GM V8 4 Valve?
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Just seeing if anyone has any info on if GM will ever move to LS 4 valve V8? Ford has already made the move with the GT 500 platform and the new 5.0
All of the LS motors are very efficient and can make plenty of power, but the pushrod design has been around for decades and is basically imo old technology.
I just feel that it would be step in the right direction if they were to introduce a LS 4 valve motor.
Just looking for some of yalls opinions on this.
All of the LS motors are very efficient and can make plenty of power, but the pushrod design has been around for decades and is basically imo old technology.
I just feel that it would be step in the right direction if they were to introduce a LS 4 valve motor.
Just looking for some of yalls opinions on this.
#3
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bastrop texas
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
its all about airflow man it has nothing to do with how many valves in fact the only cars that really use the 4 valve right are f1 cars. look at top fuel still one cam in the valley plus its less things for the motor to turn if you only have one cam, so unless you plan on going 15+k rpm go with a push rod. ls3 heads outflow any ford 4 valve head and ls7 heads make big blocks look like smog pumps. we get all the power we need out of one cam.
#4
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
It comes more down to cost and fitment than what shanemilleresp said! There is NO DOUBT that a LS engine with a well designed 4vavle per cylinder head would not outflow what is currently on the market.
If you want a technical answer then flow is related to valve curtain area. you draw one big circle on a page. then draw as 2 or three smaller circle in the middle of the larger one. messure, or work out, the circumference of the one large and then the 2 or 3 smalelr onces and see what you get. you will get a higher number with the 2 or 3 smaller circles. larger ciurtin area will equal more flow at the valve. Obviously you need to ensure the HEAD is designed well. if the ports flow for **** thenyou can have a million valves and the head wont work!
Ford V8 heads are CRAP! end of story. however the Ford Duratec inline 4 heads are very good. as are hondas Vtech units. Audis run 5 valves per cylinder (3 intake and 2 exhaust) and these should flow even better (although not greatly). another advantage is valvetrain stability. you put alot less stress on the springs with a OHC setup as you are effectively removing the pushrods from the equation. This should mean you can run lower spring presure (thanks to having less weight (F=MA so less weight requires less force for any given rate of acceleration)) for any given RPM.
For some idea of the advantages of well designed and worked 4 valve heads then take a look at the ford Pinto engine Compeard to the ford Cosworth. both are 2.0ltr engine, the cossy was design as a turbo engine but can be converted to N/A. a full on race preped pinto (2 valves per cylinder) would make around 230-250bhp and would be totally undriveable. a Cossy running 4 valves per cylinder can push 300bhp and still have reasonable maners! by the way the above two engine share the same block and are a good comparioson to each other.
I think Nelson Racing Engines are looking to manufacture SBC 4 valve per cylinder heads. have a look on their site. they recon they could build a street SBC that could spin to 9000rpm! you try doing that with the cam in the block and not needing the valvetrain re-adjusting every 1000miles! lol
Do i think the LS engine should have 4 valves per cylinder? NO. lol i think aftermarket guys, like nelson racing, SHOULD build these heads and help pushthe limits of the LS engines even further. however GM should no take away the manjor advantages the LS engines have of compact size for the displacement, low weight, easy of maintenace, lower modding costs, etc, etc.![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Chris.
If you want a technical answer then flow is related to valve curtain area. you draw one big circle on a page. then draw as 2 or three smaller circle in the middle of the larger one. messure, or work out, the circumference of the one large and then the 2 or 3 smalelr onces and see what you get. you will get a higher number with the 2 or 3 smaller circles. larger ciurtin area will equal more flow at the valve. Obviously you need to ensure the HEAD is designed well. if the ports flow for **** thenyou can have a million valves and the head wont work!
Ford V8 heads are CRAP! end of story. however the Ford Duratec inline 4 heads are very good. as are hondas Vtech units. Audis run 5 valves per cylinder (3 intake and 2 exhaust) and these should flow even better (although not greatly). another advantage is valvetrain stability. you put alot less stress on the springs with a OHC setup as you are effectively removing the pushrods from the equation. This should mean you can run lower spring presure (thanks to having less weight (F=MA so less weight requires less force for any given rate of acceleration)) for any given RPM.
For some idea of the advantages of well designed and worked 4 valve heads then take a look at the ford Pinto engine Compeard to the ford Cosworth. both are 2.0ltr engine, the cossy was design as a turbo engine but can be converted to N/A. a full on race preped pinto (2 valves per cylinder) would make around 230-250bhp and would be totally undriveable. a Cossy running 4 valves per cylinder can push 300bhp and still have reasonable maners! by the way the above two engine share the same block and are a good comparioson to each other.
