the 402 is it gonna be impossible to make over 500+whp? even at 11.2 cr? and yes I dont care for a choppy idle as much as other do.



Also another think I forgot to mention, in which bothered me the most was..

the car was very jerkey especially in 1st and 2nd gear. so if Im below 1500rpms.. I think even below 2000rpms and cruising
in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and even 4th, the car would jerk a lot. Kind of like when people learn how to drive a manual for the first time and it just jerks around. like that... That bothered me the most from all of those issues, from ebing driveable..

if they tuned it with obvious mechanical issues then that was the first mistake, any machanical issues should have been addressed first. if it had a bad pump then all the fueling tables they set up were off, bad reluctor wheel then ignition problems and who knows what they did to try and tune around it? mechanical issues will make you chase your tail all day long tryin to tune it out. you just go in circles and get nowhere

Well I dont wanna bash the guy, he is really cool, but do you think he knew that a potential problem existed and tuned it anyway?

Man I gave so much money for a new exhaust and a tune, plus more for a speed density tune, since my MAF wasnt working and even more, since my o2 sensors werent working... and all thats gone down the drain..

and my tune was probably not at its best, cuz of the fuel pump too :(

I dont understand how something can get in the engine and mess up the reluctor wheel... seems near impossible I changed the oil pump, and all valvetrain. I never pulled off the oil pan I dunno what got in the crankcase.. IF that was even the case.

Well I dont wanna bash the guy, he is really cool, but do you think he knew that a potential problem existed and tuned it anyway?

Man I gave so much money for a new exhaust and a tune, plus more for a speed density tune, since my MAF wasnt working and even more, since my o2 sensors werent working... and all thats gone down the drain..

and my tune was probably not at its best, cuz of the fuel pump too :(

I dont understand how something can get in the engine and mess up the reluctor wheel... seems near impossible I changed the oil pump, and all valvetrain. I never pulled off the oil pan I dunno what got in the crankcase.. IF that was even the case.

i have no idea who the guy is, how nice he is or how good he is, i wasnt there so cant give a professional opion on what went on, but from what i can gather about what you are sayin it sound to me like he was just flat jerkin you around, sounds like alot of problems to run into on a single job, and get more money from a customer for this that and the other, but like i said i wasnt there... but if he was taking things apart and checking them to start with, then tuned it anyway, then had to go back and fix it, sounds ass backward to me, instead of doing a speed density tune for more money why not put a maf on it for less money. tho the VE tables need corrected anyway to make snapier fuel transitions, without the O2's open loop speed density has to be spot on in all driving conditions and temps because it goes strictly on what you command it and has no way to correct as do the closed loop of the O2's........

You might want to look at my first results from my 402 setup!



http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=803743&highlight=

Your getting some sound advise in this thread. And they are being nice about it. As was said before, 520rwhp with those heads and your definition of good drivabilty is not going to happen. I know from experience! Sounds like your geting the same motor I have.

By the way, use the .03 gaskets and not the .04. That 236/236 (on a 112 though) will be a great cam. Don't ask why, just do it.

Good luck.

the car was very jerkey especially in 1st and 2nd gear. so if Im below 1500rpms.. I think even below 2000rpms and cruising
in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and even 4th, the car would jerk a lot. Kind of like when people learn how to drive a manual for the first time and it just jerks around. like that... That bothered me the most from all of those issues, from ebing driveable..

Thats bucking.
From the way you're describing what you want as far as driveability, you need to stop worrying about what kinda numbers its gonna make, build or have someone build a motor to suit your tastes, and then it is what it is.
If you want a mild 500+ rwhp car, then build a much bigger motor, with aftermarket heads, and a mild cam. You WILL NOT make 500 + rwhp with budget heads, and a small cam and low compression. If you jack up the compression to try and make power, and throw in a mild cam for drivability, then your dynamic will be too high, you'll have to pull timing to keep it from pinging, and subsequently kill the power.
We've built several 403s over 500 hp. Just finishing up another now. I can tell you from experience, you wont make that kinda power with a set of budget heads, and a small cam.
And for almost any cam, you'll have to give it some gas to slip the clutch. You need to get over that. Thats just a side affect of a bigger cam. You shouldnt have to rev it to 2 grand or nothin, but you cant just let the clutch out without giving it some gas.

