L92 heads off, AFR 230 V2 heads on, 504rwhp 6.0L automatic! (now with track results).
09-09-2010, 03:12 PM
#81
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Tony
Just because some don't agree with you you automatically call it hating, we should be able to agree and disagree.... The only reason I question this is because it seems like you have a grudge or vandetta against the L92 heads... and by you pounding your chest and the coments you have made and the title suggest that your saying you don't like the head and I have made a better head or your head is superior.....
Now as I stated and Pat G answered, and this is not to Pat G , good run Pat G, but I am talking directly to you, what happend in the Sick Flow Less doe Test?.......
Because your wording is leading people to believe that they buy these heads brownfields/AFR they will have the answer.... The key with the L92's which has been shot to death is you have to have the correct camshaft events, lobe ramps, to make them work.... period.... First it was said that they did not make enough low end torque due to the port size, velocity, well they are placed in production Silverado, Escalades, GMC, etc... that neeed the low- mid torque and grunt.....GM is not putting them on for no reason....
I don't think guys are hating but this was posted as a marketing strategy so you must respect as one gives their opinion whether or not if it goes along the lines of your conventinal thinking, because the L92 defied much of your marketing campaign of smaller port, faster velocity......
The AFR 225's could not stand up to the test, so I find it ineresting that you increased the port cc.... to 230cc.... This reminds me of the Vortec/AFR battle, now your making a L92/AFR 230 battle.....
You said never, but their are guys with 6.0/L92 combos who have made 480-500 rwhp easy...... So to say never is misleading, they just didn't do it with a Mamo ported Intake or brownfield/AFR head....
Trickflow,MastMotorsport have developed cast offs of the L92's and I have yet to see them pound their chest or crap on the L92 heads.....
As a consumer, you have to expect for people to question motive....
I'm out
Just because some don't agree with you you automatically call it hating, we should be able to agree and disagree.... The only reason I question this is because it seems like you have a grudge or vandetta against the L92 heads... and by you pounding your chest and the coments you have made and the title suggest that your saying you don't like the head and I have made a better head or your head is superior.....
Now as I stated and Pat G answered, and this is not to Pat G , good run Pat G, but I am talking directly to you, what happend in the Sick Flow Less doe Test?.......
Because your wording is leading people to believe that they buy these heads brownfields/AFR they will have the answer.... The key with the L92's which has been shot to death is you have to have the correct camshaft events, lobe ramps, to make them work.... period.... First it was said that they did not make enough low end torque due to the port size, velocity, well they are placed in production Silverado, Escalades, GMC, etc... that neeed the low- mid torque and grunt.....GM is not putting them on for no reason....
I don't think guys are hating but this was posted as a marketing strategy so you must respect as one gives their opinion whether or not if it goes along the lines of your conventinal thinking, because the L92 defied much of your marketing campaign of smaller port, faster velocity......
The AFR 225's could not stand up to the test, so I find it ineresting that you increased the port cc.... to 230cc.... This reminds me of the Vortec/AFR battle, now your making a L92/AFR 230 battle.....
You said never, but their are guys with 6.0/L92 combos who have made 480-500 rwhp easy...... So to say never is misleading, they just didn't do it with a Mamo ported Intake or brownfield/AFR head....
Trickflow,MastMotorsport have developed cast offs of the L92's and I have yet to see them pound their chest or crap on the L92 heads.....
As a consumer, you have to expect for people to question motive....
I'm out
So I've seen more than once that GM uses the heads on the trucks, and therefore they MUST make good low end torque.
I own an L92 headed truck from the factory that doesn't have the low end torque of a catherdral port headed motor. But it runs hard up top... It'd walk a cathedral port motor on the big end in a heartbeat. But, its still a pig down low... It makes for nice marketing number against Toyota. Plus it saves on that 100K mile powertrain warranty if you take some low end out anyway. But, bottom line, these heads don't boost low end...
Again, what are the heads designed for. They are the cast offs from the 6.2L Z06 program that didn't make the numbers that dates back from early 2001. There were discussion on these heads, and the dyno test GM was seeing on some of the forums back in 2001. The heads were designed for a high RPM lightweight setup. GM had them, they already had a ton of time in R&D, so why waste that. But, you have to recognize what it is, and why its used. GM is one of th best when it comes to re-use. They try to standardize and keep the numebr of choices down to keep cost down. Its called economies of scale. The GenI SBC is a prime example. use it in everything. The GenII/GenIV is a continuation of that. But, the bootm line is that just because GM is using it in trucks doesn't mean it was intended for, or ideal for that application.
