Bore vs. Stroke with a LS1 ???
Bore vs. Stroke with a LS1 ??? I'm far from an expert when it comes to car but I was reading up on the "bore vs. stroke" thing and it has me wondering. From what I read:
* Stroked motors make more torque but must be rev'd higher.
* Bored motors make more horsepower and don't need to be rev'd so high which sacrifices some torque.
Why doesn't everyone stroke their motor to achieve 422 ci instead of boring? From what I have read; you can stroke the LS1 motor without worrying about changing sleeves and since the LS1 motors can handle high rpms so well, the stroker wouldn't produce large amounts of extra strain on the bottom end.
Now when you bore the motor, the motor doesn't have to be rev'd so high but are you losing any torque that could be made for the sake of keeping the rpm's low and keeping stress off the bottom end?
What is the deciding factor between the two ... cost, reliability, drivability. Is one setup better for the street and one better for the strip?
P.S. I tried to do a search for some old posts and I can't find anything.
* Stroked motors make more torque but must be rev'd higher.
* Bored motors make more horsepower and don't need to be rev'd so high which sacrifices some torque.
Why doesn't everyone stroke their motor to achieve 422 ci instead of boring? From what I have read; you can stroke the LS1 motor without worrying about changing sleeves and since the LS1 motors can handle high rpms so well, the stroker wouldn't produce large amounts of extra strain on the bottom end.
Now when you bore the motor, the motor doesn't have to be rev'd so high but are you losing any torque that could be made for the sake of keeping the rpm's low and keeping stress off the bottom end?
What is the deciding factor between the two ... cost, reliability, drivability. Is one setup better for the street and one better for the strip?
P.S. I tried to do a search for some old posts and I can't find anything.
I *think* its the other way around. I *think* stroked motors peak lower and provide more TQ down low (GENERALLY SPEAKING), and all bore motors peak higher and give up some low end torque for maximum hp at the upper RPMs.
If you stroke a stock block, you will have a 382. A 422 is a stroked crank and a resleeved block. You cannot simply stroke a stock motor and have a 422.
My opinion (and that of others that I have seen) is that a stroked motor will be better in a street car, with the low end tq that comes with it, and an all bore motor would be better in a "race" or track situation, more peak HP.
Just my opinions, and you know what they say about opinions.
Shawn
If you stroke a stock block, you will have a 382. A 422 is a stroked crank and a resleeved block. You cannot simply stroke a stock motor and have a 422.
My opinion (and that of others that I have seen) is that a stroked motor will be better in a street car, with the low end tq that comes with it, and an all bore motor would be better in a "race" or track situation, more peak HP.
Just my opinions, and you know what they say about opinions.
Shawn 
Your killing me If you called me I could give you the info on the differences
Or this could answer it for you..Try about $10,000 to do one it your car since you'll need a clutch and rear
Originally Posted by SPANKY LS1
I *think* its the other way around. I *think* stroked motors peak lower and provide more TQ down low (GENERALLY SPEAKING), and all bore motors peak higher and give up some low end torque for maximum hp at the upper RPMs.
........remember it as:stroke = torque (lower RPM)
bore = hp (higher RPM)
now....yes hp is a number derived from torque so a 2 ft/lb motor will not make 2000hp......but for most things, the above holds true....