I made my 432rwhp through a dyno dynamics dynamometer, which fromwhat I heard is close to a mustang dyno, but still more forgiving on numbers...

I want to make about 520whp,but if I dont its not the end of the world... Im fine with spinning the motor to 6500rpms. but Id rather peak at 6000 - 64000 anywhere in that range is fine. I just am not looking for a peaky cam that makes peak power at 6800rpm or more.. although I wouldnt mind revving that high, just I dont want that to be my peak... Just like on my LS1 I made peak Hp at 5600 rpm, but I still went to 6000 - 6200 rpm when I shifted

Basically, what kind of numbers am I looking at if I wanted to have a driveable street car through a M6 402m with a tame cam with 3.73s... and lets say I went with a fast 90/90...


I mean why am I bashing the Tv3? maybe because when I was stock with boltons, I was pretty quick I guess, But I was really used to that speed.

then suddenly I jumped from 360whp to 430whp a 70rwhp increase.. and I already got used to that power the one day I drove it, in addition to that I sacrificed low rpm drivability... So thats what disappointed me then..

So bigger cubes Im hoping for, more drivability at the same time and more power, so I wont get used to it for a while..

Maybe I need to go drive a top fuel...

your TV3 car drove great! didnt have any surging or bucking ! i am sorry to here that you didnt like the driveability.
also your car came to me as is, i didnt do any work on it!, i think you need to state that. also you drove the car to me untuned then drove it home the minute you got off the freeway to your house you said it died! from either the damged reluctor wheel, or fuel pump i dont know i wasnt there.

End of subject, edcmat-l1 nailed it perfectly. :)

Erik from HKE has sent us 2 of his 408's with ET 5.3 heads and a 244/248 cam. With an LS6 intake, both cars made 500rwhp. I would think with a better intake/tb, you could get close to your 520. Both cars are VERY driveable. One guy drove to Fl in his car, got 26mpg. They both were SD tuned.

LSGunZ28

Did you swap all the parts at the same time? Seems to me that you switched from a 241 head (~200cc inlet port) to ported 5.3 heads (220+ cc ports), a much larger cam which trades bottom end torque for top end HP (not the Torquer the name would lead you to believe), and lost some inertia from a light weight aluminium flywheel.

I think all of those factors contribute to the problem. Add the fact that the cam really comes to life at higher engine speeds, and it all makes for a setup that will feel much softer than stock down low.

I think there are some bugs you could work out of this setup, and save a lot of money over building a 402.
* swap the stock flywheel back over - this will make a big difference in low speed tractability
* sell your budget 5.3 heads and invest in a set of AFR 205's - these heads are designed to improve power all over, but especially on the low end
* consider if the TV3 cam is really what you want

The Torquer is supposed to peak at 6400 and pull well to 6700 if installed at the right centerline. You could get 95% of the top end and big improvement in the bottom end with a much smaller cam. I've seen Predator-Z recommend a 224/224 .609/.581 111+2 cam that would give you excellent torque with just 346 cubic inches.

As for heads, mill those AFR's to 59cc's and run a .040 thick gasket for the best results with your TV3 cam. If you do go with less cam, 61cc's is probably as small as you want to go.

your TV3 car drove great! didnt have any surging or bucking ! i am sorry to here that you didnt like the driveability.
also your car came to me as is, i didnt do any work on it!, i think you need to state that. also you drove the car to me untuned then drove it home the minute you got off the freeway to your house you said it died! from either the damged reluctor wheel, or fuel pump i dont know i wasnt there.

