500whp 5.3 N/A possible?
Also did you cc your motor? I was wondering how much compression you have.
Thanks

The lighter lines were the fast 102. Heavier line was ported MSD.
Just go back to whatever dynopak or whatever other bs dyno you choose and stop posting on my thread unless it has to do with the orginal 500whp 5.3 discussion.
Just go back to whatever dynopak or whatever other bs dyno you choose and stop posting on my thread unless it has to do with the orginal 500whp 5.3 discussion.
It took me 2 hours to get the libaries open far enough to reconfigure anything I wanted. There is also part of it that is to be configured to your specific dyno, giving serial *, roller mass, etc.
So I decided to pull out the formula for the interia roller and reduce the mass (the same thing as removing the weights).
Lets just say he must've lied to you.
I do know that YOU never stated the 18%-22% loss a Rolling Road costs.
What is your report.
I do know that things such as Diff Oil/Ratio, tire size/pressure, the testing day air quality, Trans Gear Ratio, etc. can make some difference in the report.
MOST will state an engine with a 2x HP output vs CID would need to be classified as an "ALL OUT" Race Engine.
Lance
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Now a big bore/short stroke 5.3 would be no problem at all making 500rw. It would open up a ton of head choices
I may be new to ls1tech and I am pretty new to ls engines but I have built many engines over the years It was just mainly fords. 90 percent of the engines I build are forced induction.
I was just trying to have some advanced engine discussion in the "advanced engineering tech" section.
If you have such a big problem with me stop posting on my thread.
Once again , Thank you Darthv8r and anyone else that had added legitimate information to my thread.
Lets get back to the original topic.
500hp 5.3,
I mean if you were doing a 6.0, I’d go 235 and It’s an Easy call. But shrink the valves down for the bore. And it’s a different story. It’s just going to require some rpm like you were saying. You might need some custom work for enhanced low lift flow. Anything to help it. Also don’t want it to level off at 600 lift like a lot do.
Sorry. Longer answer to a simple question, but I’m confident in the castings flowing enough. The wild card is the intake valve size and bore limitation.
Its not required, but will take one variable out of the equation if you're willing to pay for the cost of the solid conversion.
Its not required, but will take one variable out of the equation if you're willing to pay for the cost of the solid conversion.
it's tricky on speccing LLSR. Basically, i look a the hydraulic cam i'd suggest and add 5 degrees. At least for a starting point. Guys like Steve, Kip, and Martin are better at it than me. So, i threw 242/250 out there. might even want a bit more, but I don't think you'll want too much more than that.
I certainly felt like the the LLSR was a big kick in the pants on power over the hydraulic. Definitely more responsive to the throttle. I went from 496 through a stock-geared ten bolt to 519 through a 4.11 geared 9". So, it's at least 25 HP, plus overcoming additional drivetrain mass.
Cost of entry isn't too bad. The lifters aren't that much different from morel drop-in hydraulic lifters on price. Actually, cheaper than some of the high end hydraulic lifters. And you can do it without the adjustable rockers. Don't get me wrong, Jezels and HS are great rockers, but you can do it with YT non-adjustables as long as your cam base circles are about the same. You just need a set of machine shims to set the pedestal height to get to zero lash. you also need to match your pushrod lengths almost perfectly so that your rockers pairs are level - intake and exhaust. That's the short version of how I did mine. It was right near 150K when I did the swap, and it's 165K now, so it's reliable so far. Last i knew, Kip had LLSR on his DD Camaro, and was at 24K miles - at least a year ago, if not two years ago.
So, it's not the $3K+ upgrade it used to be by any stretch, and it's very durable. In a way, it might be better than adjustable rockers. I mean, is a rocker adjuster more likely to come lose or is a machine shim more likely to change it's thickness?












