Game changer - LT1 heads on LS block
Quote:
"the LS retrofit LT heads we're making are PORT injection and the injector bungs are added to the HEAD.
Somehow, the guy posting incorrectly said that these retrofit heads are direct injection, and the conversation went into how it requires ECU and high pressure pumps, etc...not the case."
Quote:
"the LS retrofit LT heads we're making are PORT injection and the injector bungs are added to the HEAD.
Somehow, the guy posting incorrectly said that these retrofit heads are direct injection, and the conversation went into how it requires ECU and high pressure pumps, etc...not the case."
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Link
It doesn't matter. Like a dyno, a Flowbench is a tool best used for ABA testing. Lingenfelter tested both heads on their bench and posted the difference to compare. Of course other benchs are going to read different numbers, that wasn't the point. The point was a comparison between the two heads, which should be repeated on other benchs.
Now if you were going to keep the DI and run some sort of high compression setup then I guess it makes sense, but if you're going to delete the DI then what's the point?
Not only that, but it doesn't seem like the LT1 head is that impressive to begin with. From the article, it flows a measily 285cfm @ .600 lift (which is less than a ported 243 head on a much smaller bore). It requires taking the intake runner up to a whopping 312cc to get 331cfm @ .600 lift. Seems very inneficient for the trouble it would take to retrofit it. If this was a monster head that flowed 400cfm untouched I guess it would be worth all the trouble, but you're putting in so much work for a head that flows less than ancient 243s with a little work.
It doesn't matter. Like a dyno, a Flowbench is a tool best used for ABA testing. Lingenfelter tested both heads on their bench and posted the difference to compare. Of course other benchs are going to read different numbers, that wasn't the point. The point was a comparison between the two heads, which should be repeated on other benchs.
Hey look, you can believe whatever you want I dont care. I will refrain from the Lingenfelter coolaid till i see a few more "stock" flow numbers even remotely close, they were 20+ cfm higher than TSP take that as you may.
Last edited by TT427; Nov 22, 2014 at 07:15 AM.
Hey look, you can believe whatever you want I dont care. I will refrain from the Lingenfelter coolaid till i see a few more "stock" flow numbers even remotely close, they were 20+ cfm higher than TSP take that as you may.
"Step one was, of course, establishing a firm baseline for GM’s new 12.5/12-degree head.
As you can see from the first two graphs (courtesy of Lingenfelter Performance)..."
Give it some time and I'm sure better head designs will appear even from the factory. Hell, just look at the heads that came on the LS1 in 1997 versus what was being offered in five years later on the LS6, and six years after that on the LS3.