Thats right... But the car did feel like i was jerking when I test drove it...

and I am not blaming you for anything, thats why I was careful withh my choice of words I used, because I appreciated the work you guys did..

what did happen was a couple of times the rpms fluctuated when Iw as on the freeway, due to traffic, so when I came to a stop, thats what happened, itdropped from 800 to 500 and rose back up.. But this could have been a fuel issue at the time? I dunno... But this was miles before my fuel pump went out..

and when I test drove it, like i said, the car was jerking around I dunno if its a low RPM tuning issue, which Im sure is not because you finished tuning it. but maybe its just what having a bigger cam does, below 2000 rpms it would jerk and was really uncomfortable, I couldnt do anything about it, the only time it wouldnt jer is if I gave it more than 10% throttle...

and the least of my concerns is the below 1500 rpms the car had absolutely no pull... still a concern, but the least of them. I could get used to it, if that were to also happen in the 402 I plan on building... But the jerkyness, no Id want to avoid that 100%..

Thats bucking.
From the way you're describing what you want as far as driveability, you need to stop worrying about what kinda numbers its gonna make, build or have someone build a motor to suit your tastes, and then it is what it is.
If you want a mild 500+ rwhp car, then build a much bigger motor, with aftermarket heads, and a mild cam. You WILL NOT make 500 + rwhp with budget heads, and a small cam and low compression. If you jack up the compression to try and make power, and throw in a mild cam for drivability, then your dynamic will be too high, you'll have to pull timing to keep it from pinging, and subsequently kill the power.
We've built several 403s over 500 hp. Just finishing up another now. I can tell you from experience, you wont make that kinda power with a set of budget heads, and a small cam.
And for almost any cam, you'll have to give it some gas to slip the clutch. You need to get over that. Thats just a side affect of a bigger cam. You shouldnt have to rev it to 2 grand or nothin, but you cant just let the clutch out without giving it some gas.


So can you tell me what kind of power I am going to make with a mild cam, 11.2 cr due to those -10cc pistons and gasket, from a 402 and just pacesetters and LS6 manifold... and a ballpark figure of how much Ill gain if kooks 1 7/8" were used and a fast 90/90 is swapped?

Also how much heavier is a 402 than a 346?, all I can think of is, the heavier crank for a longer stroke, very slightly bigger pistons and wristpins perhaps. the sleeve being slightly larger, nothing too much I presume...


I care about this because I road race he car, as mentioned earlier...

LSGunZ28

Did you swap all the parts at the same time? Seems to me that you switched from a 241 head (~200cc inlet port) to ported 5.3 heads (220+ cc ports), a much larger cam which trades bottom end torque for top end HP (not the Torquer the name would lead you to believe), and lost some inertia from a light weight aluminium flywheel.

I think all of those factors contribute to the problem. Add the fact that the cam really comes to life at higher engine speeds, and it all makes for a setup that will feel much softer than stock down low.

I think there are some bugs you could work out of this setup, and save a lot of money over building a 402.
* swap the stock flywheel back over - this will make a big difference in low speed tractability
* sell your budget 5.3 heads and invest in a set of AFR 205's - these heads are designed to improve power all over, but especially on the low end
* consider if the TV3 cam is really what you want

The Torquer is supposed to peak at 6400 and pull well to 6700 if installed at the right centerline. You could get 95% of the top end and big improvement in the bottom end with a much smaller cam. I've seen Predator-Z recommend a 224/224 .609/.581 111+2 cam that would give you excellent torque with just 346 cubic inches.

As for heads, mill those AFR's to 59cc's and run a .040 thick gasket for the best results with your TV3 cam. If you do go with less cam, 61cc's is probably as small as you want to go.


this is totally the route I dont want to go..

Im gonna be spending money, but keeping my 346(why would i keep a stock ci engine, if I was spending that much money) So will be making less power as well...

Now considering the torquer 3 as a large cam and the 224/224 as a mild driveable cam.

Id rather just do the 402 and a mild cam for the 402, vs building a 346 with bettee heads..

