SFI 25.2 Mustang/LSx build "The Renegade"
04-14-2009, 12:37 PM
#1626
Big secret huh? Well let me guess, 6" rods "or shorter" with a 1.230 "or just a bit more" compression height. Since there will be no reluctor wheel on the crank to worry about you can run the shorter rods allowing for more compression height thus stronger ring lands. Wow, I must be a scientist. I've been in the process of building a little turbo motor with a crank trigger and jesel belt drive and this is the direction I am going.
-Dave
-Dave
04-14-2009, 12:51 PM
#1627
12 Second Club
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cooper City, FL
Posts: 1,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big secret huh? Well let me guess, 6" rods "or shorter" with a 1.230 "or just a bit more" compression height. Since there will be no reluctor wheel on the crank to worry about you can run the shorter rods allowing for more compression height thus stronger ring lands. Wow, I must be a scientist. I've been in the process of building a little turbo motor with a crank trigger and jesel belt drive and this is the direction I am going.
-Dave
-Dave
Chad
04-14-2009, 12:57 PM
#1628
So I guess I cannot not have a since of humor also? I don't take any of this that serious. Meaning I don't lose any sleep over it. Car stuff is just a hobby for me and I prefer to try to enjoy it as much as possible. Looking at the pistons in the picture I can tell they have an increased compresson height. Therefore my curiosity.
04-14-2009, 02:33 PM
#1631
LS1Tech Sponsor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rockfield Kentucky
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahahaha, 6" Rods are so yesterday......we haven't had those since #1 and #2.
Just think if they had a valvetrain that needed deep valve pockets. That really make that compression height a serious consideration.
Just assembled #5 this past weekend. I am using the old rods from #2.
The build looks killer boys, can't wait to see it in action!
Robin
Just think if they had a valvetrain that needed deep valve pockets. That really make that compression height a serious consideration.
Just assembled #5 this past weekend. I am using the old rods from #2.
The build looks killer boys, can't wait to see it in action!
Robin
04-14-2009, 02:38 PM
#1632
Ahahaha, 6" Rods are so yesterday......we haven't had those since #1 and #2.
Just think if they had a valvetrain that needed deep valve pockets. That really make that compression height a serious consideration.
Just assembled #5 this past weekend. I am using the old rods from #2.
The build looks killer boys, can't wait to see it in action!
Robin
Just think if they had a valvetrain that needed deep valve pockets. That really make that compression height a serious consideration.
Just assembled #5 this past weekend. I am using the old rods from #2.
The build looks killer boys, can't wait to see it in action!
Robin
04-14-2009, 02:54 PM
#1634
LS1Tech Sponsor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rockfield Kentucky
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first 2 were 4.125 Stroke with a 6" GRP Rod and a 1.88: Rod Journal.
We dropped back to a 4" stroke and used the same pistons with a 6.062" GRP Rod. That has a 2.100" Rod Journal
The engine that I am working on now is the 4.185 stroke with the 6" rods and pistons from engine #2.
It has a new set of the GMPP 6 Bolt LSX DR heads. The cam is the second version that has a larger duration and less lift than our current cam.
The area over the rings at the vave pockets are very thin. If we miss the tune it lifts the land.
I have applied several things that we learned on previous engines to this 454.
I want to see how it handles the power and RPM after several changes.
The engine in the car is a 440" deal that is holding up very well.
Good luck with your deal, looks good!
Robin
04-14-2009, 03:17 PM
#1635
I was also being funny. All my blocks have been standard deck height.
The first 2 were 4.125 Stroke with a 6" GRP Rod and a 1.88: Rod Journal.
We dropped back to a 4" stroke and used the same pistons with a 6.062" GRP Rod. That has a 2.100" Rod Journal
The engine that I am working on now is the 4.185 stroke with the 6" rods and pistons from engine #2.
It has a new set of the GMPP 6 Bolt LSX DR heads. The cam is the second version that has a larger duration and less lift than our current cam.
The area over the rings at the vave pockets are very thin. If we miss the tune it lifts the land.
I have applied several things that we learned on previous engines to this 454.
I want to see how it handles the power and RPM after several changes.
The engine in the car is a 440" deal that is holding up very well.
Good luck with your deal, looks good!
Robin
The first 2 were 4.125 Stroke with a 6" GRP Rod and a 1.88: Rod Journal.
We dropped back to a 4" stroke and used the same pistons with a 6.062" GRP Rod. That has a 2.100" Rod Journal
The engine that I am working on now is the 4.185 stroke with the 6" rods and pistons from engine #2.
It has a new set of the GMPP 6 Bolt LSX DR heads. The cam is the second version that has a larger duration and less lift than our current cam.
The area over the rings at the vave pockets are very thin. If we miss the tune it lifts the land.
I have applied several things that we learned on previous engines to this 454.
I want to see how it handles the power and RPM after several changes.
The engine in the car is a 440" deal that is holding up very well.
Good luck with your deal, looks good!
Robin
Thanks robin, We're hoping some of the changes we talked about 6 months ago help keep everything happy in the bottom end.
04-14-2009, 07:54 PM
#1636
would be more of a smiley.
04-14-2009, 08:20 PM
#1637
FormerVendor
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia Beach,Virginia
Posts: 2,991
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
You asked a question-i'm am not willing to give out that info,i did this very nicely,but you insist on being a dick about it.If it's so obvious and you know so much about it,why would you have to ask the question.
we try to share as much info as possible,but i'm not willing to give everything away,if this is the way it's gonna be,we will remove all the engine pics and no longer talk about anything going on with it
we try to share as much info as possible,but i'm not willing to give everything away,if this is the way it's gonna be,we will remove all the engine pics and no longer talk about anything going on with it
04-14-2009, 08:35 PM
#1638
I'm not being a dick about anything. I do believe you are a bit sensitive. I asked a simple question. Yea it is obvious but I cannot put a mic to the pictures to read thousand's of inches. If your project is such a secret maybe it would be best not to post pictures. Once again, it was just a question.
Are you scared someone else may be building something faster???
Are you scared someone else may be building something faster???
04-14-2009, 09:07 PM
#1640
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL.
Posts: 1,251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You asked a question-i'm am not willing to give out that info,i did this very nicely,but you insist on being a dick about it.If it's so obvious and you know so much about it,why would you have to ask the question.
we try to share as much info as possible,but i'm not willing to give everything away,if this is the way it's gonna be,we will remove all the engine pics and no longer talk about anything going on with it
we try to share as much info as possible,but i'm not willing to give everything away,if this is the way it's gonna be,we will remove all the engine pics and no longer talk about anything going on with it
God shawn, why you holding out on us? Its not like your a vendor in a competitive industry who relies on proprietary information to market your products.
Keep the pics comming when you can. We enjoy the eye candy.
