Carbureted LSX Forum Carburetors | Carbed Intakes | Carb Tuning Tips for LSX Enthusiasts

L92 heads+Trex=?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-30-2010, 05:56 AM
  #1  
In-Zane Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (25)
 
ZONES89RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 11,939
Received 32 Likes on 19 Posts

Default L92 heads+Trex=?

Just wondering what you guys think, but i found a set of L92 for such a good price that if i was to get them, and a intake, i would be about the same as if i got a set of ported LS6 heads, the questions is:

How would my shitbox run with a damn Trex feeding the heads? I just dont want to swap cams as that woudl just screw everything up, just a thought and i doubt i will do it, but i just think it would run like ****.
Old 11-30-2010, 11:06 AM
  #2  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (9)
 
1lejohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pasadena Texas
Posts: 1,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

What block and pistons are you running. I would be concerned about PTV clearence with stock pistons.
Old 11-30-2010, 12:29 PM
  #3  
FormerVendor
iTrader: (1)
 
ThunderStruk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by ZONES89RS
Just wondering what you guys think, but i found a set of L92 for such a good price that if i was to get them, and a intake, i would be about the same as if i got a set of ported LS6 heads, the questions is:

How would my shitbox run with a damn Trex feeding the heads? I just dont want to swap cams as that woudl just screw everything up, just a thought and i doubt i will do it, but i just think it would run like ****.


Here is my take on that option. First the cam would in no way clear the stock piston. Second thing is that the TRex was designed for a Cathedral port cylinder head. That cam would definitely not like the L92/LS3 head. There are definitely better cams that we could do for those heads, but since I see you said you didn't want to switch the heads, I would highly recommend not doing that setup.
Old 11-30-2010, 01:05 PM
  #4  
In-Zane Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (25)
 
ZONES89RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 11,939
Received 32 Likes on 19 Posts

Default

Exactly, i was just wondering how not worth it would it be if i was to do the swap and just run it as is till i got a different cam, but i dont want to swap cams, just wondering how horrible it would be.

Originally Posted by 1lejohn
What block and pistons are you running. I would be concerned about PTV clearence with stock pistons.
It is a LQ4, stock.
Old 11-30-2010, 06:26 PM
  #5  
8 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
 
3pedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: WPG MB
Posts: 1,931
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts

Default

what are the specs on a t-rex cam?
Old 11-30-2010, 06:32 PM
  #6  
In-Zane Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (25)
 
ZONES89RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 11,939
Received 32 Likes on 19 Posts

Default

242/248, .610/.615 lift on a 110 LSA.
Old 11-30-2010, 07:43 PM
  #7  
8 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
 
3pedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: WPG MB
Posts: 1,931
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts

Default

If I had 1 kickin around, I'd fit it in there and try it. 99% sure that valve releifs will need to be cut into the pistons.
Old 11-30-2010, 08:16 PM
  #8  
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
 
speedtigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,826
Received 50 Likes on 32 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by ZONES89RS
242/248, .610/.615 lift on a 110 LSA.
Ever wonder if you car would run faster with a smaller cam?
Old 12-01-2010, 06:54 AM
  #9  
In-Zane Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (25)
 
ZONES89RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 11,939
Received 32 Likes on 19 Posts

Default

Nope, i know there is a possibility of it running slightly better, but since i knew i was going with better heads later, this one pays off.
Old 12-01-2010, 08:06 AM
  #10  
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
 
stewdy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Think the l92 heads need alot of split on duration
Old 12-01-2010, 11:24 AM
  #11  
LS1Tech Co-Founder
iTrader: (34)
 
Pro Stock John's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 44,658
Received 1,099 Likes on 721 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by ThunderStruk
Here is my take on that option. First the cam would in no way clear the stock piston. Second thing is that the TRex was designed for a Cathedral port cylinder head. That cam would definitely not like the L92/LS3 head. There are definitely better cams that we could do for those heads, but since I see you said you didn't want to switch the heads, I would highly recommend not doing that setup.
John, does Thunder have some cam profiles it likes for L92 heads, ported or stock? Thanks, John
Old 12-01-2010, 11:42 AM
  #12  
TECH Apprentice
 
hymey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gladstone, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Will work well with single plane. 6 deg split is heaps for the L92s.
Old 12-01-2010, 12:47 PM
  #13  
In-Zane Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (25)
 
ZONES89RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 11,939
Received 32 Likes on 19 Posts

Default

I just see allot of L92 headed combos with random *** cams that i can out run or stop their pull on me that just arent worth a **** since i am rocking the 317s, so i just wonder if it would run that bad in mine as well. Dont see why it wouldnt, but perhaps the single plane carb setup would run the same as it is now.