Ok, first off whether it was a cathedral port head, or a square port head is irrelevant. The key factors here are port volume and cross section area. This goes back to running a ported 243 casting with 235 cc's with the same flow as a 205 AFR. It not all about a flow number.
Originally Posted by Darin Morgan
CFM and Velocity
Darin Morgan: "Make no mistake, velocity is the primary variable in the design of the entire induction system. I often say that my job title should be Velocity Manager instead of Cylinder Head Designer. Air speed is 10 times more important than raw flow numbers. If you kill the velocity by 10 percent, you will kill almost 40 percent of the wave and ram energy that dynamically fills the cylinder! Raw airflow cfm is an important variable as well; it's just not as important. If you buy a cylinder head that is properly sized for a flow of 400 cfm and your engine is only asking for 350 cfm, you will not only fail to achieve the power potential that the 400 cfm would have given you, you will also fail to reach the power that the 350 cfm would have given you. That's because you killed all the air speed in the induction system. If your engine is asking for 350 cfm and you give it a properly sized cylinder head flowing 350 cfm, your airflow demand is matched and your air speed is matched. You then have a chance of achieving the power potential that 350 cfm can give you. "How much power potential can 350 cfm give? Well, that depends on a host of variables such as engine speed, overall induction system design, and piston speed. To put it in basic terms, the less restriction you have in the induction system and the more freedom you have to attain increased engine speeds, the easier it is to extract the full potential of the 350 cfm available. Most people don't know how much airflow their engine is actually asking for! This leads to builders wanting to purchase cylinder heads with way more airflow than their engines can possibly use. The end result is a low air-speed induction system that can't properly fill the cylinder by means of dynamic inertia and harmonic supercharging, which means the engine will never reach its full power potential.
"That said, a good cylinder head port design will flow a lot of air for its valve size. The bad news is that a bad port design will flow just as much if not more air! Airflow alone won't tell you if a port design will reach its power potential with 100 percent certainty. Everyone knows that it's easy to compare two 23-degree small-block Chevy heads with 220cc ports. Just pick the one with the most flow, right? That's about all the average builder can do, and in a lot of cases it's hit-and-miss. There are multitudes of ways to achieve that 220ccs. You can have a big pushrod pinch section and a very small bowl area, or a huge bowl area and a super small pushrod pinch area. One 220cc port can actually be choked off at the pushrod, short-turn radius, or throat area, hurting top end power. Another 220cc port design can have too small of a bowl area and too large of a choke and hurt power and torque equally across the entire power range. Having extra airflow isn't always bad, but it can't come at the expense of air speed. The ports must be sized properly. The amount of air Pro Comp Eliminator engines are asking for are exactly how much the heads flow, and that's not a coincidence. People want to make cylinder head design simple, but it's not. It's very complex and interdependent on a massive amount of variables."
Darin Morgan: "Make no mistake, velocity is the primary variable in the design of the entire induction system. I often say that my job title should be Velocity Manager instead of Cylinder Head Designer. Air speed is 10 times more important than raw flow numbers. If you kill the velocity by 10 percent, you will kill almost 40 percent of the wave and ram energy that dynamically fills the cylinder! Raw airflow cfm is an important variable as well; it's just not as important. If you buy a cylinder head that is properly sized for a flow of 400 cfm and your engine is only asking for 350 cfm, you will not only fail to achieve the power potential that the 400 cfm would have given you, you will also fail to reach the power that the 350 cfm would have given you. That's because you killed all the air speed in the induction system. If your engine is asking for 350 cfm and you give it a properly sized cylinder head flowing 350 cfm, your airflow demand is matched and your air speed is matched. You then have a chance of achieving the power potential that 350 cfm can give you. "How much power potential can 350 cfm give? Well, that depends on a host of variables such as engine speed, overall induction system design, and piston speed. To put it in basic terms, the less restriction you have in the induction system and the more freedom you have to attain increased engine speeds, the easier it is to extract the full potential of the 350 cfm available. Most people don't know how much airflow their engine is actually asking for! This leads to builders wanting to purchase cylinder heads with way more airflow than their engines can possibly use. The end result is a low air-speed induction system that can't properly fill the cylinder by means of dynamic inertia and harmonic supercharging, which means the engine will never reach its full power potential.
