MAX RPM LS-X Engine 10500 + RPM
#22
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Coast of San Mateo County Between Pacifica & HMB
Posts: 1,821
Received 220 Likes
on
131 Posts
I Do not know the answer to deck ht question.
Spinning 12,000-14,000 RPM I would think
Priority Main Oiling would be Essential, along
with Piston Squirters for 15:1 Comp?
I would ask Dart concerning their Iron
LSX NEXT BLOCK about Deck Ht.
Spinning 12,000-14,000 RPM I would think
Priority Main Oiling would be Essential, along
with Piston Squirters for 15:1 Comp?
I would ask Dart concerning their Iron
LSX NEXT BLOCK about Deck Ht.
#23
Priority Main is a must. And Dry Sump probably also. Are the Dart blocks Priority Main Oiling? I know the GM LSX block is.
#25
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Boston Ma
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Induction?
I'm guessing that ITB's or maybe a single plane manifold may be the only options as far as intakes go to operate at RPM's this high?
How important is exhaust pulsing and primary length for efficiency at this level?
Transmission options?
How important is exhaust pulsing and primary length for efficiency at this level?
Transmission options?
#26
FormerVendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Ana, CA. USA
Posts: 2,157
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
Intake Runner Length
The Air Horn is 3" long with an inlet port length of 6" and a Diameter of 2.8" @ 3 degrees taper for the air horn.
This is a valve/bell of 9" OA length.
There are NO ITB's.
The Inlet Valve is used to limit air flow.
The Exhaust is 28" x 1.96" ID.
YES, Pressure Wave Tuning has great effect, just a click of a key.
Thanks ALL for the block help, I need more ?
Lance
This is a valve/bell of 9" OA length.
There are NO ITB's.
The Inlet Valve is used to limit air flow.
The Exhaust is 28" x 1.96" ID.
YES, Pressure Wave Tuning has great effect, just a click of a key.
Thanks ALL for the block help, I need more ?
Lance
#27
A good IRON block as things will tend or Start to move. 2.80 stroke Choose your bore Depending on block. A DAMN good ... high ram with Dual TB's or ITB. A Cam in the 288 to 294 @.050 with relatively low lift. Good dry sump to match a damn good set of rings. Think your on your way.
#28
A good IRON block as things will tend or Start to move. 2.80 stroke Choose your bore Depending on block. A DAMN good ... high ram with Dual TB's or ITB. A Cam in the 288 to 294 @.050 with relatively low lift. Good dry sump to match a damn good set of rings. Think your on your way.
#29
Yeah I caught it once you said it...LOL! Just saw what my eye's wanted to see,I'm suffering from selective looking now. To crazy for me I like mechanical working valves with a nice big old 4500 T/b. Look Ma that thing has a Dominator on it.
Hope it works out.
Hope it works out.
#30
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Put the longest rod you possibly can in it. You should be able to get away with 1.000" CH IMO on this combo since torque output will be fairly low due to the stroke of the engine.
I would do a 2.875" crank, 5.750" rod, 1.050" CH piston, 4.070" bore with a 8.24" deck height. 300" engine has a nice ring to it.
I would do a 2.875" crank, 5.750" rod, 1.050" CH piston, 4.070" bore with a 8.24" deck height. 300" engine has a nice ring to it.
Last edited by Martin Smallwood; 02-24-2017 at 03:14 PM.
#31
Would there be a real negative to The standard 9" deck height, a 3.00" stroke, a 6.46" rod, and say a 1.04" CH piston?
Long Rod 302".
#34
TECH Regular
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tampa FL
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So while we are at it, let's list a couple of other challenges that need to be overcome.
1. Bearing Speed. You are stuck with main bearing journal diameter. There is no easy way to change that. Blocks optimized for this kind of cycling rate use smaller mains like a 2.3in main from a 283. You can have rod bearing journals turned down to either Honda or Aurora diameters. That will help.
2. Oiling and windage. At that kind of crank speed windage will be horrible. Keep in mind, what you displace above, you displace below. You need to pull down the crankcase to a vacuum to help the crank slice through that. Dry Sump territory, for sure.
3. Valvetrain. I think you are going to have a real tough time keeping the lifter on the lobe with stock diameter parts. You probably will need to step up to at least a 60mm cam core to get a larger base circle. A Larger diameter roller lifter probably wouldn't hurt either. You're going to need mega everything for this to work.
The good news is that this has all been done before by guys running Comp Eliminator and PS truck, albeit on Gen1 engines. All you have to do is follow their blueprint. For reference, here is the block they would use. Notice the low deck height and raised cam. The deck is so low in fact, it doesn't even use a standard chevy SBC bellhousing pattern, it won't fit the envelope. This block doesn't have headbolt holes or lifters drilled on it so you could theoretically Put LS heads on it with a little bit of work.
http://paceperformance.com/i-6255625...sed-bores.html
1. Bearing Speed. You are stuck with main bearing journal diameter. There is no easy way to change that. Blocks optimized for this kind of cycling rate use smaller mains like a 2.3in main from a 283. You can have rod bearing journals turned down to either Honda or Aurora diameters. That will help.
2. Oiling and windage. At that kind of crank speed windage will be horrible. Keep in mind, what you displace above, you displace below. You need to pull down the crankcase to a vacuum to help the crank slice through that. Dry Sump territory, for sure.
3. Valvetrain. I think you are going to have a real tough time keeping the lifter on the lobe with stock diameter parts. You probably will need to step up to at least a 60mm cam core to get a larger base circle. A Larger diameter roller lifter probably wouldn't hurt either. You're going to need mega everything for this to work.