Also my Torquer cam only peaked at 6300 rpms :(

i have no idea who the guy is, how nice he is or how good he is, i wasnt there so cant give a professional opion on what went on, but from what i can gather about what you are sayin it sound to me like he was just flat jerkin you around, sounds like alot of problems to run into on a single job, and get more money from a customer for this that and the other, but like i said i wasnt there... but if he was taking things apart and checking them to start with, then tuned it anyway, then had to go back and fix it, sounds ass backward to me, instead of doing a speed density tune for more money why not put a maf on it for less money. tho the VE tables need corrected anyway to make snapier fuel transitions, without the O2's open loop speed density has to be spot on in all driving conditions and temps because it goes strictly on what you command it and has no way to correct as do the closed loop of the O2's........

well at the moment, I was infromed my MAF wasnt working. and I just wanted to have the tuning finished and drive my car already, so I gave an ok to do the speed density tune...
But it doesnt matter now does it, since the car doesnt run anymore...

but for next time Im getting a MAF tune

On second thought.... Should I just buy the damn whole engine already? a 418 with heads and a mild cam.. I mean, All I was doing is saving the heads, but I was gonna need a new cam anyways and probably a new intake manifold...

This isnt certain, but Im just considering this, I dont wanna spend a lot of money, but right now seems like I might as well just put everything in at once and then maybe I can just sell my old stuff... and make the difference back... ?

On second thought.... Should I just buy the damn whole engine already? a 418 with heads and a mild cam.. I mean, All I was doing is saving the heads, but I was gonna need a new cam anyways and probably a new intake manifold...



You keep talking about doing this on the cheap. There is no such thing. Do you have any idea how much it really costs by the time you're done. What's your budget?

You keep talking about doing this on the cheap. There is no such thing. Do you have any idea how much it really costs by the time you're done. What's your budget?

I already explained why...

I have PRC stage 2.5 5.3 heads + Tv3 cam, 7.4" hardened pushrods, TY rockerarms 1.7 ratio, caddy lifters, ported LS6 oilpump and double roller timing chain that has 150 total miles on it Only.. and a LS1 with over 90,000 miles on it that needs to be taken apart fully..

Since my 5.3 heads would work with the 402, I said hey maybe Id rather just go with a 402 instead of a 346 rebuild and get a new cam... That way I can reuse almost everything in my valvetrain except the camshaft...

My budget is to do this as cheap as possible, because I wan to drive my car again, bottom line. I miss it.. and I wanna do this ASAP, so I dunno about you telling me its not gonna be cheap... I understand that, but Im trying to do it with the cheapest possible route, but reliable and driveable. This is my goal, the 520whp is secondary... But I dont wanna settle for less than 500whp, even though it isnt my primary goal...

reason Im saying is 500whp, is because apparently a 520whp isnt possible cheap or driveable by my standards.. so would 500whp be?

based on the calculations I did earlier in the thread. 511whp should be more driveable and obtainable...

I want to spend under $4500 - $5000, if I can reuse my heads....

so $5000 including a new cam and 402 assembled block, shipped....

Recently I considered the $9500, for a brand new fully assembled engine including the intake manifold , new heads, cam, everything... and maybe I can sell my old stuff (heads, cam, rockers, pushrods, lifters etc and make a few thousand back)

Im assuming the brand new engine comes with all of those... So if I went the $9500 way I was thinking L92 stroker.. But this is still a small chance. because I can hardly afford the 402 option as of now...

Put $10-12k in your pocket before you start thinking 403 that will aproach 500RWHP and have the drivability you want. Don't forget about things like a new clutch to hold the HP/TQ, 1 7/8 LT's, injectors, etc, etc, etc.

To be honest, after reading all of your posts, you are not a very good listener. Some knowledgable people have tried to give you advice and you immediately followup with your own uniformed ideas on how to build an engine.

I give up..:bang:

Put $10-12k in your pocket before you start thinking 403 that will aproach 500RWHP and have the drivability you want. Don't forget about things like a new clutch to hold the HP/TQ, 1 7/8 LT's, injectors, etc, etc, etc.

To be honest, after reading all of your posts, you are not a very good listener. Some knowledgable people have tried to give you advice and you immediately followup with your own uniformed ideas on how to build an engine.

