Vizard's LSA - CI/Inch Valve Diameter chart
Vizard's LSA - CI/Inch Valve Diameter chart "LSA - Vizard's LSA to CI/Inch of valve diameter chart puts my 21.4 at 108. This chart is supposed to be for accurate for 9.0 to 11.0 compression."
I pulled this statement from a recent post. Regarding Vizard's chart, do you think it is applicable to Gen III SBC heads? I read the article and am a bit weary to apply his principles to Gen III, when it seems he is referring to Gen I heads.
I pulled this statement from a recent post. Regarding Vizard's chart, do you think it is applicable to Gen III SBC heads? I read the article and am a bit weary to apply his principles to Gen III, when it seems he is referring to Gen I heads.
I read the article and thought the same thing. I rarely see LS1s anywhere near 108LSA. I just assumed he meant Gen I heads and that it wasn't applicable to LS1s.
Could someone explain why it is/isn't applicable?
Could someone explain why it is/isn't applicable?
intakes Well one things for sure... Our intakes are totally different from single and double plane intakes of gen 1's. Therefore, I assume reversion characteristics relative to LCA and overlap would not be highly correlated b/w gen 1 and gen 3.
reply
Originally Posted by 1989GTA
I was wondering if the chart leaned more to carb applications versus EFI. It's my understanding that the narrower the LSA the harder it is to tune the ECM.
Originally Posted by 1989GTA
I was wondering if the chart leaned more to carb applications versus EFI. It's my understanding that the narrower the LSA the harder it is to tune the ECM.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
I think that chart is the biggest bunch of bullshit I have ever seen. Overlap amount is going to change with port efficnecy, cubic inchs rpm manifolding headers etc etc etc. Valve size doesn;t have **** to do with overlap.
Trending Topics
Originally Posted by tee-boy
I'm not a tuner, and I have heard statements like that before; however, I am under "assumption" that anything a carb can do, a computer can do better. It just depends on the quality of the individual who is doing the tune.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,875
Likes: 1
From: Naperville, IL
That was me that used his chart and refered to it in another thread.
I got the info from reading this article:
http://www.compcams.com/Community/Ar...ID=-2026144213
I learned a lot from it too.. it's a great read.
I got the info from reading this article:
http://www.compcams.com/Community/Ar...ID=-2026144213
I learned a lot from it too.. it's a great read.
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
And efi car will tame a wild cam far far easier than a carb ever will.....
And the same rules probably dont apply. Tight LSA cams tend do be favoured on engines with crap heads, as they have to resort to such measures to try and make some power.
LSx heads flow very well...so these tight LSA's arent needed, or wanted.
And the same rules probably dont apply. Tight LSA cams tend do be favoured on engines with crap heads, as they have to resort to such measures to try and make some power.
LSx heads flow very well...so these tight LSA's arent needed, or wanted.
Originally Posted by stevieturbo
And efi car will tame a wild cam far far easier than a carb ever will.....
There are some very specific carb mods that need to be done to make them work right.
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Originally Posted by edcmat-l1
SAY WHAT? Who's buildin your carbs? I run/build carbs for cams I would never even think about running in an efi car. 250/260+ duration on a 108. Silky smooth with a carb.
There are some very specific carb mods that need to be done to make them work right.
There are some very specific carb mods that need to be done to make them work right.
All thats required with efi...is a laptop and suitable software/computer.
Fuel and ignition control at your fingertips. No very specific mods at all. Just simple tuning.
its great.
Originally Posted by stevieturbo
I havent used a carb in about 5 years....I have moved on with technology.
All thats required with efi...is a laptop and suitable software/computer.
Fuel and ignition control at your fingertips. No very specific mods at all. Just simple tuning.
its great.
All thats required with efi...is a laptop and suitable software/computer.
Fuel and ignition control at your fingertips. No very specific mods at all. Just simple tuning.
its great.
But fact is a carb doesnt have the same issues as a computer with high overlap cams. I'm talkin cams that are pretty much race car ****. Over .700 lift, over 260 degrees duration, 108, 106 LSAs.
A properly tuned carb will make just as much HP as an EFI system. And just as good of driveability. The only trade off, is cold start, because most perf carbs dont use a choke.
