budget turbo motor: LQ4/LQ9 or L92
09-22-2009, 10:48 PM
#1
budget turbo motor: LQ4/LQ9 or L92 hey, basically im trying to figure out what motor is the easiest to swap parts over from my broken ls1, i want to keep my cam and heads. i think i will buy new rods and pistons.... everything else, im just swapping straight over.
im wondering if i should look for an L92 (6.2L) or an LQ motor (6.0L). id prefer the bigger displacement, but i dont know if i have to run different heads and intake (which isnt in the budget right now)
and help is appreciated!
oh yeah this is for a street car, 76mm front turbo.
also, does your low compression motor lose some low end power? if so, id rather run a little higher compression with less boost. id be happy with a good 600rwhp
im wondering if i should look for an L92 (6.2L) or an LQ motor (6.0L). id prefer the bigger displacement, but i dont know if i have to run different heads and intake (which isnt in the budget right now)
and help is appreciated!
oh yeah this is for a street car, 76mm front turbo.
also, does your low compression motor lose some low end power? if so, id rather run a little higher compression with less boost. id be happy with a good 600rwhp
09-22-2009, 11:41 PM
#3
Most people use the LQ4 for budget engine build and use the cylinder heads that come on them due to the larger combustion chambers to help lower compression. I just did a full build on a LQ4 that I got from a local salvage yard. I run a rear mount turbo. I swapped all the parts off of the stock LS1 to complete the LQ4 long block. A few months ago when I was looking the L92's were a lot harder to find and where way more money. I run a 9.5:1 comp ratio and don't feel that I lost anything from the stock LS1. I ran the car N\A for 500 miles while I broke it in. Hope this helps.
09-22-2009, 11:48 PM
#4
Most people use the LQ4 for budget engine build and use the cylinder heads that come on them due to the larger combustion chambers to help lower compression. I just did a full build on a LQ4 that I got from a local salvage yard. I run a rear mount turbo. I swapped all the parts off of the stock LS1 to complete the LQ4 long block. A few months ago when I was looking the L92's were a lot harder to find and where way more money. I run a 9.5:1 comp ratio and don't feel that I lost anything from the stock LS1. I ran the car N\A for 500 miles while I broke it in. Hope this helps.
the only thing im worried about is losing some low end with it being heavier and having low compression. my boost comes in around 3k rpms...
09-23-2009, 01:19 AM
#5
You did say budget or I would tell you to buy an LS7. It is only about 150lbs heavier. I doubt you would even notice the weight or the lower compression. You may make up for some of that with the little extra displacement and having the LS6 style heads that come with the LQ4. I was also worried when I lowered the compression but felt my built LQ4 was way better. What are you going to use for a cam?
Trending Topics
09-23-2009, 06:39 AM
#9
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Greenville, Raleigh NC
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand the compression problem. You said in the original post that you were thinking of doing rods and pistons right. .. Order the forged slugs to give you the compression you want with the cc head you already have.
and I agree, I plan to keep the ls1 block but if it takes a dump its iron lq4 all the way for me.
and I agree, I plan to keep the ls1 block but if it takes a dump its iron lq4 all the way for me.
09-23-2009, 02:20 PM
#10
I don't understand the compression problem. You said in the original post that you were thinking of doing rods and pistons right. .. Order the forged slugs to give you the compression you want with the cc head you already have.
and I agree, I plan to keep the ls1 block but if it takes a dump its iron lq4 all the way for me.
and I agree, I plan to keep the ls1 block but if it takes a dump its iron lq4 all the way for me.
09-24-2009, 01:24 PM
#11
You did say budget or I would tell you to buy an LS7. It is only about 150lbs heavier. I doubt you would even notice the weight or the lower compression. You may make up for some of that with the little extra displacement and having the LS6 style heads that come with the LQ4. I was also worried when I lowered the compression but felt my built LQ4 was way better. What are you going to use for a cam?
No reason not to use an L92 if it's in the budget. You figure a new LQ4/LQ9 is going to cost $750 and weigh almost 100 lbs more than a new L92 at about $1100. You can't take 100 lbs off the nose for less than $2k. It's worth it if you can swing it IMO. I went iron block again because I found a decent core for $200. Otherwise I would have gone 6.2L all the way.
09-24-2009, 01:30 PM
#12
Do not reuse the LS1 timing chain. Buy a new stock LS2 timing chain set or get a Cloyes Hexadjust. Make sure you loctite the cam bolts.
09-24-2009, 04:32 PM
#13
They only lose power down low off boost. A front mount 76mm turbo on a 408 should be instaspool. Don't worry about it. As 98Camarod stated, the additional grunt from the extra 50+ cubes will make more torque than you will lose from dropping a point of compression.
Do not reuse the LS1 timing chain. Buy a new stock LS2 timing chain set or get a Cloyes Hexadjust. Make sure you loctite the cam bolts.
Do not reuse the LS1 timing chain. Buy a new stock LS2 timing chain set or get a Cloyes Hexadjust. Make sure you loctite the cam bolts.
09-24-2009, 11:39 PM
#17
1999 and 2000 blocks have cast iron cylinder heads and a built in offset on rear of the crank. I know the auto guys have to use some kind of special spacer to get it to work for a 4L60E trans. I would assume that a flywheel would have the same issue. I just did a 2002 LQ4 block and everything from my 2002 LS1 I needed swapped over.
09-25-2009, 08:15 AM
#18
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Indy
Posts: 4,220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1999 and 2000 blocks have cast iron cylinder heads and a built in offset on rear of the crank. I know the auto guys have to use some kind of special spacer to get it to work for a 4L60E trans. I would assume that a flywheel would have the same issue. I just did a 2002 LQ4 block and everything from my 2002 LS1 I needed swapped over.
09-25-2009, 11:33 AM
#19
11 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Encinal/Kingsville, Texas
Posts: 840
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think you are talking about the iron LSX not the aluminum LS7 which weighs in about the same as all the other aluminum motors.
No reason not to use an L92 if it's in the budget. You figure a new LQ4/LQ9 is going to cost $750 and weigh almost 100 lbs more than a new L92 at about $1100. You can't take 100 lbs off the nose for less than $2k. It's worth it if you can swing it IMO. I went iron block again because I found a decent core for $200. Otherwise I would have gone 6.2L all the way.
No reason not to use an L92 if it's in the budget. You figure a new LQ4/LQ9 is going to cost $750 and weigh almost 100 lbs more than a new L92 at about $1100. You can't take 100 lbs off the nose for less than $2k. It's worth it if you can swing it IMO. I went iron block again because I found a decent core for $200. Otherwise I would have gone 6.2L all the way.
09-25-2009, 06:35 PM
#20
I had a small clearance issue with the stupid TCI flex plate I got so I had to grind the heads of some of the rear main cover bolts down a little to clear the converter bolts and then it worked fine. The TCI unit is nice but a lot of folks have had fitment issues even on stock LS1's. I did put the stock LS1 flexplate on the LQ4 and it fit exactly the same as it did on the LS1. Measured everything with digital calipers and the LS1 and the LQ4 matched within a few thousands. Something with the way TCI welds the torq converter mounting point bosses must have been off. They were not much help when I called them either.