I give up..:bang:

You should take your own advice, sir, and listen too... I dont know what you are saying, but I responded to your comment just fine, I think...

I have listened and responded having listened. Plus, again as mentioned based on Hp/liter being at about 76 , based on my LS1 numbers I can achieve 500whp. This being driveable with the higher compression ratio and running a cam milder than the tv3, but for the 402.... 520 ia another story....

Im not just some guy that doesnt know anything that wants to build an engine. I have built 3 engines, 2 sbcs and 1 toyota 4cyl 2000cc... built my own T-56 and a TH400, and did the head/cam on my camaro.

Dont forget Im responding to many different people at once, vs all of them responding to mine, so its not the same...

Also, what do you expect, I am getting frustrated. For example if I am asking 10 questions Im gtting only 5 or 6 responded to. So Im still unsure on what route to go, because not everything has been answered.

I dont think 10,000-12,000 is the cost fror a 402 to make 500whp... Im sure I can build one for under 8,000....because if that was the case, like I mentioned Id rather go with a L92, that waill easily make those numbers + a bit more, and be more driveable. and the L92 being a brand new assembled engine with heads, intake manifold , injectors and all..


So no one told me yet, a mild cam and a ballpark figure for a 402 with those heads, about what numbers am I going to reach? I understand, yall are saying I wont reach 500... So if not that, then what numbers am I looking at??

and I dont remember who said it, but th driveability issue coul dhave been a number of things, an dnot really the size of cam I was running, so potentially that could have been fixed and I could have ran a mild - big cam (nothing too big) with the 402 and still have drivability, due to higher CR, larger CI and stroke, better tuned at low RPMs, better mathcing ports to he intake manifold runner length, velocity, etc... So a cam like that isnt out of the question if drivabilty was improved.


I am aware of the headers and clutch..

is re using my pacesetter(at least for a while) unacceptable with such a big cid over 400?

Edit:
I edited this like 4 times, so sorry if somethings are repeated.

Sorry, but it sounds to me like you're looking at it all wrong. "As cheap as possible" and your goals are mutually exclusive...

5.3 heads on a 402 :thumbsdow
Pacesetters on a 402 :bang:
402, Headers, Clutch, Heads, Cam, 90/90, Tune + misc will :kali: your budget

My best guess for a 402 with Pacesetters, 5.3 heads, LS6 manifold, mild cam and a tune is 470-485rwhp.

To put things another way you can wish in one hand and :turd: in the other all you want.

Let us know which one fills up first..

Sorry, but it sounds to me like you're looking at it all wrong. "As cheap as possible" and your goals are mutually exclusive...

5.3 heads on a 402 :thumbsdow
Pacesetters on a 402 :bang:
402, Headers, Clutch, Heads, Cam, 90/90, Tune + misc will :kali: your budget

My best guess for a 402 with Pacesetters, 5.3 heads, LS6 manifold, mild cam and a tune is 470-485rwhp.

To put things another way you can wish in one hand and :turd: in the other all you want.

Let us know which one fills up first..

ok so thanks for the direct answer, finally...

So If I wanna go the cheaper route for now, I should just get a rotating assembly for the LS1 and call it a day? since I wanna keep my CLutch and pacesetters for now..

then maybe save up and swap a L92 in the future, with some kooks and better clutch.. fast 90/90 etc...

This isnt the route I wanted to go, but due to money issues, I think its what I may be forced to do.

SO lets talk a L92 for the future then... driveable, kooks, good heads(but from a package deal from TSP) and fast 90/90 is that ever so talked about 520whp a reality????

Don't give up yet. A 402 will be a lot more motor than a 346 even if it ends up with exactly the same peak HP, since you will have a lot more tq on tap for your driveability concerns.

The 5.3s will work fine. Not for 520 hp but 470-480 peak HP with a flat torque curve is going to be both faster and a heck of a lot better driver than a 430 peak HP 346.

Go for it. You can put on better heads and a FAST 90/90 later.

