Horsepower limit of the bottom end of a stock 02 LS1 engine?
#21
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Patterson, CA
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes the crank can. but not rod's and pistons. theres some procharged and turbo ls1's running pretty solid in the 600's but still even they say its a time bomb really. most build to 500's to stay reliable. atleast from reading the last 8-10 years.
#22
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good info, so from what I get the only way you can really risk your stock internals is with power adders such as turbo, supercharger, or nitrous.
A head and cam LS1 with 105 intake and throttle body should be fine on factory connecting rods...
A head and cam LS1 with 105 intake and throttle body should be fine on factory connecting rods...
#24
TECH Resident
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Patterson, CA
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah w/ power adder ur typically looking at 550+ easily, so it obviously adds more to the risk factor lol. look up katech for rod bolts. theyre stronger material while utilizing stock tension or something along those lines.
#25
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (27)
I have seen numerous stock ls1's blow. I am currently around 500 rwhp and mine is still going. now, i don't drive it much and i try to not keep it pegged for long periods of time. my personal gut feeling is that higher rpm will hurt you more so than more power. i keep the shift points at 6200 to try to keep the bottom end together.
#26
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
As others have agreed...the production shortblock has reliably dynoed 500
plus rear wheel several times (camscam and chris1313 to name a few) yet
they do have to spin them to 7200-7400 which elevates the stress loads on
the pistons (speed in ft./sec.) as well as the limits of the powdered metal rod
even if upgraded with aftermarket bolts.
Even Car Craft (IIRC) just sprayed a junkyard LQ9 w/cam and FAST intake
using a direct port fogger, like 20 degrees of timing, and 109 octane for like
750 dyno horse at I believe 6500 rpms. Again keeping the tune right AND the
rpms down helped it live. For the record it had 190,000 miles on it.
Now the reason you can safely make a bunch more power with forced induc-
tion is twofold. The rpms can stay in the 62-6400 range and they make peak
power just after top dead center (with regards to the piston location) this is
much easier on the stresses to the stock pistons and rods, whereas peak
with NA and NOS is right at the ragged edge of detonation (almost trying to
back the piston up)
A simple Borg Warner S480 on E85 can dyno 1000 flywheel (perhaps just shy
of 900 rwhp) with quality heads, the right cam, a FAST intake, and BIG injec
tors. I'm not saying this is a daily driver however there are plenty of people
on the turbo forums running high eights and low nines with combos like this
in G body or Fox chassied cars; and having decent longevity.
plus rear wheel several times (camscam and chris1313 to name a few) yet
they do have to spin them to 7200-7400 which elevates the stress loads on
the pistons (speed in ft./sec.) as well as the limits of the powdered metal rod
even if upgraded with aftermarket bolts.
Even Car Craft (IIRC) just sprayed a junkyard LQ9 w/cam and FAST intake
using a direct port fogger, like 20 degrees of timing, and 109 octane for like
750 dyno horse at I believe 6500 rpms. Again keeping the tune right AND the
rpms down helped it live. For the record it had 190,000 miles on it.
Now the reason you can safely make a bunch more power with forced induc-
tion is twofold. The rpms can stay in the 62-6400 range and they make peak
power just after top dead center (with regards to the piston location) this is
much easier on the stresses to the stock pistons and rods, whereas peak
with NA and NOS is right at the ragged edge of detonation (almost trying to
back the piston up)
A simple Borg Warner S480 on E85 can dyno 1000 flywheel (perhaps just shy
of 900 rwhp) with quality heads, the right cam, a FAST intake, and BIG injec
tors. I'm not saying this is a daily driver however there are plenty of people
on the turbo forums running high eights and low nines with combos like this
in G body or Fox chassied cars; and having decent longevity.
#27
Staging Lane
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Finleyville
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As others have agreed...the production shortblock has reliably dynoed 500
plus rear wheel several times (camscam and chris1313 to name a few) yet
they do have to spin them to 7200-7400 which elevates the stress loads on
the pistons (speed in ft./sec.) as well as the limits of the powdered metal rod
even if upgraded with aftermarket bolts.
Even Car Craft (IIRC) just sprayed a junkyard LQ9 w/cam and FAST intake
using a direct port fogger, like 20 degrees of timing, and 109 octane for like
750 dyno horse at I believe 6500 rpms. Again keeping the tune right AND the
rpms down helped it live. For the record it had 190,000 miles on it.
