How much spray and how much whp
Yep and plan on needing a new trans soon. That stage 2 4L60 isn't going to last long with roughly 550-600 hp being put through it and using a cheap converter.
You said you wanna stay with stock parts and reuse parts because you're starting a new build. If you keep cheaping out you're gonna be starting two new builds instead of one.
You can have a well built motor with the reused parts etc, that's fine, and it can handle the 150 shot too. But don't cut corners on the build to build something else, you'll just end up right back here building it again. A high end expensive torque converter is good in many ways. Its more efficient and puts more of your power to the tires and doesn't lose it all in slip. There's other benefits too. I used to have a bolt on car that would tear up big cam cars that ran cheap converters. Pissed them off on a regular basis.
You said you wanna stay with stock parts and reuse parts because you're starting a new build. If you keep cheaping out you're gonna be starting two new builds instead of one.
You can have a well built motor with the reused parts etc, that's fine, and it can handle the 150 shot too. But don't cut corners on the build to build something else, you'll just end up right back here building it again. A high end expensive torque converter is good in many ways. Its more efficient and puts more of your power to the tires and doesn't lose it all in slip. There's other benefits too. I used to have a bolt on car that would tear up big cam cars that ran cheap converters. Pissed them off on a regular basis.
Thread Starter
Teching In
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Yep and plan on needing a new trans soon. That stage 2 4L60 isn't going to last long with roughly 550-600 hp being put through it and using a cheap converter.
You said you wanna stay with stock parts and reuse parts because you're starting a new build. If you keep cheaping out you're gonna be starting two new builds instead of one.
You can have a well built motor with the reused parts etc, that's fine, and it can handle the 150 shot too. But don't cut corners on the build to build something else, you'll just end up right back here building it again. A high end expensive torque converter is good in many ways. Its more efficient and puts more of your power to the tires and doesn't lose it all in slip. There's other benefits too. I used to have a bolt on car that would tear up big cam cars that ran cheap converters. Pissed them off on a regular basis.
You said you wanna stay with stock parts and reuse parts because you're starting a new build. If you keep cheaping out you're gonna be starting two new builds instead of one.
You can have a well built motor with the reused parts etc, that's fine, and it can handle the 150 shot too. But don't cut corners on the build to build something else, you'll just end up right back here building it again. A high end expensive torque converter is good in many ways. Its more efficient and puts more of your power to the tires and doesn't lose it all in slip. There's other benefits too. I used to have a bolt on car that would tear up big cam cars that ran cheap converters. Pissed them off on a regular basis.
well the only thing im reusing is the rods, everything else on my block is brand new but you actually think a 150 can actually put my car around 550 to the tires? im not getting nitrous till spring or whenever this shortage bullshit stops and most likely will get a yank ss soon
The LS1 makes about 400 flywheel horse power stock if you do a cam etc you're easily approaching 450- 500+ if you do heads etc.. then a 150 on top of that is adding 150. So if you build it well it will be well over 600 flywheel horsepower. You'll need a bad *** built 4L60 to handle that.
What it makes to the tires depends on a lot of things that I can't guess about your setup.
A 5.3 on an engine dyno makes 353. There's no way an LS1 makes less than a damn 5.3 truck motor.
5.3 engine dyno
Being such a diminutive factory cam, it is not surprising that power fell off so rapidly past 5,500 rpm. Run on the high-mileage 5.3L, the stock 5.3L cam produced peak numbers of 353 hp at 5,200 rpm and 384 lb-ft of torque at 4,300 rpm
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/ls-cam-test-comparison/
LS1 engine dyno
https://ls1tech.com/forums/general-l...-3-ft-lbs.html
http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/0701gm-ls1-dyno-tech/
In the baseline dyno run, the stock LS1 surprised everyone by churning out a whopping 400.4 hp at 5,600 and 411.3 ft-lbs of torque at 4,800 rpm. Average power and torque (from 3,000-5,800 rpm) was 330.7 and 394.8, respectively. Reflecting back on the pull, Jason Mangum stated, "The baseline was about 10 percent higher than I anticipated since the average rear wheel horsepower of a 2000-02 F-body is normally in the 305-315 range. If we factor in drivetrain losses of 10 to 15 percent depending on transmission types, theoretically the factory SAE net crankshaft rating could range from 335 to 362 hp. The difference in what we found on the dyno versus our expectations must be attributed to the lower overall parasitic drag from the electric water pump and the lack of accessory drive belts.
That's rated and has never been accurate since the beginning of time
Okay.... With electric water pump and headers they make about 400. Most of our cars have headers. So with accessories on it maybe it makes 380
A 5.3 on an engine dyno makes 353. There's no way an LS1 makes less than a damn 5.3 truck motor.
