assasinator

http://forums.corral.net/forums/svt-...l#post12587770

PHR magazine this month.







409 cubic inches

assasinator

keep in mind there is no such thing as after market heads.

this is the equivilent of making 800hp on factory ported LS1 heads.

Tainted

iTrader: (9)

yawn...

its still not that great imo. lot of money for not a lot of reward when you could've had an lsx hitting 500rwhp on stock internals etc. not to mention how much larger in size and weight it is.

kainedogg

iTrader: (23)

I read that a few weeks back. I love that the motor made such good power. If the article had been about value, the the LS's there would have won hands down. However just based on bad-assness, I am glad the mod motor won. Wonder why they decided to allow them to compete in the last event.

assasinator

try your lsx on ls1 heads. its a yawn to folks who have no idea the restrictions a 3.7" bore imposes.


its called engine masters. and a LSX did not win it. there are lsx competitors...who lost.

assasinator

427 LSx. loses

LQ9 417 loses.


Jon Lahone, an expert builder in his own right, is employed by BES racing and entered the competition under the Also BES team name. The engine is a stout GM LS displacing 401 cubic inches. Equipped with RHS cylinder heads and MegaSquirt electronic fuel injection, we expected spectacular power. The engine certainly delivered the goods, with 748 peak horsepower and 621 lb-ft of peak torque recoded. The crew from BES was obviously well prepared, and worked flawlessly through the test session for a score of 2837.1 points putting them into second place.


401 LSx loses.


the list goes on and on.


this is engine masters asshat. Tainted.

just STFU.



Tony Bischoff also looked to take advantage of the rules change allowing the Ford four-valve modular motor with a 401 cubic inch example. The power production capabilities had already been proven by the other competitors running this engine, and this time the attention was on Bischoff. Unlike the others, BES used a single plane intake manifold with a central throttle body location, which looked like a good choice for top-end power. In qualifying pulls the engine churned out 775 horsepower at peak, while torque peaked at 632 lb-ft. Tony’s MOD motor finished qualifying elimination with a score of 2867 points, putting it in the second spot with two engines left to run.

775hp. MORE THAN A 427 lsX. 401 CUBIC INCHES.


the flood gates have opened. i would expect a mercedes 400inch to win next year if one is run.

buddha845

iTrader: (3)

Those headers

Tainted

iTrader: (9)

Now tell me how much money is invested into that motor to get it to that point?
Show me it's cheaper and easier than an lsx setup and I'll retract my statement. Using stock heads is whatever on a max engine build if ya ask me since most would usually go aftermarket.

Irunelevens

Any N/A small block motor over 700rwhp is gonna have $$ in it.

fspeedster

iTrader: (6)

Most Engine Master builds are won by Ford, RELIABILITY is their weak point, they usually don't last very long.

JD_AMG

Do you care to share a link to this?
From what Ive read that massive boat anchor is only making 5 peak more hp than the little LSx it was competing against.
http://www.enginelabs.com/news/jon-k...th-409ci-ford/
Regardless why does it matter? Why are you trying to use this as a troll/bragging point? This is restricted, rule limited engine building, not anything really relevant to the real world (in the real world displacement isn't limited, and engines actually have to fit in cars).
Im assuming its the typical ford fanboy way of being insecure, so you have to join GM forums to attempt to defend the "underdog". You're convincing absolutely no one that Ford engines are superior, and if anything you are only making the Ford crowd look more pathetic by making threads like these...

Wanna impress us? Show us a Ford engine thats comparable in physical size to an lsx while making the same hp/torque for less money. THAT is what matters in the real world. We don't care whats supposedly "stock". Youre not going to convince anyone with heavily restricted racing series or restricted engine building.

Zac_Speed

iTrader: (4)

Why dont you post up priors years winners? Too many GM motors winning?

It'llrun

It appears that the top 3 spots were taken by modular engines. One also took 5th. This is hardly John's 1st rodeo either. He's won like 3 or 4 other times.

Is this new stuff, because what I saw was from October of last yr and the 2014 challenge entry cutoff is in February?

Not likely. Ford engines really do very well in this competition and have won it several times.

