Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Bore vs. Stroke with a LS1 ???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-17-2003, 05:45 PM
  #1  
Humanitarian
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
Joe "Preachers Sheets" DIESO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: N/A
Posts: 6,466
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Question 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.
Old 12-17-2003, 06:07 PM
  #2  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (24)
 
SPANKY LS1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,489
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

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
Old 12-17-2003, 06:19 PM
  #3  
LS1Tech Sponsor
iTrader: (12)
 
Slowhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bridgewater,Ma
Posts: 14,865
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts

Default

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
Old 12-17-2003, 06:24 PM
  #4  
Humanitarian
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
Joe "Preachers Sheets" DIESO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: N/A
Posts: 6,466
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

I didn't want to keep e-mailing you and harassing you. I've been asking you questions all day.
Old 12-17-2003, 08:01 PM
  #5  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (6)
 
2001CamaroGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ USA
Posts: 4,766
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

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....
Old 12-18-2003, 12:57 PM
  #6  
z98
TECH Fanatic
 
z98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

a 2 ft/lb motor will not make 2000hp
It could! You only need to make sure it revs to 10 million RPM, give or take a few hundred thousand.




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:41 AM.