"That said, a good cylinder head port design will flow a lot of air for its valve size. The bad news is that a bad port design will flow just as much if not more air! Airflow alone won't tell you if a port design will reach its power potential with 100 percent certainty. Everyone knows that it's easy to compare two 23-degree small-block Chevy heads with 220cc ports. Just pick the one with the most flow, right? That's about all the average builder can do, and in a lot of cases it's hit-and-miss. There are multitudes of ways to achieve that 220ccs. You can have a big pushrod pinch section and a very small bowl area, or a huge bowl area and a super small pushrod pinch area. One 220cc port can actually be choked off at the pushrod, short-turn radius, or throat area, hurting top end power. Another 220cc port design can have too small of a bowl area and too large of a choke and hurt power and torque equally across the entire power range. Having extra airflow isn't always bad, but it can't come at the expense of air speed. The ports must be sized properly. The amount of air Pro Comp Eliminator engines are asking for are exactly how much the heads flow, and that's not a coincidence. People want to make cylinder head design simple, but it's not. It's very complex and interdependent on a massive amount of variables."
I'm not saying you can't make a "decent" peak number with a ported L92. And, for many folks having a car with less than optimal throttle response and no low end is ok so long as it post up a big dyno number. Heck, you can make a "decent" peak number with an unported L92 and a cam. But again, thats one point on the dyno graph.
Then you cite that all you need is the right cam. You have to understand what you are doing with the cam. You aren't fixing the underlying issue. You are using the cam to "crutch" a problem. Its like saying that the cure for spun main bearing is to use heavier weight oil to get the oil pressure up.
Look as I said, the fist thing I'd do with an L92 is fill the port with epoxy and try to shrink it to 230-240CC ported. The head has the advantage of a taller floor and thus a better short turn out of the box. Its just a big friggin port that is too big for the intended application.
When do you need a 260-280 CC port. I promise you, its when you are way bigger than 364 inches... As for the vendors who are offering those, why do you think they are making those offerings. Because they can see the same logic as everyone else that you need to get that velocity up. But, I will say that it not enough as I pointed out to just shrink the port. You also have to develop the port shape to make power... So, even if you have a port that is 230-240cc now, if the port is a pooch, its still a pooch...
I'm not taking a dump on the L92 and being a hater on them. I'll be honest, if I were doing a cheap buildup in a lightweight platform I'd consider a set of stock L92 heads and a cam to crutch them. But, I would recognize what I was doing, and why I was doing it. And I'd be the first to point out its shortcomings.
The point I'm trying to make here and that I tried to make in the other L92 head is to educate folks about heads. People get wrapped up on peak flow number at .700 lift @ 28" on a 4.125 bore. They refuse to open up and understand "why". Again, take cathedral vs L92 port out of this equation. Get it back to velocity, CSA, and airflow requirements. Which one gets you there is the winner at the track, and on the dyno....
09-09-2010, 03:32 PM
#82
I'm not saying you can't make a "decent" peak number with a ported L92. And, for many folks having a car with less than optimal throttle response and no low end is ok so long as it post up a big dyno number. Heck, you can make a "decent" peak number with an unported L92 and a cam. But again, thats one point on the dyno graph.
Terrible throttle response and no low end (more roll eyes-just busting your *****).
Then again I did the exact OPPOSITE of what most people do with stock CI and L92 heads.
09-09-2010, 04:13 PM
#83
There are other areas that are as important to many. If you were to stop at the high 400 to 500 RWHP # I could see going with the L92's and saving the money.
For myself and many others who would start at 500 RWHP and add nitrous or boost as the next progression, I would be looking for something with a thicker deck to handle the higher combustion pressures compared to the L92s 1/2" or less deck. You are also limited on the L92's in spring selection when you want to progress to a larger cam due to small spring pocket and lack of material to support higher loads.
Q for AFR regarding the above. Does the 230 have the traditionally thicker deck and capability to take a larger diameter spring than an L92, along with more material in the pocket to handle high spring loads?
For myself and many others who would start at 500 RWHP and add nitrous or boost as the next progression, I would be looking for something with a thicker deck to handle the higher combustion pressures compared to the L92s 1/2" or less deck. You are also limited on the L92's in spring selection when you want to progress to a larger cam due to small spring pocket and lack of material to support higher loads.