I think Nelson Racing Engines are looking to manufacture SBC 4 valve per cylinder heads. have a look on their site. they recon they could build a street SBC that could spin to 9000rpm! you try doing that with the cam in the block and not needing the valvetrain re-adjusting every 1000miles! lol
Do i think the LS engine should have 4 valves per cylinder? NO. lol i think aftermarket guys, like nelson racing, SHOULD build these heads and help pushthe limits of the LS engines even further. however GM should no take away the manjor advantages the LS engines have of compact size for the displacement, low weight, easy of maintenace, lower modding costs, etc, etc.
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Chris.
#5
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
also look at the spring design. Why not run penumatic valve spring assisters? you could presurize them at higher rpm or even have a cam that has diffrent lobe profile liket eh Vtech guys run.
Chris.
#6
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Do i think the LS engine should have 4 valves per cylinder? NO. lol i think aftermarket guys, like nelson racing, SHOULD build these heads and help pushthe limits of the LS engines even further. however GM should no take away the manjor advantages the LS engines have of compact size for the displacement, low weight, easy of maintenace, lower modding costs, etc, etc. ![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Chris.
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Chris.
Like you said ppl should build these heads to unlock the greater potential of the motors.
It would still be cool to be able to get a LS crate motor that can turn almost 9,000
![Devil](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_devil.gif)
#7
Douchebag On The Tree
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Just seeing if anyone has any info on if GM will ever move to LS 4 valve V8? Ford has already made the move with the GT 500 platform and the new 5.0
All of the LS motors are very efficient and can make plenty of power, but the pushrod design has been around for decades and is basically imo old technology.
I just feel that it would be step in the right direction if they were to introduce a LS 4 valve motor.
Just looking for some of yalls opinions on this.
All of the LS motors are very efficient and can make plenty of power, but the pushrod design has been around for decades and is basically imo old technology.
I just feel that it would be step in the right direction if they were to introduce a LS 4 valve motor.
Just looking for some of yalls opinions on this.
It's only been in the "recent" 30 years that people have been nuthugging imports and their use of OHC.
Trending Topics
#12
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
2012/2013 DOHC plans that were cancelled/shelved in late 2008.
LT5 was to replace LS3
6.2L DOHC
500HP @ 6500RPM
500lb-ft @ 4400RPM
Direct Injection
Displacement on Demand hardware
Cam Phaser
376 cu/in
11.0:1 C/R
11mm Intake valve lift
41mm Intake valves
Steel Crank.
LT6 was to replace LS7
6.2L DOHC
600HP @ 7500RPM
550lb-ft @ 5000RPM
Direct Injection
Cam Phaser
376 cu/in
11.0:1 C/R
13mm Intake valve lift
41mm Intake valves
Steel Crank.
LTC was to replace LS9
6.2L DOHC
700HP @ 6500RPM
700lb-ft @ 4400RPM
Direct Injection
Cam Phaser
376 cu/in
9.0:1 C/R
Supercharged + Intercooled
13mm Intake valve lift
41mm Intake valves
Steel Crank.
LT5 was to replace LS3
6.2L DOHC
500HP @ 6500RPM
500lb-ft @ 4400RPM
Direct Injection
Displacement on Demand hardware
Cam Phaser
376 cu/in
11.0:1 C/R
11mm Intake valve lift
41mm Intake valves
Steel Crank.
LT6 was to replace LS7
6.2L DOHC
600HP @ 7500RPM
550lb-ft @ 5000RPM
Direct Injection
Cam Phaser
376 cu/in
11.0:1 C/R
13mm Intake valve lift
41mm Intake valves
Steel Crank.
LTC was to replace LS9
6.2L DOHC
700HP @ 6500RPM
700lb-ft @ 4400RPM
Direct Injection
Cam Phaser
376 cu/in
9.0:1 C/R
Supercharged + Intercooled
13mm Intake valve lift
41mm Intake valves
Steel Crank.
#13
#15
Staging Lane
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rent Free in Hio's Mind
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 36 Likes
on
31 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I love me some pushrod engines, and just because it's "old" does not make it primitive as in no longer effective. Not many people know that the development of the OHV engine with the camshaft in the middle of the block was an accident to begin with, well, not accident, but they did not intend to keep it in the middle of the block during the beginning engineering phases, but once they found it was effective, they decided to keep it around. Don't remember where I read that.
#16
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The Ford 4Vs are doing that on a 3.552" and 3.63" bores, now imagine the same 4V head designed around a 4.06" or 4.125" bore (increased port volume, increased valve diameters, DOHC would also allow for TiVCT). Not sure why you guys turn up your noses at 4V for LSxs, do you have something against ~450-500 cfm capable heads that offer good low-end and perfect driveability?
Last edited by Ben99GT; 05-21-2010 at 03:22 PM.
#19
Launching!
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I just like to keep it simple, I was a ford guy back in the 5.0 days but I would not buy a sohc or dohc motor. Just not for me I like my simplicity plain and simple.
Why mess with what works????
Why mess with what works????