edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Heres an interesting L92 case.The car is an 06 GTO. Now mind you, this thing didnt have an "optimal" L92 cam. Heads were redone by ETP. No additional port work, just milling, tighten up the springs, back cut valves, 5 angle valve job, and seats blended into the bowls.
In addition to this, I decided to try one of Corys intakes (ls2PortWorks).
I was hoping for 20 from the heads (I knew that was a pretty much a given) and another 10 from the intake (thats what Cory told me to expect)
So, anyways, heres the results........

Run 12 is what it was with a good street tune in it.
Run 15 is maxed out tune. Now that run (15) is with a crazy amount of timing in it, and pretty lean at the same time. It turns out that it liked a bunch of timing because the compression was really low.
Run 17 is THE REDONE HEADS ONLY with 6 degrees LESS timing, because of the compression.
Run 20 was same as run17, just a higher tq number.
Run 22 is AFTER SWAPPING INTAKES. Needless to say I was VERY impressed with the gains from the intake. It gained the 10 HP that Cory told me it would, but LOOK AT THE TORQUE!! Thats a good 18-20 ft lbs with just the intake swap!!
To sum up, the L92s have some issues that are just part of their design. For the most part, they CANNOT be bolted right on and make the power that they should make.
That being said, these heads had some issues that they just shouldnt have had. Attention to detail, and just plain 'ol 'sperience got this combo to where it should be.
Thanks to ETP, and to Cory at ls2PortWorks (no link, non sponsor)

Patrick G

iTrader: (14)

Great writeup Ed. Backs up what the rest of us have been seeing too...the L92 can be fine heads with the right intake manifold in front of them. The L76 manifold is not very good in stock form. It would be interesting to know the areas that Cory attacks with the porting. Regardless, those are solid numbers! Well done.

TurboGibbs

iTrader: (6)

Great info! keep it coming. What was the cam?

Ryne @ CMS

iTrader: (10)

i thought that kind of horsepower wasnt possible huh?? kind put your foot in your mouth now

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

No foot in mouth. I never said they couldnt make this kinda power. I said a 6.0 isnt going to make 509/460. So lets get that right.
I've done enough of the L92s to know what to expect. If you are getting a legit 500+ out of a 6.0, you should be selling those combos left and right.
BTW, has that thing been run on a DJ yet?

WKMCD

iTrader: (2)

Nice work Ed. So I would expect with the changes I've made on my car and the addition of the YT rockers and Cory's intake I should be north of 530/500 on my baby cam "Gentleman's Cruiser". Let me take care of the Tiger Shark stuff and I'll come done. Probably about 3 weeks.

98camaroLS1M6

iTrader: (35)

Congrats, those are nice results!!!

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Thanks everyone. Kevin, hope to see you in a few weeks.
Ryne, next H/C combo we do (L92) I will probably purchase a cam from you. I would be very interested in seeing what your cams does with some of the heads we use, along with 93 octane.

JS

iTrader: (4)

TQ looks good from 3000 on...
I like the fact that it peaks about 6200 too...

I like that u did tweek these heads,most people think u just bolt them on a go.This is NOT the case,with alittle bowl work,good valvejob and some exhaust work the L92's really make for a nice setup..

Would be interesting to see how the ET 243's do at $1300 a set vs their modded (how much do these ET L92's cost) L92's .It would just be interesting to me to see a ported LS2 intake and a set of 243's vs this setup...

Wonder which would cost more in the long run?

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

We didnt buy the heads from them, we sent them to them, because they had "issues" and I wanted to see what they had to say about them.
We've used the 243s from ETP. They would be a nice comparison to these.
I was more impressed with the gains from the intake. I expected the heads to pick up what they did.

McLeod

At what point does it cease to be a cruiser and become a rocket?

mike c.

iTrader: (1)

Now,take that 486hp to vector motorsports mustang dyno and watch it go back to 460hp. Nice improvement on re-working the heads and intake. I would have my intake done,but I hear fast has an Intake comming out sometime this year.

Frost

iTrader: (45)

Over 700rwhp...


Nice gains Ed; that intake was really a suprise, I would have predicted lower!

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

Thanks Steve. Yeah, the intake def impressed me. Got a couple sold to customers just based on these results.
We'll also be trying one of his LS7 intakes. Hope to post results on that one in the next month or so.

eb02z06

iTrader: (18)

Hey Ed, am I seeing this corrrectly? The L92's are pulling cleanly past 6500? It's too bad you can't slap these on a certain 347-that would be on happy camper! Now that I think of it-that would a test for these L92's with no intake as a restriction!

1997bird

iTrader: (2)

Nice gains Ed, congrats!! Thanks for the detailed write up. See you at the end of the month!

WKMCD

iTrader: (2)

Ed, I got the Yella Terra Ultra-light rockers yesterday for the L92's. Very nice looking pieces. We'll have to see if they work as good as AlohaC5's did on his 383 cathedral motor.

66deuce

iTrader: (1)

what are the specs of the cam?good numbers,by the way...

Beaflag VonRathburg

iTrader: (176)

I'd also be interested in some rough cam specs if you don't feal like divulging the whole schmeel. I noticed that they pulled pretty well up top too. I might just pick up a set of L92 castings to mess around with. I've got a few ideas I've been thinking about doing with them.

s346k

iTrader: (4)

put a carb intake on the L92s and 7,000 rpm is not a problem. they're lazy heads with hardly anything to offer below 4,500 rpm. they are a great head for the money - even better if you plan on using a carbed intake, 260 dur cam and 5000 stall.