Q for AFR regarding the above. Does the 230 have the traditionally thicker deck and capability to take a larger diameter spring than an L92, along with more material in the pocket to handle high spring loads?
09-09-2010, 04:58 PM
#84
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision." The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms.
A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision." The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms.
There are other areas that are as important to many. If you were to stop at the high 400 to 500 RWHP # I could see going with the L92's and saving the money.
For myself and many others who would start at 500 RWHP and add nitrous or boost as the next progression, I would be looking for something with a thicker deck to handle the higher combustion pressures compared to the L92s 1/2" or less deck. You are also limited on the L92's in spring selection when you want to progress to a larger cam due to small spring pocket and lack of material to support higher loads.
Q for AFR regarding the above. Does the 230 have the traditionally thicker deck and capability to take a larger diameter spring than an L92, along with more material in the pocket to handle high spring loads?
For myself and many others who would start at 500 RWHP and add nitrous or boost as the next progression, I would be looking for something with a thicker deck to handle the higher combustion pressures compared to the L92s 1/2" or less deck. You are also limited on the L92's in spring selection when you want to progress to a larger cam due to small spring pocket and lack of material to support higher loads.
Q for AFR regarding the above. Does the 230 have the traditionally thicker deck and capability to take a larger diameter spring than an L92, along with more material in the pocket to handle high spring loads?
Thanks,
Tony
09-09-2010, 07:49 PM
#85
thanks for posting Patrick...
some of us know how to read these results...
and not even optomized...people need to realize:
he is only at 11:1 could easy go to 11.9:1
has a 92mm Tb, could have a 102mm
has full exhaust, could run a cutout or open headers
only 231 cam, we all know how much bigger he could have went here
and it's an a4, imagine just these numbers in m6
Patrick do you have an ewp?...
The thing I like the most about your threads is no infomation is hidden or undisclosed...
great built, looking forward to the 210 results
some of us know how to read these results...
and not even optomized...people need to realize:
he is only at 11:1 could easy go to 11.9:1
has a 92mm Tb, could have a 102mm
has full exhaust, could run a cutout or open headers
only 231 cam, we all know how much bigger he could have went here
and it's an a4, imagine just these numbers in m6
Patrick do you have an ewp?...
The thing I like the most about your threads is no infomation is hidden or undisclosed...
great built, looking forward to the 210 results
09-09-2010, 07:58 PM
#86
So what is the TOTAL parts cost and tuned, no labor, to go from a current stock L92/LS3 based 6.0L to get these numbers?
I am going to do some guessing since you didn't answer my question.
Heads like Pat = $3600
FAST intake = $800
MAMO porting = $400?
8 rockers = $90
Pushrods = $125
Head gaskets = $50
Camshaft = $400
Dyno/Street tune = $600
Kooks Long tubes = $1400
ARP Head bolts = $125
U/D pulley = $150
CAI = $400
Syn Oil and filter = $50
Parts and Tune
Roughly $8190 if installed by owner and professionally tuned.
Here is a comparable setup in the G8 section, 490 hp, 442 tq $6999.99 installed.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/pontiac-g...eo-inside.html
Just trying to compare and get some pricing, full pricing makes the sale, not long paragraphs.
I am going to do some guessing since you didn't answer my question.
Heads like Pat = $3600
FAST intake = $800
MAMO porting = $400?
8 rockers = $90
Pushrods = $125
Head gaskets = $50
Camshaft = $400
Dyno/Street tune = $600
Kooks Long tubes = $1400
ARP Head bolts = $125
U/D pulley = $150
CAI = $400
Syn Oil and filter = $50
Parts and Tune
Roughly $8190 if installed by owner and professionally tuned.
Here is a comparable setup in the G8 section, 490 hp, 442 tq $6999.99 installed.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/pontiac-g...eo-inside.html
Just trying to compare and get some pricing, full pricing makes the sale, not long paragraphs.
09-09-2010, 09:23 PM
#87
On The Tree
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Orlando
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a comparable setup in the G8 section, 490 hp, 442 tq $6999.99 installed.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/pontiac-g...eo-inside.html
Just trying to compare and get some pricing, full pricing makes the sale, not long paragraphs.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/pontiac-g...eo-inside.html
Just trying to compare and get some pricing, full pricing makes the sale, not long paragraphs.