Now the reason you can safely make a bunch more power with forced induc-
tion is twofold. The rpms can stay in the 62-6400 range and they make peak
power just after top dead center (with regards to the piston location) this is
much easier on the stresses to the stock pistons and rods, whereas peak
with NA and NOS is right at the ragged edge of detonation (almost trying to
back the piston up)
A simple Borg Warner S480 on E85 can dyno 1000 flywheel (perhaps just shy
of 900 rwhp) with quality heads, the right cam, a FAST intake, and BIG injec
tors. I'm not saying this is a daily driver however there are plenty of people
on the turbo forums running high eights and low nines with combos like this
in G body or Fox chassied cars; and having decent longevity.
plus rear wheel several times (camscam and chris1313 to name a few) yet
they do have to spin them to 7200-7400 which elevates the stress loads on
the pistons (speed in ft./sec.) as well as the limits of the powdered metal rod
even if upgraded with aftermarket bolts.
Even Car Craft (IIRC) just sprayed a junkyard LQ9 w/cam and FAST intake
using a direct port fogger, like 20 degrees of timing, and 109 octane for like
750 dyno horse at I believe 6500 rpms. Again keeping the tune right AND the
rpms down helped it live. For the record it had 190,000 miles on it.
Now the reason you can safely make a bunch more power with forced induc-
tion is twofold. The rpms can stay in the 62-6400 range and they make peak
power just after top dead center (with regards to the piston location) this is
much easier on the stresses to the stock pistons and rods, whereas peak
with NA and NOS is right at the ragged edge of detonation (almost trying to
back the piston up)
A simple Borg Warner S480 on E85 can dyno 1000 flywheel (perhaps just shy
of 900 rwhp) with quality heads, the right cam, a FAST intake, and BIG injec
tors. I'm not saying this is a daily driver however there are plenty of people
on the turbo forums running high eights and low nines with combos like this
in G body or Fox chassied cars; and having decent longevity.
#28
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
I talked to a machinest last year about this. Man has been building gen IIIs since they came out. He told me once close to 500whp your on borrowed time because of the rods. I firmly believe it. A lot of depending factors on this tho. Tuner,engines condition before any upgrades, how it's driven etc. I can't believe there are people on here saying there safe to 700-900whp. You have got to be kidding me. obviously these are folks that have assembled more than 1000 engines.
I only answered The OPs question. Please don't assume that I'm advocating
using stock parts for mega-horse builds. Some people are cheap and some
just don't give a F#CK.........case in point
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/h...g_bang_theory/
#30
Staging Lane
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Finleyville
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FIXED 4YA
I only answered The OPs question. Please don't assume that I'm advocating
using stock parts for mega-horse builds. Some people are cheap and some
just don't give a F#CK.........case in point
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/h...g_bang_theory/
I only answered The OPs question. Please don't assume that I'm advocating
using stock parts for mega-horse builds. Some people are cheap and some
just don't give a F#CK.........case in point
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/h...g_bang_theory/
#31
Launching!
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
friend of mine has a completly stock bottem end ls2 pushing 811whp to the tire through a th400
hes now upgraded injectors (since he maxed out his old 160lb's) and is running 8.7's in the 1/4
he beats the hell out of it.
he keeps trying to blow it up seeing as he has a complete forged rotating assembly sitting on the bench, but cant.
hot rod mag, did a article on a 150k mile twin turbo 4.8 truck motor that help up 60 dyno pulls at over 1000hp.
heres the link
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/h...g_bang_theory/
hes now upgraded injectors (since he maxed out his old 160lb's) and is running 8.7's in the 1/4
he beats the hell out of it.
he keeps trying to blow it up seeing as he has a complete forged rotating assembly sitting on the bench, but cant.
hot rod mag, did a article on a 150k mile twin turbo 4.8 truck motor that help up 60 dyno pulls at over 1000hp.
heres the link
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/h...g_bang_theory/
#32
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
I can only imagine that the BTUs of heat kicking the slugs of your mill @ 600
rearwheel or 700 crank was enough to close the factory .018" ring endgap
which then pops the dense part of the cast flattop off and all hell breaks
loose then. If you manage to shut her down quick enough and the piston is
still connected to the rod the area usually broken is right near the exhaust
valve section of the slug (highest heat temperature)....sorry to hear this
The silicon content of hypereutectic pistons is so high that it tries to
reject the cumbustion heat back into the chamber to create more TQ
and consecuently causes the top portion of the piston to run hotter
which closes the ring end-gap.