Why the PTV issues?
Old 12-01-2010, 12:58 PM
  #14  
FormerVendor
iTrader: (1)
 
ThunderStruk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Pro Stock John
John, does Thunder have some cam profiles it likes for L92 heads, ported or stock? Thanks, John


Yes we have quite a few depending on what the customer wants. Believe it or not you don't have to put really large cams with those heads to make really good power. They normally do like larger splits in the intake and exhaust duration than a cathedral port head does like. One cam that we have had really great luck with on those heads is a 223/236 on a 115LSA. Have quite a few 2010 Camaro's make over 450+ rwhp cam only with this cam. We do have larger profiles than that particular one, and have had good results. We are still constantly developing and testing cams on a weekly basis. I actually am in the process of updating the website to reflect some of the new L92/LS3 based camshafts
Old 12-01-2010, 01:02 PM
  #15  
FormerVendor
iTrader: (1)
 
ThunderStruk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by ZONES89RS
I just see allot of L92 headed combos with random *** cams that i can out run or stop their pull on me that just arent worth a **** since i am rocking the 317s, so i just wonder if it would run that bad in mine as well. Dont see why it wouldnt, but perhaps the single plane carb setup would run the same as it is now.

Why the PTV issues?


The PTV issue is that the cam is so large it barely fits under a stock Cathedral port head w/ a 2.00" intake valve. Take the L92 head with a 2.165 valve and you now have serious piston hitting valve issues.
Old 12-01-2010, 02:18 PM
  #16  
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
 
speedtigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,826
Received 50 Likes on 32 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by ThunderStruk
One cam that we have had really great luck with on those heads is a 223/236 on a 115LSA. Have quite a few 2010 Camaro's make over 450+ rwhp cam only with this cam
What RPM do you find the HP peak with this camshaft?
Old 12-01-2010, 02:30 PM
  #17  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (7)
 
tennerv8's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mn
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

I am running this cam with my L92's. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CCA-54-428-11/ It pulls way hard all the way past 7k. I had no piston to valve clearance issues. Its only a .570ish lift.
Old 12-01-2010, 02:35 PM
  #18  
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
 
speedtigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,826
Received 50 Likes on 32 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by ZONES89RS
I just see allot of L92 headed combos with random *** cams that i can out run or stop their pull on me that just arent worth a **** since i am rocking the 317s, so i just wonder if it would run that bad in mine as well. Dont see why it wouldnt, but perhaps the single plane carb setup would run the same as it is now.

Why the PTV issues?
After looking at that HotRod head shootout article, I would have a hard time justifying the migration to L92s. I would speculate that some TEA or TSP ported 943s would run just as hard. And, you would not have to buy a cam, intake manifold & rockers.
Old 12-01-2010, 02:43 PM
  #19  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (14)
 
Squirts11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: OKC, OK
Posts: 898
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by tennerv8
I am running this cam with my L92's. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CCA-54-428-11/ It pulls way hard all the way past 7k. I had no piston to valve clearance issues. Its only a .570ish lift.
Lift is almost irrelevant with regard to PTV clearance, as max lift occurs when the piston is near BDC. Intake/Exhaust duration and ICL are the primary factors.
Old 12-01-2010, 02:48 PM
  #20  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (23)
 
xpndbl3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: orland park, IL
Posts: 1,568
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedtigger
After looking at that HotRod head shootout article, I would have a hard time justifying the migration to L92s. I would speculate that some TEA or TSP ported 943s would run just as hard. And, you would not have to buy a cam, intake manifold & rockers.
i agree


Quick Reply: L92 heads+Trex=?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:28 PM.