The livernois car makes good power but its also M6 6.2 vs A6 6.0
Not exactly a comparable setup.
09-10-2010, 02:16 AM
#88
09-10-2010, 03:41 AM
#90
Do you mean this one
When you're trying to see the gains you make at rpm below 4000 rpm (and you don't have the luxury of having an engine dyno at your disposal) you get a much better representation of the torque curve with a locked torque converter. This way, guys with manual transmissions can compare my locked curves to theirs. So I beg to differ, many people couldn't care less about what a converter does for multiplying torque. They want to see the A-B gains at lower and higher rpm. This is what I reported. Sorry if you don't agree.
09-10-2010, 05:04 AM
#91
Not to get all long and paragraphy, but I see a bolded reference to comparing curves. As in hp & torque curves. Presumably that would be referring to things like what RPM maximum hp/torque occurred at, how many RPMs it carried, etc. That would be quite different than suggesting a comparison of peak numbers.
09-10-2010, 08:34 AM
#92
thanks for posting Patrick...
some of us know how to read these results...
and not even optomized...people need to realize:
he is only at 11:1 could easy go to 11.9:1
has a 92mm Tb, could have a 102mm
has full exhaust, could run a cutout or open headers
only 231 cam, we all know how much bigger he could have went here
and it's an a4, imagine just these numbers in m6
Patrick do you have an ewp?...
The thing I like the most about your threads is no infomation is hidden or undisclosed...
great built, looking forward to the 210 results
some of us know how to read these results...
and not even optomized...people need to realize:
he is only at 11:1 could easy go to 11.9:1
has a 92mm Tb, could have a 102mm
has full exhaust, could run a cutout or open headers
only 231 cam, we all know how much bigger he could have went here
and it's an a4, imagine just these numbers in m6
Patrick do you have an ewp?...
The thing I like the most about your threads is no infomation is hidden or undisclosed...
great built, looking forward to the 210 results
So what is the TOTAL parts cost and tuned, no labor, to go from a current stock L92/LS3 based 6.0L to get these numbers?
I am going to do some guessing since you didn't answer my question.
Heads like Pat = $3600
FAST intake = $800
MAMO porting = $400?
8 rockers = $90
Pushrods = $125
Head gaskets = $50
Camshaft = $400
Dyno/Street tune = $600
Kooks Long tubes = $1400
ARP Head bolts = $125
U/D pulley = $150
CAI = $400
Syn Oil and filter = $50
Parts and Tune
Roughly $8190 if installed by owner and professionally tuned.
Here is a comparable setup in the G8 section, 490 hp, 442 tq $6999.99 installed.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/pontiac-g...eo-inside.html
Just trying to compare and get some pricing, full pricing makes the sale, not long paragraphs.
I am going to do some guessing since you didn't answer my question.
Heads like Pat = $3600
FAST intake = $800
MAMO porting = $400?
8 rockers = $90
Pushrods = $125
Head gaskets = $50
Camshaft = $400
Dyno/Street tune = $600
Kooks Long tubes = $1400
ARP Head bolts = $125
U/D pulley = $150
CAI = $400
Syn Oil and filter = $50
Parts and Tune
Roughly $8190 if installed by owner and professionally tuned.
Here is a comparable setup in the G8 section, 490 hp, 442 tq $6999.99 installed.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/pontiac-g...eo-inside.html
Just trying to compare and get some pricing, full pricing makes the sale, not long paragraphs.
Here's an overlay of my G8 when it was bone stock compared to it in bolt-on form. Bolt-ons included Vararam CAI, ASP 25% UDP, Fast 102 intake manifold, Yella Terra 1.85 rockers, American Racing 1 7/8" Headers with dual cats, tune. So I gained 91 rwhp over stock before I ever added the AFR heads, the 231/231 cam, the Mamo ported intake and removed the 1.85 rockers.
__________________
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
Last edited by Patrick G; 09-10-2010 at 08:48 AM.
09-10-2010, 08:54 AM
#93
For your entertainment purpose, here's a dyno of a stock G8 GXP making 346rwhp, then 403rwhp with ARH 1 7/8" headers, Vararam CAI, ASP UD pulley and tune. Notice the 40rwhp advantage the 6.2L LS3 with manual trans has over my 6.0L automatic G8.
Stock 6.2L LS3 M6 = 346 rwhp.
Stock 6.0L L76 A6 = 306rwhp.
