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

Pros and Cons of oversized valves?

Old Nov 26, 2014 | 06:09 PM
  #1  
Felix C's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Enthusiast
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 627
Likes: 4
From: Miami, FL
Default Pros and Cons of oversized valves?

I read using a 2.02 or larger valve actually cuts the airflow into the cylinder. As apparently nonsensical as that reads I have actually come across the statement several times.

Working up to new heads for 2015. Still using the LS6 intake and so ask this one last time before I decide on heads.

What say yee?
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2014 | 06:36 PM
  #2  
KCS's Avatar
KCS
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (20)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 8,859
Likes: 323
From: Conroe, TX
Default

The fastest cathedral heads run larger valves.

A larger valve equals more curtain area at any lift and allows a larger throat, so it should equal more airflow unless something is very wrong. Most people will just argue that a 2.02" valve is such a marginal increase that it's not worth it.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2014 | 06:46 PM
  #3  
Felix C's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Enthusiast
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 627
Likes: 4
From: Miami, FL
Default

Ok. I thought it was the stock bore of the LS1 would have a shrouding effect at the cylinder wall area with larger ones.

Looking at Trick Flow 215s and notice they are 2.04" or Lingenfelter which are 2.02"
others keep 2.00"
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2014 | 07:09 PM
  #4  
farmington's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,807
Likes: 13
From: Little River SC
Default

depends on your bore size. A 6.2L block will flow more air through big valve heads than a 5.7 L block because the valves are further from the cylinder wall with bigger bores
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2014 | 08:22 PM
  #5  
Felix C's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Enthusiast
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 627
Likes: 4
From: Miami, FL
Default

regular 346cid
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2014 | 09:56 PM
  #6  
KCS's Avatar
KCS
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (20)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 8,859
Likes: 323
From: Conroe, TX
Default

Originally Posted by Felix C
Ok. I thought it was the stock bore of the LS1 would have a shrouding effect at the cylinder wall area with larger ones.

Looking at Trick Flow 215s and notice they are 2.04" or Lingenfelter which are 2.02"
others keep 2.00"
The OEM heads have a 2.02" diameter seat insert, so a 2.02" is about as big as you would want to go in a stock head unless you change out the seat inserts. Aftermarket heads usually have a larger seat from the get go for even larger valves.

You can go a lot bigger than 2.02" on a 3.898" bore LS1 so it's not really going to be all that shrouded. Look at the 4.8L engines with 799 heads. Straight from the factory with a 2" valve in a 3.780" bore. That's like a 2.060" valve in a 3.898" bore.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2014 | 11:54 PM
  #7  
1FastBrick's Avatar
TECH Senior Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 9,710
Likes: 622
From: JunkYard
Default

Ever seen a set of stock heads on block from the bottom side? The Exhaust valve is much closer than the intake valve. Open it far enough and it will actually hit the cylinder wall.

Attached is junk set of 317's on a stock bore 5.3L with no head gasket that is being used for mock up in a project. Since it was up on a lift I found this view interesting...

That's the exhaust valve hanging down hitting the cylinder wall.
Attached Thumbnails Pros and Cons of oversized valves?-20140927_133821.jpg   Pros and Cons of oversized valves?-20140927_133944.jpg  
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2014 | 12:17 AM
  #8  
CAMONLYLS2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Default

I have ported patriots with bigger valves and they were originally going on a 5.3 until my friend noticed the valves wouldn't even clear the cylinder walls.... Got them on my ls2 now no problems
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2014 | 03:28 AM
  #9  
Tony @ Mamo Motorsports's Avatar
LS1Tech Sponsor
20 Year Member
Active Streak: 30 Days
Active Streak: 60 Days
Top Answer: 1
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 819
Likes: 561
Default

MOST of this depends on the bore size (and shape) of the combustion chamber.

If the larger valve is shrouded by the wall you may not see a benefit....if the cross section of the head wont feed the curtain area available at the valve you may not see a benefit.

If you do have a proper shaped port and chamber a larger valve will usually pay dividends.....throat percentage and the valvejob also play a large role.

There is no steadfast rule but if you know how to properly port a cylinder head and you don't over do it based on the actual valve size relative to the port and cylinder bore, bigger is usually better but its one of this diminishing returns type of situations.

The right combination is really the answer (like most things engine related)....lots of things done properly will help it achieve good results and the opposite holds true as well.

Hope this helps

-Tony
__________________


www.mamomotorsports.com

Tony@MamoMotorsports.com

Anything worth doing is worth doing well. Build it right the first time....its alot cheaper than building it twice!!
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2014 | 06:37 AM
  #10  
96capricemgr's Avatar
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,975
Likes: 15
Default

Originally Posted by KCS
The OEM heads have a 2.02" diameter seat insert, so a 2.02" is about as big as you would want to go in a stock head unless you change out the seat inserts. Aftermarket heads usually have a larger seat from the get go for even larger valves.

You can go a lot bigger than 2.02" on a 3.898" bore LS1 so it's not really going to be all that shrouded. Look at the 4.8L engines with 799 heads. Straight from the factory with a 2" valve in a 3.780" bore. That's like a 2.060" valve in a 3.898" bore.
What performance application did they use the 4.8l in?

Point being OEMs do things for cost reasons more than about any other reason so I see no validity to the 4.8l argument.
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2014 | 07:57 AM
  #11  
KCS's Avatar
KCS
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (20)
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 8,859
Likes: 323
From: Conroe, TX
Default

Originally Posted by 96capricemgr
What performance application did they use the 4.8l in?

Point being OEMs do things for cost reasons more than about any other reason so I see no validity to the 4.8l argument.
What does shrouding hurt? Wet flow.

What does wet flow hurt? Mostly fuel economy.

Why would one buy a 4.8L? Fuel economy.

Which is cheaper, an 862 casting with the 1.94" valves or the 799 head with the 2" valves? From a consumer stand point, the 799 head, but maybe there was a financial gain in minimizing the variety of castings GM had.
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:23 AM.