Perry

470 rwhp NA + 50 shot of nitrous = 520 rwhp

Ding, ding...problem solved. :nod:

470 rwhp NA + 50 shot of nitrous = 520 rwhp

Ding, ding...problem solved. :nod:

hey this isnt a honda +150 shot:Deven better

Jesus, its not hard. Did anyone even read my above post?

HKE 408
ET 5.3 heads
HKE 244/248 cam
Pacesetters
LS6 intake

This combo, in two cars made 500rwhp. I could see a FAST 90/90 getting you pretty close to 520. Call HKE and he can get it all going...period. It's not rocket science

LSGunZ28

Found this thread in the dyno section. Thought you might be interested....
Synergy L92 408 results....new camshaft (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=650576) and the original build L92 408 first results.... (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=626547)

Im still talking to texas speed.

Through pacesetters, but a fast 90/90 with the 5.3 heads and maybe even the Tv3 cam. I can make right about 500whp... far more driveable than before... plus the 5.3 will give me good midrange and low end.. and I can reuse all my valvetrain components

I think I may go this route..... if the Torquer 3 isnt the best choice, thenmaybe a MS4, would still be driveable in a 402, with 11.2 : 1 CR or so I hear..

and thanks for all the positive responses in the 2nd 1/2 of page 3

LSGunZ28

Found this thread in the dyno section. Thought you might be interested....
Synergy L92 408 results....new camshaft (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=650576) and the original build L92 408 first results.... (http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=626547)

comparable to my setup...

slightly better bolt ons, and slightly more cubes... the drivetrain will slightly eat up more HP

cam intake is smaller than mine, but exh is much bigger, but has less lift on both...

I think I can see similar numbers through my heads, maybe not the cam I have at the moment though...

Wow a lot of detailed info here, but way too much crap to sort out.

You want a motor to make 520 rwhp, and make power in a streetable rpm range, if it was my motor and it was N/A I would go way bigger than a 402, something between 427 - 454 cid.

Besides would you rather have a motor make 480 hp @5900 and 600 tq or a motor revving to 6800 making 520hp and 470 tq?

To get the power you want you'll either need to rev it higher or build it bigger. Yes you can easily make 520 rwhp with a 402, but from my understanding you want a stock type power band and just an increase in power.

Which would leave me with two options, build it bigger or build it mild and add the boost later and live with a little less power now.

Wow a lot of detailed info here, but way too much crap to sort out.

You want a motor to make 520 rwhp, and make power in a streetable rpm range, if it was my motor and it was N/A I would go way bigger than a 402, something between 427 - 454 cid.

Besides would you rather have a motor make 480 hp @5900 and 600 tq or a motor revving to 6800 making 520hp and 470 tq?

To get the power you want you'll either need to rev it higher or build it bigger. Yes you can easily make 520 rwhp with a 402, but from my understanding you want a stock type power band and just an increase in power.

Which would leave me with two options, build it bigger or build it mild and add the boost later and live with a little less power now.


But you missed the main point. The main reason Im going 402 in the first place is because itll cost almost a smuch as rebuilding my 346 or making my LS1 a 383... and since I can salvage the heads and reuse them on the 402, is the only reason Im doing so..

520whp was my original goal, but more important than that was drivability, reliability(which hasnt even een talk abaout yet) and lastly good power, if all I can make is 500whp and not even that with a LS6 manifold and pacesetters, so be it at the moment.. I just wanna get this over with and drive my car already... Im trying to hurry up, but not rush too fast, so I wont make a mistake. the 402 route seems the best money for the buck since I can reuse all my valvetrain, and even my cam if it comes down to that point.

I think I will go with build it milder than my Tv3 LS1 setup, but not as mild as stock... and just improving drivability a little... So yeah Id rather have something mentioned in the middle of what you were saying... Even when I was stock I did rev out til 6900 rpms when making top speed runs :P but that was on a stock LS1 cam, which made my peak power at 5600rpms and good power til 6000rpms.

now lets talk ETs... :D

a 3.73 geared moser 12 bolt trutrac, 3400lb car(due to rollcage :( ) making... lets say a conservative 475rwhp with slicks should be running definitely in the 10s, right? :/

Ok Im gonna get my 402 soon this week....

along with injectors, maybe another cam, re use all my lifters and pushrods and use my harland sharp rockers or maybe the YT rockers I had on..

what spark plugs should I use? and gap em at what? the TR55s or TR6s?

what kind of injectors, I still have a stocker fuel pump, but its brand new..