Stock 6.2L LS3 M6 = 346 rwhp.
Stock 6.0L L76 A6 = 306rwhp.
__________________
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
09-10-2010, 12:13 PM
#94
Pat,
Can you please S-T-O-P breaking down the "cognitive dissonance"
Classic J-Rod I tell ya....
Actually that's really good info btw.....I wouldn't have guessed the stock 6.2's would have dyno'ed that much better.
Is the camshaft a bit larger in those motors?
-Tony
EDIT: Was just informed the 6.2 does in fact have a slightly larger cam and the other point I overlooked is manual trans vs auto which is easily 20-25 RWHP
Can you please S-T-O-P breaking down the "cognitive dissonance"
Classic J-Rod I tell ya....
Actually that's really good info btw.....I wouldn't have guessed the stock 6.2's would have dyno'ed that much better.
Is the camshaft a bit larger in those motors?
-Tony
EDIT: Was just informed the 6.2 does in fact have a slightly larger cam and the other point I overlooked is manual trans vs auto which is easily 20-25 RWHP
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; 09-10-2010 at 01:14 PM.
09-10-2010, 03:33 PM
#95
12 Second Club
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gateway International Raceway
Posts: 1,575
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
So what is the TOTAL parts cost and tuned, no labor, to go from a current stock L92/LS3 based 6.0L to get these numbers?
I am going to do some guessing since you didn't answer my question.
Heads like Pat = $3600
FAST intake = $800
MAMO porting = $400?
8 rockers = $90
Pushrods = $125
Head gaskets = $50
Camshaft = $400
Dyno/Street tune = $600
Kooks Long tubes = $1400
ARP Head bolts = $125
U/D pulley = $150
CAI = $400
Syn Oil and filter = $50
Parts and Tune
Roughly $8190 if installed by owner and professionally tuned.
Here is a comparable setup in the G8 section, 490 hp, 442 tq $6999.99 installed.
I am going to do some guessing since you didn't answer my question.
Heads like Pat = $3600
FAST intake = $800
MAMO porting = $400?
8 rockers = $90
Pushrods = $125
Head gaskets = $50
Camshaft = $400
Dyno/Street tune = $600
Kooks Long tubes = $1400
ARP Head bolts = $125
U/D pulley = $150
CAI = $400
Syn Oil and filter = $50
Parts and Tune
Roughly $8190 if installed by owner and professionally tuned.
Here is a comparable setup in the G8 section, 490 hp, 442 tq $6999.99 installed.
09-10-2010, 03:41 PM
#96
Livernois cam 2R Max cam is 235/242 .603/.618" 114LSA. Pretty nasty idle in a 6.2L with L92 heads, plus the piston to valve clearance is very tight.
__________________
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
09-10-2010, 04:10 PM
#97
I was just asking for a total price to take the L92/LS3 headed 6.0L and add what you have done and give everyone a finished price, pretty simple. I posted Livernois' link because they showed the whole package with a price. If you or Tony don't want to price it out for potential customers so be it.
To just say $3600 for the heads I guess is fine but it takes a lot more than that to make that horsepower, not just head prices. The price I came up with does not include labor for the heads/cam/header installation so add that in to the $8000 + price as well.
To just say $3600 for the heads I guess is fine but it takes a lot more than that to make that horsepower, not just head prices. The price I came up with does not include labor for the heads/cam/header installation so add that in to the $8000 + price as well.
09-10-2010, 04:33 PM
#98
I was just asking for a total price to take the L92/LS3 headed 6.0L and add what you have done and give everyone a finished price, pretty simple. I posted Livernois' link because they showed the whole package with a price. If you or Tony don't want to price it out for potential customers so be it.
To just say $3600 for the heads I guess is fine but it takes a lot more than that to make that horsepower, not just head prices. The price I came up with does not include labor for the heads/cam/header installation so add that in to the $8000 + price as well.
To just say $3600 for the heads I guess is fine but it takes a lot more than that to make that horsepower, not just head prices. The price I came up with does not include labor for the heads/cam/header installation so add that in to the $8000 + price as well.
__________________
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
09-10-2010, 09:21 PM
#100
Just on more quick question....
I saw on the first graph in green it said no filter. Was the 504 with no air filter or did it make more or did it make less with no filter?
I saw on the first graph in green it said no filter. Was the 504 with no air filter or did it make more or did it make less with no filter?