Stroking an ls1 using a 3.90 stroke crank
#1
Stroking an ls1 using a 3.90 stroke crank
I just wanted to know if there would be any problems i might run into doing this. I dropped my ls1 block off at the machine shop wednesday and i already have the crank. Does anyone think it would be wiser to use my 6.0 block for this build? i know it would yield more cubic inches but i wanted to get rid of the 80 extra pounds my car already has on the nose. (i bought the car not knowing someone swapped the ls1 out with a 5.3)
#2
So, are you asking to stroke the 5.3? If I had a 5.3 and a 6.0 and a 3.9 crank. It would def go in the 6.0. Don't know why I like the bore>stroke. There are ways to get 80lbs off the nose if you really want to.
#3
No i have an actual aluminum ls1 block that i dropped off at the machine shop. This is a daily driver, mite make a few runs at the track to see how good im doing then thats it. An hell i hate the ways my car handles na due to that iron block
#6
I would throw the crank in the LS1 and roll out I am about to build my LS1 up instead of an LQ9 block for the same reason, the weight. Where did you get a 3.90 stroke crank at? I was going to do a 383 stroker, but I dont want my stroke greater than my bore.
Trending Topics
#9
#11
The 6.0 is for sale, 350 obo.....the crank has been junked, still have the rods and pistons.....and i will be using the pistons that probe sell for this stroke crank, if not probe ill have some custom ones made by flatlander racing....thats only if i dont cheap out and use the stock stroke crank since im only aiming for 425 to the wheel....but i really want lots of torque.....will be using 243 heads, and the xer273hr cam from comp. 224/230 duration
#12
The proposed combo would be 3.905" bore with a 3.900" stroke ?????
This would make a square 374 CID which in my opinion should run real nice.
Excellant street torque. I'd probably run a 6.125" rod instead of the 6.098"
so as to not have the piston .025" in the hole as you mentioned. You want
tight quench clearance(piston to head) in the .035 to .050 range and the
stock mls gasket is .056"....so if the longer rod puts the piston above deck
by a few thousandths you'll be golden. Also if you already have the 224/230
cam then run it but I think you could actually sneak a 230-236 range cam in
this combo without sacrificing any drivability. Happy modding
This would make a square 374 CID which in my opinion should run real nice.
Excellant street torque. I'd probably run a 6.125" rod instead of the 6.098"
so as to not have the piston .025" in the hole as you mentioned. You want
tight quench clearance(piston to head) in the .035 to .050 range and the
stock mls gasket is .056"....so if the longer rod puts the piston above deck
by a few thousandths you'll be golden. Also if you already have the 224/230
cam then run it but I think you could actually sneak a 230-236 range cam in
this combo without sacrificing any drivability. Happy modding
#14
Call TSP since your pistons will have reliefs they may even suggest the V3
which I think has .648" lift to go with the 231/234 duration. Also comp rocker
trunions are a good idea with this combo. I like your bore and stroke, this
engine should really put it down.
which I think has .648" lift to go with the 231/234 duration. Also comp rocker
trunions are a good idea with this combo. I like your bore and stroke, this
engine should really put it down.