5.3 engine dyno
Being such a diminutive factory cam, it is not surprising that power fell off so rapidly past 5,500 rpm. Run on the high-mileage 5.3L, the stock 5.3L cam produced peak numbers of 353 hp at 5,200 rpm and 384 lb-ft of torque at 4,300 rpm
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/ls-cam-test-comparison/
LS1 engine dyno
https://ls1tech.com/forums/general-l...-3-ft-lbs.html
http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/0701gm-ls1-dyno-tech/
In the baseline dyno run, the stock LS1 surprised everyone by churning out a whopping 400.4 hp at 5,600 and 411.3 ft-lbs of torque at 4,800 rpm. Average power and torque (from 3,000-5,800 rpm) was 330.7 and 394.8, respectively. Reflecting back on the pull, Jason Mangum stated, "The baseline was about 10 percent higher than I anticipated since the average rear wheel horsepower of a 2000-02 F-body is normally in the 305-315 range. If we factor in drivetrain losses of 10 to 15 percent depending on transmission types, theoretically the factory SAE net crankshaft rating could range from 335 to 362 hp. The difference in what we found on the dyno versus our expectations must be attributed to the lower overall parasitic drag from the electric water pump and the lack of accessory drive belts. Another point to consider is that when GM eliminated the EGR on the 2001 F-body and went with the LS6 intake, their marketing suggested that the engine had better mid-range, even with the lower overall duration and lift of the '01-02 camshaft (197/202 at .050 and .467/.479 on a 116 LSA). The hotter '98-00 cam, in combination with the overall better flowing LS6 intake, probably picked up 10-15 horsepower by themselves, or roughly equivalent to what we see when a '98-00 car replaces the LS1 intake with an LS6. No matter how you analyze it, the stock LS1 is a potent engine with outstanding power and torque for the available head flow and camshaft." Magic Stick Time
Okay.... With electric water pump and headers they make about 400. Most of our cars have headers. So with accessories on it maybe it makes 380
A 5.3 on an engine dyno makes 353. There's no way an LS1 makes less than a damn 5.3 truck motor.
5.3 engine dyno
Being such a diminutive factory cam, it is not surprising that power fell off so rapidly past 5,500 rpm. Run on the high-mileage 5.3L, the stock 5.3L cam produced peak numbers of 353 hp at 5,200 rpm and 384 lb-ft of torque at 4,300 rpm
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/ls-cam-test-comparison/
LS1 engine dyno
https://ls1tech.com/forums/general-l...-3-ft-lbs.html
http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/0701gm-ls1-dyno-tech/
In the baseline dyno run, the stock LS1 surprised everyone by churning out a whopping 400.4 hp at 5,600 and 411.3 ft-lbs of torque at 4,800 rpm. Average power and torque (from 3,000-5,800 rpm) was 330.7 and 394.8, respectively. Reflecting back on the pull, Jason Mangum stated, "The baseline was about 10 percent higher than I anticipated since the average rear wheel horsepower of a 2000-02 F-body is normally in the 305-315 range. If we factor in drivetrain losses of 10 to 15 percent depending on transmission types, theoretically the factory SAE net crankshaft rating could range from 335 to 362 hp. The difference in what we found on the dyno versus our expectations must be attributed to the lower overall parasitic drag from the electric water pump and the lack of accessory drive belts. Another point to consider is that when GM eliminated the EGR on the 2001 F-body and went with the LS6 intake, their marketing suggested that the engine had better mid-range, even with the lower overall duration and lift of the '01-02 camshaft (197/202 at .050 and .467/.479 on a 116 LSA). The hotter '98-00 cam, in combination with the overall better flowing LS6 intake, probably picked up 10-15 horsepower by themselves, or roughly equivalent to what we see when a '98-00 car replaces the LS1 intake with an LS6. No matter how you analyze it, the stock LS1 is a potent engine with outstanding power and torque for the available head flow and camshaft." Magic Stick Time
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 And the dude surely has headers like they did on the dyno
So how much power do you think having the belt on it drops the output? With a stock water pump.
My point is I said he'd be at about 550 with a 150 shot at the flywheel easily, unless it's a junk build and stock long block. And a lot of N20 ratings are at the tires too.... So with headers and accessories the dude will have about 370 to split hairs with you. then 150 shot that's 520. If he has a cam, heads or intake the power will go up at a minimum 50 up to say 130 if he has top flight ****. Possibly higher depending how top flight. The guys getting the most out of an LS1 get near or at 500 rwhp vs 300 stock rwhp. lets split hairs and say he increased it in the middle to 400 rwhp and then adds a 150. That's 550 at the tires and 600+ at the crank.
EDIT: he's got a stage 4 BTR cam
well the only thing im reusing is the rods, everything else on my block is brand new but you actually think a 150 can actually put my car around 550 to the tires? im not getting nitrous till spring or whenever this shortage bullshit stops and most likely will get a yank ss soon
If you spun a rod bearing you probably have the rev limiter too high. What are you spinning it to? Keep it below 7. 6800-6900 works well on never opened motors. Yours will depend on how good they did the work. A set of rod bolts would go a long way for your build and keep you safe at higher rpm from toasting another rod bearing. But the machine shop needs to check big end roundness if you add bolts. Supposedly you can add katech bolts though and not resize or worry. But I would have them checked regardless.
Going back over the articles this is pretty accurate. But I would like to see a back to back with accessories vs none. I have a hard time seeing accessories pull down so much power. But i've never seen testing on it so I may be way off.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 22,295
Likes: 3,617
From: Central Cal.
The way power is rated by the factory is different than the way we do on the dyno. Present day, factory rating is SAE with ALL accessories. The Gen III 5.3's were rated at 285-295HP. The LS1, as said was 350-400HP. That is an apples to apples comparison.
The test you refer to was with dyno headers and a Holley management system, so that 5.3 ran a bit "freer" than a factory one would, which is why 353HP resulted. An LS1 at 401HP sounds right if tested by the same method as the LM7 5.3
The test you refer to was with dyno headers and a Holley management system, so that 5.3 ran a bit "freer" than a factory one would, which is why 353HP resulted. An LS1 at 401HP sounds right if tested by the same method as the LM7 5.3
Good tune and AFR's in the 11.5-12.0 range at WOT on the spray will be safe for a 150 all day long. Read your plugs, depending on a lot of variables you may need a plug with an 8 heat range. I kick a 200 shot to my lq4 now, bottom end is stock. No signs of problems but I FREQUENTLY change plugs and oil to monitor.