What's so great about LSX engines?
06-20-2009, 01:28 AM
#23
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 1,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its lighter, physically smaller, and flows way better.
The 4V mod motors are 200-300lbs heavier than the LSx's and are the size of a small barn.
To me the appeal is the power to weight (390lbs, 350hp/375ft.lbs) and physical size. Physically the LS1 is smaller than most V6s, and most other V8s. And this is a reason you see so many small cars with LSx's, most other engines wont even fit.
Attached you can see the difference between a Porsche flat 6 and an LS1, an LS1 and a rotory, an LS1 and a Porsche I4, and an LS1 and a RB26.
The 4V mod motors are 200-300lbs heavier than the LSx's and are the size of a small barn.
To me the appeal is the power to weight (390lbs, 350hp/375ft.lbs) and physical size. Physically the LS1 is smaller than most V6s, and most other V8s. And this is a reason you see so many small cars with LSx's, most other engines wont even fit.
Attached you can see the difference between a Porsche flat 6 and an LS1, an LS1 and a rotory, an LS1 and a Porsche I4, and an LS1 and a RB26.
x1000
06-20-2009, 02:37 AM
#25
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have a few buddies who run 5.0s at the track. and they know its tough to beat LSx motors. but stock for stock, they all admit head flow on an LS will demolish a ford. NA ofcourse.
06-20-2009, 08:00 AM
#26
Teching In
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Okinawa Japan
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Ford 2V heads are HORRIBLE though.
06-20-2009, 10:46 AM
#27
TECH Resident
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Faribault, MN
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PI heads on the 99+ 4.6Ls are very good flowing heads to say the least. I would argue that as far as stock equipment they are a little bit better than our heads.
But one of my main arguments as to why the LS1 is better than the 4.6 is pure simplicity. Ford has used every DOHC/3 valve/4 valve/PI head combination in the book for the 4.6 and the simple fact is that our 2 valve single cam pushrod NA engine absolutely destroys any NA 4.6 that comes our way. Cam/head swaps for the 99+ Mustang are pretty spendy compared to our cars and don't yield as good of results. There's that timeless classic...
Must Use Supercharger/Turbo Against N/A GM
But one of my main arguments as to why the LS1 is better than the 4.6 is pure simplicity. Ford has used every DOHC/3 valve/4 valve/PI head combination in the book for the 4.6 and the simple fact is that our 2 valve single cam pushrod NA engine absolutely destroys any NA 4.6 that comes our way. Cam/head swaps for the 99+ Mustang are pretty spendy compared to our cars and don't yield as good of results. There's that timeless classic...
Must Use Supercharger/Turbo Against N/A GM
06-20-2009, 10:47 AM
#28
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Z28usmc-What about the 3v configuration? How do they stack up? Or is that what is in your Mach? I know up untill 05 the GT was 2v and than it became 3v. But I thought the Mach1 was possibly a 4v. Is it a different heads setup than what is on the Cobras of 03/04?
Last edited by oddwraith; 06-20-2009 at 10:54 AM.
06-20-2009, 10:56 AM
#29
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PI heads on the 99+ 4.6Ls are very good flowing heads to say the least. I would argue that as far as stock equipment they are a little bit better than our heads.
But one of my main arguments as to why the LS1 is better than the 4.6 is pure simplicity. Ford has used every DOHC/3 valve/4 valve/PI head combination in the book for the 4.6 and the simple fact is that our 2 valve single cam pushrod NA engine absolutely destroys any NA 4.6 that comes our way. Cam/head swaps for the 99+ Mustang are pretty spendy compared to our cars and don't yield as good of results. There's that timeless classic...
Must Use Supercharger/Turbo Against N/A GM
But one of my main arguments as to why the LS1 is better than the 4.6 is pure simplicity. Ford has used every DOHC/3 valve/4 valve/PI head combination in the book for the 4.6 and the simple fact is that our 2 valve single cam pushrod NA engine absolutely destroys any NA 4.6 that comes our way. Cam/head swaps for the 99+ Mustang are pretty spendy compared to our cars and don't yield as good of results. There's that timeless classic...
Must Use Supercharger/Turbo Against N/A GM
06-20-2009, 11:07 AM
#30
Its lightweight, its efficient, it handles good amounts of power, and can be modded to make ungodly power.
Ive seen a few cars making well over 600rwhp on the stock shortblock(other than the cam ofcourse). My car will be close to 700rwhp on nitrous and it uses a stock crank.
Ive seen a few cars making well over 600rwhp on the stock shortblock(other than the cam ofcourse). My car will be close to 700rwhp on nitrous and it uses a stock crank.
06-20-2009, 05:26 PM
#33
TECH Enthusiast
06-20-2009, 05:29 PM
#34
Teching In
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Okinawa Japan
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course the S197 has the same problem the new Challenger/Charger and the new Camaro have- they are PIG heavy. That's why you see such poor numbers @ the track for so many GT drivers- (besides needing the ever so difficult to find "driver mod") is the wt. There have been stock Mach1's and 99/01 Cobras in the low 13's. with DR's high 12's. With absolutely perfect conditions you might see a 13.2 out of a bone stock S197 GT- and it would have to have the 3.73 gear option.
06-20-2009, 06:16 PM
#35
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Compared to the modular 2V I agree whole heartedly. But the 03/04 4V heads are some of the best flowing heads manufactured by anybody for a production car. The LS heads are VERY good as well- it's one of the many reasons I made the switch. I love my Mach but it pales in comparison to my Z28 performance wise in just about every category.
The Ford 2V heads are HORRIBLE though.
The Ford 2V heads are HORRIBLE though.
06-20-2009, 08:37 PM
#38
Teching In
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Okinawa Japan
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The modular engine has it's advantages in it's more efficient and economic from a fuel economy perspective- but the first few years were bad from a power perspective. I can never figure out why Ford never tried to make more power? Stangs have almost always given up power to bowties...yet another reason I made the switch. LOL
06-20-2009, 08:50 PM
#39
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Shillington PA
Posts: 1,775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I miss the ole foxbodies with their 5.0's......the engine was decent but supporting aftermarket is insane. Plus that's when Stangs used to be lightwright- kesera I guess.
The modular engine has it's advantages in it's more efficient and economic from a fuel economy perspective- but the first few years were bad from a power perspective. I can never figure out why Ford never tried to make more power? Stangs have almost always given up power to bowties...yet another reason I made the switch. LOL
The modular engine has it's advantages in it's more efficient and economic from a fuel economy perspective- but the first few years were bad from a power perspective. I can never figure out why Ford never tried to make more power? Stangs have almost always given up power to bowties...yet another reason I made the switch. LOL
06-20-2009, 11:11 PM
#40
Teching In
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Okinawa Japan
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My z28 on the other hand is mid teens at best- but I didn't get her for fuel economy. LOL
Last edited by Z28usmc; 06-21-2009 at 05:15 AM.