Ok Im gonna get my 402 soon this week....

along with injectors, maybe another cam, re use all my lifters and pushrods and use my harland sharp rockers or maybe the YT rockers I had on..

what spark plugs should I use? and gap em at what? the TR55s or TR6s?

what kind of injectors, I still have a stocker fuel pump, but its brand new..

,,,,,,,,

Depends on how hard you are going to run it.

I see no problem staying with the LS6 intake (I am still there as the others are not in the budget). I did do a Racetronix pnp pump and 42 lb Lucas injectors. They are less than 55% duty cycle wide open, so you might go a bit with your stocker inj and pump if $ is an issue. If you do that make certain you spend some good time tuning with a fuel pressure gauge on the front of the fuel rail. Only tune with it on. Don't leave it on and drive....Ask me how I know and what miracle it was that the car didn't burn down when the pressure guage loosened itself while driving.

Good Wrenchin,

Perry

Depends on how hard you are going to run it.

I see no problem staying with the LS6 intake (I am still there as the others are not in the budget). I did do a Racetronix pnp pump and 42 lb Lucas injectors. They are less than 55% duty cycle wide open, so you might go a bit with your stocker inj and pump if $ is an issue. If you do that make certain you spend some good time tuning with a fuel pressure gauge on the front of the fuel rail. Only tune with it on. Don't leave it on and drive....Ask me how I know and what miracle it was that the car didn't burn down when the pressure guage loosened itself while driving.

Good Wrenchin,

Perry

well can I just go with SVO or FAST injectors and a stock pump for now?

ALso Im a 6 speed.

Stock fuel pump? I wouldn't use that with a 402 (or any built motor for that matter) even if it was my only car. You can't just stuff a huge engine in your car and not have the foundation to support it...

Stock fuel pump? I wouldn't use that with a 402 (or any built motor for that matter) even if it was my only car. You can't just stuff a huge engine in your car and not have the foundation to support it...

can you please chime in, on whats so bad with the stocker? It wont keep up? I mean, Ill change it soon enough, but can it be ran a couple of months with the stocker? It has literally 0 miles on it.. its brand new... Just wondering, if it can be done and if not, what exactly is the reason.

they dont have burito warmers in them........ but seriously they are not intended to support more volume of fuel than what stock injectors can flow, so..... it will work, and hate you the hole time till it shits, but i wouldnt suggest getting it tuned on a stock pump if you are plannin on upgrading, just asking for the same problems to start all over again, if it is weak and stuggleling to keep up, when you upgrade, and have more fuel.....tune is now off. cut the floor and make it a 15min job.lol

they dont have burito warmers in them........ but seriously they are not intended to support more volume of fuel than what stock injectors can flow, so..... it will work, and hate you the hole time till it shits, but i wouldnt suggest getting it tuned on a stock pump if you are plannin on upgrading, just asking for the same problems to start all over again, if it is weak and stuggleling to keep up, when you upgrade, and have more fuel.....tune is now off. cut the floor and make it a 15min job.lol

I know, we already did that. Ok so I must change the fuel pump... fine Ill do so... what to suggest for a fuel pump?

what spark plugs for a 11 - 11.2 cr combustion chamber?

and gapped how?

I know, we already did that. Ok so I must change the fuel pump... fine Ill do so... what to suggest for a fuel pump?

what spark plugs for a 11 - 11.2 cr combustion chamber?

and gapped how?

Guys I really need help with teh choice of plugs and whatnot Im ordering my block on monday...

thanks...

Ok here's a start...

the 236/236 cam has even less lift than the Tv3 Im using, so it seems pretty small...

what ratio gears were you running with this cam?

Lift is irelevant to driveability. Engine only knows when valve opens and shuts in terms of driveability.

