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

My LQ9 build. Opinions on milling

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-05-2013, 06:17 PM
  #1  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default My LQ9 build. Opinions on milling

I purchased an LQ9 out of a 2004 escalade and plan on doing a cheapish build for my TransAm. It has 10 to 1 compression with the stock 317 heads, and stock flat top pistons. I decided to port out the heads at home Here is a couple of pictures of some completed (ish) port and a stock ports. I didn't go crazy hogging everything out only cleaning up and removing a small amount of material along with taking some off around the valve guides. I just got numbers back and they were as follows :
Intake
.200/152
.300/210
.400/248
.500/267
.600/280
Exhaust
.200/119
.300/149
.400/179
.500/193
.600/210
This is without a valve job or cleaning up the chambers. My plan is too smooth out the chambers without taking too much out, and possibly a 3 angle valve job. I was also planning on milling heads .030 to get back anything lost from porting chambers and raising compression slightly. Any idea how much I can mill the heads without issues with my Fast 90mm intake bolting up, and if I would have issues with PTV clearance ? cam is only 222/224 .566/.568 @112 using stock rockers. I'll order pushrods after I decide on milling etc ... any opinions, ideas ? I am debating if I wanna open up the intake more or work more on the exhaust as I haven't removed a ton of material yet. I'm hoping for around 400 rwhp.
Thanks
P.S. I am using .051 crushed MLS gaskets
Attached Thumbnails My LQ9 build. Opinions on milling-1233357_10151801470436132_1954756888_n.jpg   My LQ9 build. Opinions on milling-1234782_10151801470581132_1084890628_n.jpg   My LQ9 build. Opinions on milling-1016050_10151805266171132_187199814_n.jpg   My LQ9 build. Opinions on milling-1001601_10151805266236132_365572127_n.jpg  

Last edited by Mrbowtie26; 09-07-2013 at 11:15 PM.
Old 09-07-2013, 11:20 PM
  #2  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Nobody ?
Old 09-07-2013, 11:37 PM
  #3  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (27)
 
Rise of the Phoenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Jefferson City, MO
Posts: 9,728
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts

Default

You should be able to mill them quite a bit given the size of your cam. I'm not sure exactly what cc your going to need to be at, but I would shoot for 12:1 compression.
Old 09-07-2013, 11:50 PM
  #4  
Teching In
 
hi tech redneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Your port work looks very nice
Old 09-08-2013, 12:02 AM
  #5  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by hi tech redneck
Your port work looks very nice
Thanks.

I have since ported a bit more out to bring the intake and the exhaust cfm up a bit more . I'll have them flow tested again after I clean up the chambers and get the heads milled. I'm debating between .030 and .040 milling. I think with my cam I can probably do .040 without ptv issues just not sure.
Old 09-08-2013, 12:04 AM
  #6  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (27)
 
Rise of the Phoenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Jefferson City, MO
Posts: 9,728
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts

Default

I think you can too. More compression means more power throughout the band.
Old 09-09-2013, 06:21 AM
  #7  
Teching In
 
hi tech redneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Nice work
Old 09-09-2013, 09:46 AM
  #8  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by hi tech redneck
Nice work
Thank you.
I will update post with current pics after I am done with heads. I worked them a little more after these pics as the intake and exhaust still had some room for improvements I think.
Old 09-09-2013, 11:17 AM
  #9  
TECH Fanatic
 
2000PewterT/A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Sweet job
Old 09-09-2013, 11:45 AM
  #10  
TECH Senior Member
 
PREDATOR-Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

I hope you considered DCR with such a small cam. Too much mill and you'll have detonation and that would negate any benefits of compression increase.
First Q you should answer is what fuel do you plan on using. Based on that calculate your DCR and do not go over 8.5.
Old 09-09-2013, 11:33 PM
  #11  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
I hope you considered DCR with such a small cam. Too much mill and you'll have detonation and that would negate any benefits of compression increase.
First Q you should answer is what fuel do you plan on using. Based on that calculate your DCR and do not go over 8.5.
Stock compression with those heads untouched (72cc chambers) is 10:1 I will be cleaning up the chambers so I may lose a couple cc's there but I'm looking to get around to 10.5:1 I'm not planning on going over 11:1 really. I just have to figure out what compression I will be at using .051 mls gaskets and if I get the cc size to around 68cc.
Thanks
Old 09-10-2013, 03:09 AM
  #12  
TECH Senior Member
 
PREDATOR-Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

You are still going about this wrong. First figure out your DCR at desired SCR so you can see if it is fuel compatible. This will help you mill the exact amount needed to optimize your cam potential. Throwing static compression number around does nothing to maximize the cam potential.
DCR= Dynamic compression (important part), DCR is constant so that is what is used to be fuel octane compatible not SCR= Static compression.
Old 09-10-2013, 08:51 PM
  #13  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
You are still going about this wrong. First figure out your DCR at desired SCR so you can see if it is fuel compatible. This will help you mill the exact amount needed to optimize your cam potential. Throwing static compression number around does nothing to maximize the cam potential.
DCR= Dynamic compression (important part), DCR is constant so that is what is used to be fuel octane compatible not SCR= Static compression.
Ok so the numbers I'm looking at with that cam if I get the cc to 68cc is SRC = 10.69:1 and DCR 8.29:1
Now if I get the chambers down to 66cc that will give me SRC 10.95:1 and DCR of 8.49:1 which would be ideal I think considering I'll be running 92-93 octane correct ?

Last edited by Mrbowtie26; 09-11-2013 at 12:57 AM.
Old 09-11-2013, 03:47 AM
  #14  
TECH Senior Member
 
PREDATOR-Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

As per your calculations, achieving 11:1 in your case would be desirable with a 8.5 dcr for that fuel.
Old 09-11-2013, 07:22 PM
  #15  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
As per your calculations, achieving 11:1 in your case would be desirable with a 8.5 dcr for that fuel.
K thanks for the info I should have thought about figuring out the DCR I just haven't built a motor for awhile and forgot about it lol.
Old 09-11-2013, 07:34 PM
  #16  
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
 
speedtigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 8,830
Received 68 Likes on 39 Posts

Default

I suspect that chamber work on 317s with stock valve sizes will do very little to increase flow and the compression you lose would not be a fair trade. You will like that cam. It makes power everywhere. It will even run good if you don't mill the heads.
Old 09-12-2013, 02:29 PM
  #17  
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
Mrbowtie26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: West Haven, CT
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by speedtigger
I suspect that chamber work on 317s with stock valve sizes will do very little to increase flow and the compression you lose would not be a fair trade. You will like that cam. It makes power everywhere. It will even run good if you don't mill the heads.
With the chambers I'm not looking to remove much material just smooth it out a bit to reduce hot spots etc ... I didn't think it would change size more than 1cc or so maybe 2 max which I can easily pick back up through milling.



Quick Reply: My LQ9 build. Opinions on milling



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:51 AM.