317s vs l92s
Thread Starter
Teching In
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
317s vs l92s This past year I ran a stock lq4 with exception of head gaskets and studs. The engine has 317 heads on it and I've heard nothing but good things about these heads. The motor performed awesome on e85 and 20 lbs of boost with an a2w I managed a 6.15@114 in the 1/8 and 9.63@143 in the 1/4. I've got the car apart doing various suspension/chassis upgrades and came across a deal I couldn't pass on an 08 van. It has the ly6 with l92 heads. My first thoughts were to swap the square ports and truck intake on to my motor. But after talking with a few people, everyone seems to be against putting the square ports on my motor and thinks I should sell them and spend that money else where due to the fact that I won't see much gains out of the l92s from the 317s with my boosted application. So what do you guys think? Should I sell the square ports or run them? I can't seem to make up my mind
You should really get a new cam if you swap heads. I was always under the impression the square port was a better higher flowing design. I have no first hand experience with the 317's and boost though.
This was just covered a few days ago.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-in...317-s-why.html
If you're wanting to go with a JFR cam, most of his are designed around the heads you already have. Just cam swap it and put the money into something else.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-in...317-s-why.html
If you're wanting to go with a JFR cam, most of his are designed around the heads you already have. Just cam swap it and put the money into something else.
9 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (17)
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 9
From: Colorado Springs, Co/ Central, Ca
It's a tough call. The 317's have small light valves that are easy to control under boost, and the small ports offer high velocity for a balance of good NA tq and still respond well to boost. The L92 heads offer a lot more airflow and port volume, at the expense of low speed velocity, and heavy valves that need ~180 lbs of spring pressure to control effectively at high RPM and boost. The L92's are going to lose a little response and spool but if cam and setup are right they will make more power on lower psi than an unported 317. In the end tho the 317 head is thicker and could hold more cyl psi. If it were mi I would prob stick with the 317's and do a little work to them, unless planning on going 400+ CI. The L92's really start to come alive on the larger engines.
I can say that my L92's preform quite well on my 370. I'm not really "out of boost" much so i don't notice a lack of N/A torque. I have a twin setup behind a glide so lag is virtually nonexistent for me. Stock 48 is right, You probably wont notice much of a difference.
Trending Topics
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
The 317's have small light valves that are easy to control under boost................... The L92 heads offer a lot more airflow and port volume, at the expense of low speed velocity, and heavy valves that need ~180 lbs of spring pressure to control effectively at high RPM and boost
9 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (17)
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 9
From: Colorado Springs, Co/ Central, Ca
Yes. It's not a crazy amount but the boost can try to blow the valve open to a point. The larger the intake valve the more surface area you have, and normally a large valve is heavier. Same can go with exh of back psi is high.
That is interesting. I have never seen this. I cannot even imagine a scenario where this would happen although i have heard people say it many times. It can't happen on the power stroke because there is more pressure in the cylinder than in the intake or exhaust, on the intake stroke, by the time the valve closes, there should be just as much pressure in the cylinder as in the intake tract, on the exhaust stroke there is more pressure in the cylinder the whole time until maybe the very end if any scavenging is happening. I just don't see it.
9 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (17)
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 9
From: Colorado Springs, Co/ Central, Ca
Well I typed out a big long explanation and my piece of **** **** computer erased it all while I was trying to post it lol..... I'm thinking positive psi in the intake causes valve to bounce on the seat. I've had my mild 218/.570 cam and pac 1218 single springs in NA 2'' truck valve 6.0l make pk power at 5800~6200 then slowly descend after but rev clean to 7K rpm before valve float... Same engine with 20 psi of boost would float valves hard at 64~6500 RPM. Add .060'' of shim under the intake and .030'' under exh springs bring seat psi to 150~155 and it would rev to 6700 RPM then float hard. Added a set of BTR dual springs with ti retainers set up at 175/380 and it would rev clean to 7200RPM + @23psi with zero float.