rearwheel or 700 crank was enough to close the factory .018" ring endgap
which then pops the dense part of the cast flattop off and all hell breaks
loose then. If you manage to shut her down quick enough and the piston is
still connected to the rod the area usually broken is right near the exhaust
valve section of the slug (highest heat temperature)....sorry to hear this
The silicon content of hypereutectic pistons is so high that it tries to
reject the cumbustion heat back into the chamber to create more TQ
and consecuently causes the top portion of the piston to run hotter
which closes the ring end-gap.
Last edited by A.R. Shale Targa; 09-13-2012 at 08:12 PM.
#33
Staging Lane
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there is no one number, but over 500 and things do tend to break. conservative is nice - you get to actually drive the thing and not sit in the garage all the time doing repairs
#34
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Mesa,az
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FIXED 4YA
I only answered The OPs question. Please don't assume that I'm advocating
using stock parts for mega-horse builds. Some people are cheap and some
just don't give a F#CK.........case in point
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/h...g_bang_theory/
I only answered The OPs question. Please don't assume that I'm advocating
using stock parts for mega-horse builds. Some people are cheap and some
just don't give a F#CK.........case in point
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/h...g_bang_theory/
#35
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Those blocks also have crazy thick cylinder walls and amazing I or H beam Connecting rods with full floating wrist pins... Big difference from what the 5.7 LS has. They didn't mention this in the article. Here are the rods that came out of my 5.3 liter.. compared to some LS6 rods and pistons. The thicker rods are from the 5.3.
#36
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's sounding more to me like the limiting factor on rods and pistons is the maximum torque they are exposed to...
This would explain why I have always seen engines go in the meat of their torque band and not 1000 or less rpms before hitting their rev limit.
I am betting the reliable horsepower limit is much higher with a centrifugal supercharger vs a turbo or positive displacement blower. Simply because your not exposing the engine to longer durations of increased torque...
For example, they may both reach the same peak horsepower, but one (turbo) is making alot more peak torque earlier on...
This would explain why I have always seen engines go in the meat of their torque band and not 1000 or less rpms before hitting their rev limit.
I am betting the reliable horsepower limit is much higher with a centrifugal supercharger vs a turbo or positive displacement blower. Simply because your not exposing the engine to longer durations of increased torque...
For example, they may both reach the same peak horsepower, but one (turbo) is making alot more peak torque earlier on...
#38
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
Then as boost escalates the amount of horsepower needed to turn the blower
increases which causes belt slip...more ribs on the belt or a cogged design
helps this but then an extreme tensioner is needed putting added stress on
the crank snout which then becomes a weak link.....every engine combo has
it's pros and cons....compromises
#39
12 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 5.0
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The blower drive hub needs the crank to be keyed...sometimes double keyed
Then as boost escalates the amount of horsepower needed to turn the blower
increases which causes belt slip...more ribs on the belt or a cogged design
helps this but then an extreme tensioner is needed putting added stress on
the crank snout which then becomes a weak link.....every engine combo has
it's pros and cons....compromises
Then as boost escalates the amount of horsepower needed to turn the blower
increases which causes belt slip...more ribs on the belt or a cogged design
helps this but then an extreme tensioner is needed putting added stress on
the crank snout which then becomes a weak link.....every engine combo has
it's pros and cons....compromises
#40
TECH Fanatic
I put down 755rwhp at Tick on a cam only s475 fed 130,000 mile ls1 with them letting off before the peak power at only 5800rpm on the Dyno because of a glitch on the computer. Seen the number and told them not to make a full pull lol because I had no idea it was putting down that much power. It was just a Dyno day and wasn't really concerned about making another pull to the full 6600rpm. Figured I may of picked up closer to the 800 rwhp number if did though. I realize the ls1 is on a prayer but with low timing and enough fuel( 11.0 AFR with 100% meth) it will live a while long as you don't drive it like your average Honda owner the barks his gears and twist 9000rpm and thinks he has 300 HP but really 150 lol.