MI-Z/28

Quick Google search shows a GM engine winning in 2012. 402ci small block making 853hp, 665tq. http://www.dragzine.com/news/sam-sch...ith-chevy-sb2/ I could not find a list of winners by year. All bad *** engines for sure!

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

There really needs to be a "Like" button.

It'llrun

Was displacement actually limited here? A Ford 572 was entered and made the most power overall, but since c.i. is factored, it didn't win the competition.

Besides, in actual racing, nearly every class in America has rules. In fact, all of them do, except illegal racing. I'm all for "run what ya brung," but let's not act as if the majority of legitimate racing doesn't have a plethora of rules to follow.

Further, the Ford modular has been used in millions of cars... It actually fit into every one of them. Just because the LS block is smaller hardly means the Mod motor won't fit. That's just junk thinking.

What I find MOST intriguing here, of course, is that these Ford Modular engines made WELL OVER 700hp N/A and not a peep from the "you need a blower to make power" crowd... Oh, the irony... Of course, even the small block Dodge broke 700. The winner, Kaase, was actually the lowest hp of the modular top 3.

From the article in the magazine... "Starting with a 5.4 four cam powerplant, the engine was extensively modified to expand the displacement to 401 cubic inches to meet the minimum requirement for competition. All eyes were on the numbers as the engine buzzed effortlessly through the rev range, making phenomenal torque and power along the way. The power was devastating, with peak horsepower coming in at 736 horsepower, and torque peaking at a lofty 664 ft-lbs. That puts the specific torque at a staggering 1.66 lb-ft per cubic inch!"

By the way, it appears there IS a cubic inch limit... A lower end limit of somewhere around 400 cubes. I think I read of 4 SBC's entered and 1 of them broke 700hp(711) while another nearly did and the other 2 weren't even close to the competition. I think the engine I liked most was the SAM entry, a 436cube LS which made 775/677... respekatibal... Honestly, it seems that would've won, had it been in the 401-416ci range with the same power.

JD_AMG

They have a minimum displacement, not that it matters. Displacement was part of the score (displacement per torque and hp).

Im pretty sure no one was even implying that. I never said there is anything wrong with rules and regulations. The problem is when someone tries to brag about car x (or engine x) doing better than car y (or engine y) in a highly restricted racing series, and therefore that car/engine is "better" in all applications.

That engine pictured certainly will have a very hard time fitting in anything with those headers...
And its not just about getting the engine to fit (although im sure in most cases it take quite a bit of cutting to get a mod motor to fit in most smaller engine bays), but its about where it fits. With a smaller engine you can mount it lower and closer to the center of the chassis for better all around performance.

How many people have built 700hp mod motors that they drive on the street? If any (doubt it), how much lighter is their wallet now?
On the flip side look at how many N/A LSx's or SBC's run around with 700FWHP, TONS! Ill go to a local car show and see a handful of NA LSx's making those numbers, along with BBC's, while the closest N/A Mod motor will be fully built making 400RWHP on a good day...

Let me ask you, would you be able to tell what the CI was on that engine by looking at it? So its the same physical size as a 5.3L LSx engine (ofcouse, way smaller/lighter than a mod motor as you know). So while its making the same power/more torque and its lighter/smaller and cheaper than the mod motor, why would you bother putting that mod motor in your car?
That is whats impressive, not that a full custom $$$ mod motor won a heavily restricted engine comparison.

distortion_69

iTrader: (20)

It's a cool novelty thing... but I think most of us already knew you could make more horsepower/torque per liter with multi-valved engines. Yet, none of us are driving hondas... because that **** doesn't matter. There's a dozen other variables that come into play.

At the end of the day, I bought a 6.0 to put in my s10 because it's light, cheap, and small. For $2400 I have a 500+ flywheel horsepower engine that I can be happy with the reliability of, and get mid 20's mpg. I would RATHER there be a better budget/size option out there, I would gladly choose it.

WE TODD DID

iTrader: (2)

Nah, $60,000 is not a lot of reward.

WE TODD DID

iTrader: (2)

8th place engine. We scored over 100 points less at the event than at home.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/parts-cla...t-rodding.html