TECH Apprentice
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by edcmat-l1
Yeah. Preachin to the choir. I do a bunch of LT, LS stuff, not to mention the stand alones.
But fact is a carb doesnt have the same issues as a computer with high overlap cams. I'm talkin cams that are pretty much race car ****. Over .700 lift, over 260 degrees duration, 108, 106 LSAs.
A properly tuned carb will make just as much HP as an EFI system. And just as good of driveability. The only trade off, is cold start, because most perf carbs dont use a choke.
But fact is a carb doesnt have the same issues as a computer with high overlap cams. I'm talkin cams that are pretty much race car ****. Over .700 lift, over 260 degrees duration, 108, 106 LSAs.
A properly tuned carb will make just as much HP as an EFI system. And just as good of driveability. The only trade off, is cold start, because most perf carbs dont use a choke.
Dave
follow
Originally Posted by LS1curious
I think that chart is the biggest bunch of bullshit I have ever seen. Overlap amount is going to change with port efficnecy, cubic inchs rpm manifolding headers etc etc etc. Valve size doesn;t have **** to do with overlap.
I don't think overlap has anything to do w/ port efficiency, ci, or headers. You are correct however, that valve size doesn't have anything to do w/ it either. I'm willing to bet that all those variables do affect reversion-including valve size.
Originally Posted by tee-boy
I don't think overlap has anything to do w/ port efficiency, ci, or headers. You are correct however, that valve size doesn't have anything to do w/ it either. I'm willing to bet that all those variables do affect reversion-including valve size.
So, how does it not have anything to do with any of those parts? They all have an effect on the engines ability to breathe. Well flowing intake runners combined with well flowing heads and headers would seem to not require as much overlap. So, running a bunch of overlap would tend to hurt the power in the way of wasted energy right thru the motor.
Originally Posted by edcmat-l1
Overlap, or the amount of it, affects scavenging. Scavenging aids in cylinder filling. This can either help or hurt the output. Depending on the flow characteristics of the entire motor.
So, how does it not have anything to do with any of those parts? They all have an effect on the engines ability to breathe. Well flowing intake runners combined with well flowing heads and headers would seem to not require as much overlap. So, running a bunch of overlap would tend to hurt the power in the way of wasted energy right thru the motor.
So, how does it not have anything to do with any of those parts? They all have an effect on the engines ability to breathe. Well flowing intake runners combined with well flowing heads and headers would seem to not require as much overlap. So, running a bunch of overlap would tend to hurt the power in the way of wasted energy right thru the motor.
Launching!
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 251
Likes: 2
From: Portland OR
To the point of the original post: I'm not so sure that Vizard's handy graph applies particularly well to most LSx applications. In particular, LSx motors seem to like later intake valve open and close points (and hence, a larger LSA) than older generation small and big blocks of similar displacement.
I suspect that this difference is due primarily to the very different characteristics of the plastic "candy cane" style intakes, which tend to have runners that are longer and less tapered than those of performance 4-barrel style intakes. I would bet that a 4-barrel single plane LSx intake would require very similar cam timing as a first gen SBC with similar intake.
I suspect that this difference is due primarily to the very different characteristics of the plastic "candy cane" style intakes, which tend to have runners that are longer and less tapered than those of performance 4-barrel style intakes. I would bet that a 4-barrel single plane LSx intake would require very similar cam timing as a first gen SBC with similar intake.
Originally Posted by tee-boy
The point is... Overlap isn't a funcion of port efficiency.
.
.
Originally Posted by tee-boy
Engine's ability to breathe is a function of port efficiency..
Originally Posted by tee-boy
My statement is only true if overlap is defined as degrees of rotation over which both valves(assuming 2 valve engine) are open.
Virtually all of the components and specs you've regarded as meaningless, all have an effect on what cam specs will work best.
Ed,
Thanks for the clarification. So going back to your original post... I assume your answer to the original question is that since an EFI application is harder to tune on a narrow LSA when compared to a carb application, then Vizard's Cubic inch:valve diameter ratio chart is useless... Now it's clear.
Thanks for the clarification. So going back to your original post... I assume your answer to the original question is that since an EFI application is harder to tune on a narrow LSA when compared to a carb application, then Vizard's Cubic inch:valve diameter ratio chart is useless... Now it's clear.