243/799 or L92 Heads?
Yes but no... Cathedral will use a lot more higher RPM range (6200) where the l92 would be done by then.
The l92 sweet spot on a smaller bore engine is 5-6K RPMs... Anything below or above that and it is a dog/done compared to a cathedral.
I can't be convinced otherwise I don't think.. The valves are just way too large for that small of a displacement. 4.1 or larger.
I wasn't really arguing... We just meant two different things and said it similar is all.
The l92 sweet spot on a smaller bore engine is 5-6K RPMs... Anything below or above that and it is a dog/done compared to a cathedral.
I can't be convinced otherwise I don't think.. The valves are just way too large for that small of a displacement. 4.1 or larger.
I wasn't really arguing... We just meant two different things and said it similar is all.
Last edited by lemons12; Jun 23, 2013 at 12:58 AM.
Something else is wrong with your combo, no way should a 408 be putting down those low numbers.
Most of the guys I see saying L92's or LS3's suck down low have other issues with their combos.
Martin at Tick use to be the same way until he actually started using them. Before, he had never fooled with them and would trash them and regurgitate the same bull posted by the close minded, but once he actually started using them, his opinion changed. I think he has some LSA's for his car now.
You can make power with them and it will not be all top end power either.
I have used both cath and square. Which one do I like better? Depends on what I am trying to accomplish and how much money I want to blow. I will say for the money, LS3's are tough to beat.
Most of the guys I see saying L92's or LS3's suck down low have other issues with their combos.
Martin at Tick use to be the same way until he actually started using them. Before, he had never fooled with them and would trash them and regurgitate the same bull posted by the close minded, but once he actually started using them, his opinion changed. I think he has some LSA's for his car now.
You can make power with them and it will not be all top end power either.
I have used both cath and square. Which one do I like better? Depends on what I am trying to accomplish and how much money I want to blow. I will say for the money, LS3's are tough to beat.
I had a set of l92s... Martin didn't suggest using them.. I'm looking into TFS 235s.... And this is going on a 408.
I tried VERY hard to be pro square port for the smaller motors/stalled autos.. I just can't back that.
I've seen too many combos that back that.
Every single time I see someone posting about their times with l92s and think... "Damn, he is making power high up (6200+)"... They are NEVER running an ls3 intake. It is a FAST/Victor/etc.
I haven't seen a stock l92/ls3 setup keep making power like a cathedral above 6K.. **** a 228R cam and FAST 90 likes 6200+ RPM shift points. I have seen VERY VERY few l92 combos still climbing at that point.
I hope I'm wording that correctly...
Cathedral- Still climbing at 6K plus easily
Square- Pulls incredibly hard at 5-6K (harder than a cathedral) but dies off very fast after that
Every single time I see someone posting about their times with l92s and think... "Damn, he is making power high up (6200+)"... They are NEVER running an ls3 intake. It is a FAST/Victor/etc.
I haven't seen a stock l92/ls3 setup keep making power like a cathedral above 6K.. **** a 228R cam and FAST 90 likes 6200+ RPM shift points. I have seen VERY VERY few l92 combos still climbing at that point.
I hope I'm wording that correctly...
Cathedral- Still climbing at 6K plus easily
Square- Pulls incredibly hard at 5-6K (harder than a cathedral) but dies off very fast after that
My vote is for the cathedral ports. They tend to make better overall power than the L92 stuff and you will want the smaller chambers that the 243/799 heads have to keep compression up with that LQ4.
TECH Apprentice
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 318
Likes: 5
From: Oklahoma
The trick flow 220 as cast can be had for $1,600.00 a set. Assembled with room to grow if you want to port them and stroke the engine later. They are DESIGNED for a 4" bore unlike the ls3/l92. You will make more power at every RPM with the trick flow. I just don't see how you beat it once you factor in buy heads, mailing heads, having heads ported, mill the heads, assemble the head, mail the head back. Damn. The Trick flow head will make more power on your engine than 243/799 or any other factory head no matter how big of valve is in it, shrouded or un-shrouded, or what ever.
I love disproving this "LS3/L92 heads dont make good low end power and peter out up top" bullshit...LOL
Mods in sig...car was only around 10.7:1 compression...
350 lbft at 3K...pulled to 6700...Fuel pump was weak...needed a little more fuel. My G5X3 spec'd out to 234/243 .598/.611 111.5+4.
Mods in sig...car was only around 10.7:1 compression...
350 lbft at 3K...pulled to 6700...Fuel pump was weak...needed a little more fuel. My G5X3 spec'd out to 234/243 .598/.611 111.5+4.
I love disproving this "LS3/L92 heads dont make good low end power and peter out up top" bullshit...LOL
Mods in sig...car was only around 10.7:1 compression...
350 lbft at 3K...pulled to 6700...Fuel pump was weak...needed a little more fuel. My G5X3 spec'd out to 234/243 .598/.611 111.5+4.
Mods in sig...car was only around 10.7:1 compression...
350 lbft at 3K...pulled to 6700...Fuel pump was weak...needed a little more fuel. My G5X3 spec'd out to 234/243 .598/.611 111.5+4.
Show me dynos all day. My car had a good graph also.
L92s look awesome on paper, they don't back it up on the smaller bore motors.
I had heard it and heard it.. I didn't believe it. I went with l92s and now Im saying the same things because I saw it first hand.
L92s look awesome on paper, they don't back it up on the smaller bore motors.
I had heard it and heard it.. I didn't believe it. I went with l92s and now Im saying the same things because I saw it first hand.
Last edited by lemons12; Jun 23, 2013 at 10:49 PM.
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
I don't see why you keeping posting this as if it is a badge of honor. That combo was fugg'd up.