Think about it like this, your making 1.3 hp per cube, and not happy with driveability. Your current heads can only be marginalized by having to fill a much larger cylinder, its going to need more camshaft naturally to help out. I think there are some things that need to be thought out or re thoughtt out, but doable.

Lift is irelevant to driveability. Engine only knows when valve opens and shuts in terms of driveability.

Think about it like this, your making 1.3 hp per cube, and not happy with driveability. Your current heads can only be marginalized by having to fill a much larger cylinder, its going to need more camshaft naturally to help out. I think there are some things that need to be thought out or re thoughtt out, but doable.

which is why... Im going with a smaller cam(or maybe just the Tv3 for now) in the 402 vs the Tv3 was in the 5.7....

Here it is in a nutshell. When you use the Tv3 and the same heads in a 402, you will make virtually the same rwhp as before, but with 65-70 more rwtq. The airflow of your intake and heads, coupled with the valve events of your cam determine your hp potential. You will make around the same hp but at a lower rpm peak.

I've ran my stock fuel pump in my 402 for over a year and a half (6,000 miles) with no issues, and plenty of track passes. I'll be upgrading soon, but only cuz I'll be adding nitrous...........

I've ran my stock fuel pump in my 402 for over a year and a half (6,000 miles) with no issues, and plenty of track passes. I'll be upgrading soon, but only cuz I'll be adding nitrous...........

well that sounds like good news to me, until I change my fuel pump..

and I made a new thread, since this thread has gotten congested..

http://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=875061

Here it is in a nutshell. When you use the Tv3 and the same heads in a 402, you will make virtually the same rwhp as before, but with 65-70 more rwtq. The airflow of your intake and heads, coupled with the valve events of your cam determine your hp potential. You will make around the same hp but at a lower rpm peak.

Honestly that sounds a bit strange.. If I make more torque, I should be making more HP.. since the formula for HP is Tq X rpm/5252...

but it makes sense if I make it at a lower RPM peak..

ive seen back to back dyno of a SB350 and then a 383 stroker using the exact same setup(heads,cam,intake,carb) and the tq sounds about right as it made about 60 ft lb more. tho it didnt make that much more HP it did increase about 40 average thruout the power curve. this was at the crank tho

ive seen back to back dyno of a SB350 and then a 383 stroker using the exact same setup(heads,cam,intake,carb) and the tq sounds about right as it made about 60 ft lb more. tho it didnt make that much more HP it did increase about 40 average thruout the power curve. this was at the crank tho

well all this information made me realiza I can still run a Torquer 3 and the 5.3 heads with a L92/LS3 and even a LS7 if I desired. So thats what I may just do, until I can afford better heads for that application, better headers, a better intake manifold, a different cam, etc...

but I still will upgrade my injectors. what should I go with? and what spark plugs? thanks...

for a 402 - 427 cid run with he same heads and cam I have now...

You can't run an LS7 intake on 5.3 heads, it fits LS7 heads only. Same goes with L92/LS3, they won't fit cathedral port heads, like your 5.3s.

You can't run an LS7 intake on 5.3 heads, it fits LS7 heads only. Same goes with L92/LS3, they won't fit cathedral port heads, like your 5.3s.

Im not saying the intake. Im saying the 5.3 heads on the LS7 block or L92 block..

My 402 build with soundclips/track times/specs here: http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=560284&highlight=

small cam, small heads great drivability

My 402 build with soundclips/track times/specs here: http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=560284&highlight=

small cam, small heads great drivability

Thanks man, but im goin with a damn 418 now... well Im not mad about it, but i just changed my mind so much...

Here is what you do. Trade in those heads for some AFRs, TFs, or ETPs. Get a Fast 90/90 and decent LTs. Keep the compression the same. This will allow you to do a milder cam, and still get the performance you want. Otherwise, you will have to go BIG cam and even then it's a shot in the dark getting to 520rwhp. There was a thread on here, and the average 402 was dynoing at just over 500 rwhp.

Texas speed wont take back my 5.3 heads...