The good news is that this has all been done before by guys running Comp Eliminator and PS truck, albeit on Gen1 engines. All you have to do is follow their blueprint. For reference, here is the block they would use. Notice the low deck height and raised cam. The deck is so low in fact, it doesn't even use a standard chevy SBC bellhousing pattern, it won't fit the envelope. This block doesn't have headbolt holes or lifters drilled on it so you could theoretically Put LS heads on it with a little bit of work.
http://paceperformance.com/i-6255625...sed-bores.html
Last edited by 96 Comp T/A; 02-25-2017 at 06:23 AM.
#35
FormerVendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Ana, CA. USA
Posts: 2,157
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
17 Posts
Block Deck Height ?
Hi All, again I want to THANK all here for help.
Many topics have been addressed (oil feed as one such) saving many mistakes.
Block selection may need to be Non-OEM due to deck/oiling.
My progress IS the operation of the Star Motor (rotary valve actuator).
This unit is in a current test mode NOW !
The last (in 1996) Electrohydraulic actuator I created with Eddie's Latching Valve ran to 14K RPM.
The Main Diameter is ALSO a good report, I would need to selection a block first.
My goal is 15K RPM with practical of 14K RPM.
I will post pictures soon.
Lance
Many topics have been addressed (oil feed as one such) saving many mistakes.
Block selection may need to be Non-OEM due to deck/oiling.
My progress IS the operation of the Star Motor (rotary valve actuator).
This unit is in a current test mode NOW !
The last (in 1996) Electrohydraulic actuator I created with Eddie's Latching Valve ran to 14K RPM.
The Main Diameter is ALSO a good report, I would need to selection a block first.
My goal is 15K RPM with practical of 14K RPM.
I will post pictures soon.
Lance
#36
3. Valvetrain. I think you are going to have a real tough time keeping the lifter on the lobe with stock diameter parts. You probably will need to step up to at least a 60mm cam core to get a larger base circle. A Larger diameter roller lifter probably wouldn't hurt either. You're going to need mega everything for this to work.
#37
My progress IS the operation of the Star Motor (rotary valve actuator).
This unit is in a current test mode NOW !
The last (in 1996) Electrohydraulic actuator I created with Eddie's Latching Valve ran to 14K RPM.
The Main Diameter is ALSO a good report, I would need to selection a block first.
My goal is 15K RPM with practical of 14K RPM.
I will post pictures soon.
Lance
This unit is in a current test mode NOW !
The last (in 1996) Electrohydraulic actuator I created with Eddie's Latching Valve ran to 14K RPM.
The Main Diameter is ALSO a good report, I would need to selection a block first.
My goal is 15K RPM with practical of 14K RPM.
I will post pictures soon.
Lance
#38
FormerVendor
iTrader: (2)
Hi All, again I want to THANK all here for help.
Many topics have been addressed (oil feed as one such) saving many mistakes.
Block selection may need to be Non-OEM due to deck/oiling.
My progress IS the operation of the Star Motor (rotary valve actuator).
This unit is in a current test mode NOW !
The last (in 1996) Electrohydraulic actuator I created with Eddie's Latching Valve ran to 14K RPM.
The Main Diameter is ALSO a good report, I would need to selection a block first.
My goal is 15K RPM with practical of 14K RPM.
I will post pictures soon.
Lance
Many topics have been addressed (oil feed as one such) saving many mistakes.
Block selection may need to be Non-OEM due to deck/oiling.
My progress IS the operation of the Star Motor (rotary valve actuator).
This unit is in a current test mode NOW !
The last (in 1996) Electrohydraulic actuator I created with Eddie's Latching Valve ran to 14K RPM.
The Main Diameter is ALSO a good report, I would need to selection a block first.
My goal is 15K RPM with practical of 14K RPM.
I will post pictures soon.
Lance
If you can get a hold of Maskin at Dart, he can probably come up with something that will work deck height wise.
#39
TECH Regular
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tampa FL
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest, the manufacturers are getting squeezed pretty hard by CAFE standards. If the Coates system was viable and could have increased efficiency enough to make a difference, someone would have snapped it up under license by now and built a commercially viable product. I think the Freevalve set up by Koennigseg (sp?) is pretty interesting and has a brighter future, because you can alter, lift duration, and timing, all at the same time. The rotary valve is fixed duration, although you could advance or retard them individually.
#40
Then why even waste time with the LS platform? You'd be way ahead starting with a Northstar, Shortstar, LFX, or even a Ford Coyote or earlier Mod platform. If it has to be giant cubic inch, go with the previous gen Raptor 6.2 engine. They all already have the infrastructure in place to spin overhead cam/ spherical rotary valves. There will be a ton of grief and expense just to plug all the cam bearings and lifter galleries in a production block LS engine. You can't plug the driver's side galley from the back because it also feeds the mains. Buying an aftermarket block to basically cut up doesn't seem like a prudent idea either. I would not waste time or money developing the bottom end of a test mule when there are plenty of perfectly functional candidates available today, allowing you to start product design immediately.
To be honest, the manufacturers are getting squeezed pretty hard by CAFE standards. If the Coates system was viable and could have increased efficiency enough to make a difference, someone would have snapped it up under license by now and built a commercially viable product. I think the Freevalve set up by Koennigseg (sp?) is pretty interesting and has a brighter future, because you can alter, lift duration, and timing, all at the same time. The rotary valve is fixed duration, although you could advance or retard them individually.
To be honest, the manufacturers are getting squeezed pretty hard by CAFE standards. If the Coates system was viable and could have increased efficiency enough to make a difference, someone would have snapped it up under license by now and built a commercially viable product. I think the Freevalve set up by Koennigseg (sp?) is pretty interesting and has a brighter future, because you can alter, lift duration, and timing, all at the same time. The rotary valve is fixed duration, although you could advance or retard them individually.