You took a 376 iron. Placed 241's with slight work( as you described in your right up) and a LS1 intake. You made 430rwtq at 3000 but your motor was done and nosing over at 5000rpms with a 235/235 111+2? WTF
Bro you can sell that to these little guys who are unknowledgable who don't know any better but you are wrong for trying to sell that.
Then on your second run, you didn't even crack 400rwtq?
There are 376's with stock cams and LS3 heads making similar numbers or better.
You only proved my point because look at how much duration(how long you had to leave the valve open to fill the cylinder with your smaller port) and look at the power you made. If your port velocity is so great, why are you not able to make power unless you hold the valve open for an extended period of time to the tune of 10-20 degress longer to achieve a certain cylinder volume? I will tell you why becuase the port size does not change, its constant and the velocity pill they marketed to you is not the full story. They did a hell of a brainwashing and marketing job on guys I swear.
I hate to use dynos as a reference but thats the only thing guys here understand, guys are cracking 500rwhp and 455rwtq with LS3 heads and 376ci low 230's cams..
What happened to your 376 with the 241's, where is the beef?
This is crazy, guys rather race dynos than each other on the street or track.
You took a 376 iron. Placed 241's with slight work( as you described in your right up) and a LS1 intake. You made 430rwtq at 3000 but your motor was done and nosing over at 5000rpms with a 235/235 111+2? WTF
Bro you can sell that to these little guys who are unknowledgable who don't know any better but you are wrong for trying to sell that.
Then on your second run, you didn't even crack 400rwtq?
There are 376's with stock cams and LS3 heads making similar numbers or better.
You only proved my point because look at how much duration(how long you had to leave the valve open to fill the cylinder with your smaller port) and look at the power you made. If your port velocity is so great, why are you not able to make power unless you hold the valve open for an extended period of time to the tune of 10-20 degress longer to achieve a certain cylinder volume? I will tell you why becuase the port size does not change, its constant and the velocity pill they marketed to you is not the full story. They did a hell of a brainwashing and marketing job on guys I swear.
I hate to use dynos as a reference but thats the only thing guys here understand, guys are cracking 500rwhp and 455rwtq with LS3 heads and 376ci low 230's cams..
What happened to your 376 with the 241's, where is the beef?
This is crazy, guys rather race dynos than each other on the street or track.
I simply said cathedral ports tend to make more overall power and I was curious what you L92 people said about me making 80 ft-lbs more at 3000RPM with 241 heads and an LS1 intake. That's not 243 heads. Not an LS6 manifold either. How do you explain 80ft-lbs if rectangle port heads work so well at low RPM?
243s on a 4" Bore or reworked MAST or Ballistic Speed LS3s with a 2.08" intake valve. The problem isn't that LS3 heads suck. It's that they suck on smaller bores and are more sensitive to overlap than a cathedral port head.
I had faith in them... And was REALLY hoping they worked, for what I had invested it would have been amazing! I even argued (both ways) for and against them before I had them but figured the only way to know for sure is to try it out.
I think they would do considerably better on my 408... But I know that even then I'm still just band aiding an issue with the larger (but not necessary) cubic inches. A nice (albeit more expensive top end) cathedral will perform the same up top but have gobs more power in the mid range (performance wise, not necessarily on paper).
If I had a 41X or larger motor Ls3s would be sitting on top.. 40X or smaller, some sort of cathedral.
They are a great budget head no matter how you dice it though.
I'm most likely going TFS 235s.. I already have the 102 to accompany them.
I'll look into any bad *** cathedral port though..
If I'm spending 1500$ and can spend another 700$ and run .1-.2 or 1-2mph faster.. I'll do it. At that point, power/performance isn't that easy to come by.
That is why TFS 235s are getting the nod over and as cast version, etc..
If I'm spending 1500$ and can spend another 700$ and run .1-.2 or 1-2mph faster.. I'll do it. At that point, power/performance isn't that easy to come by.
That is why TFS 235s are getting the nod over and as cast version, etc..
If you back to back test stock LS3 heads and intake to a really good cathedral setup, the cathedral heads will make more low end torque, and more top end horsepower. The LS3 heads will come very close to making the same mid range torque.
Valve diameter acts just like cam overlap, which is why the LS3 heads can make good mid range torque with the right camshaft. Look at the Hot Rod cathedral port head shootout, LS3 heads made the most torque, cathedral heads made the most horsepower.
If cost is not a factor, the cathedral heads with a Fast intake will shine. Dollar for dollar, the LS3 heads and intake are still hard to beat. The cam ties the whole combination together.
Unfortunately everything you need to do with the cam timing events to make power everywhere with the LS3 heads works against the piston to valve clearance. The amount the LS3 heads needs to be milled to work on a LQ4 works against your piston to valve clearance.
I would either put pistons in the engine with the LS3 heads, or use the stock pistons with some TFS heads and a Fast 102.
Valve diameter acts just like cam overlap, which is why the LS3 heads can make good mid range torque with the right camshaft. Look at the Hot Rod cathedral port head shootout, LS3 heads made the most torque, cathedral heads made the most horsepower.
If cost is not a factor, the cathedral heads with a Fast intake will shine. Dollar for dollar, the LS3 heads and intake are still hard to beat. The cam ties the whole combination together.
Unfortunately everything you need to do with the cam timing events to make power everywhere with the LS3 heads works against the piston to valve clearance. The amount the LS3 heads needs to be milled to work on a LQ4 works against your piston to valve clearance.
I would either put pistons in the engine with the LS3 heads, or use the stock pistons with some TFS heads and a Fast 102.
Id say the dyno has been messed with to read whatever will make customers happy because 430lbft at 3k with Ls1 intake and stock 241 heads is at least 25 more lbft than 99% of h/c/I ls1 cars make at peak...very unrealistic number.