RPMSpeed 5 ls engine test for 2018 (but wait there's more)
01-14-2018, 12:35 AM
#21
TECH Fanatic
I'm so glad you guys are doing this! I can't wait to see how the various bore and stroke combinations make torque and power. I think we would also like to hear your notes on other things too like idle characteristics, driveability, and responsiveness.
I wish I could send you the 02' 4.8 LR4 that I have in my daily driver 4th gen camaro for the 5.1 build your planning as I'd be happy to test it out!
I was also recently gifted an 01' LQ4 that broke #7 rod, ate the piston, and thus needs bored over. I'm hoping to gleam some some great info from your testing before I take it to the machine shop to have it punched out.
I wish I could send you the 02' 4.8 LR4 that I have in my daily driver 4th gen camaro for the 5.1 build your planning as I'd be happy to test it out!
I was also recently gifted an 01' LQ4 that broke #7 rod, ate the piston, and thus needs bored over. I'm hoping to gleam some some great info from your testing before I take it to the machine shop to have it punched out.
01-14-2018, 10:45 AM
#23
TECH Senior Member
Even though these engines will mainly be "dyno queens", can driveability be guessed at by how it responds to different and varying throttle inputs?
01-19-2018, 10:31 AM
#25
TECH Fanatic
I think we are all going to need audio of each one of these engines idling and then doing a burnout with open headers if we really want to learn anything useful at all from this ambitious and awesome project!
01-19-2018, 10:49 AM
#27
TECH Senior Member
Yeah, we gotta make sure they are acoustically correctly tuned! lol
01-19-2018, 11:42 AM
#28
You can rest assured all Mexico Burnout and FLYBYE videos will be available. I may put them on a test stand first for "break in" tuning but not sure yet. Time is hard to come by as we all know, so we will see. Hopefully ill have some pics of the 333 and start assembly soon.
01-19-2018, 12:00 PM
#29
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,836 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
I'm particularly interested in the 333 and the all stroke 360 results
02-07-2018, 12:07 AM
#31
We have the ls2 333 being torque plate honed, and the 4.8l rods being sized for floating pins and oil holes.
Designing 6 new lobes for a new series of cams and porting the oil pumps for the engine.
Im trying to finish up the DLS2 and DLST porting and finishing for flow testing. The exhaust seats on one set of our 243/799 castings are being fit with our LEADFOOT valves, just having the exhaust seat cut to 1.571. We could go to the 1.600 but i will make that decision later this week.
Thoughts or comments on going to a 2.020 valve on this particular application? Since the valves are the same cost and only a seat job, maybe adding more air to this odd engine out would be a good idea.
Designing 6 new lobes for a new series of cams and porting the oil pumps for the engine.
Im trying to finish up the DLS2 and DLST porting and finishing for flow testing. The exhaust seats on one set of our 243/799 castings are being fit with our LEADFOOT valves, just having the exhaust seat cut to 1.571. We could go to the 1.600 but i will make that decision later this week.
Thoughts or comments on going to a 2.020 valve on this particular application? Since the valves are the same cost and only a seat job, maybe adding more air to this odd engine out would be a good idea.
02-07-2018, 09:06 AM
#32
On The Tree
02-16-2018, 10:39 AM
#34
TECH Fanatic
We have the ls2 333 being torque plate honed, and the 4.8l rods being sized for floating pins and oil holes.
Designing 6 new lobes for a new series of cams and porting the oil pumps for the engine.
Im trying to finish up the DLS2 and DLST porting and finishing for flow testing. The exhaust seats on one set of our 243/799 castings are being fit with our LEADFOOT valves, just having the exhaust seat cut to 1.571. We could go to the 1.600 but i will make that decision later this week.
Thoughts or comments on going to a 2.020 valve on this particular application? Since the valves are the same cost and only a seat job, maybe adding more air to this odd engine out would be a good idea.
Designing 6 new lobes for a new series of cams and porting the oil pumps for the engine.
Im trying to finish up the DLS2 and DLST porting and finishing for flow testing. The exhaust seats on one set of our 243/799 castings are being fit with our LEADFOOT valves, just having the exhaust seat cut to 1.571. We could go to the 1.600 but i will make that decision later this week.
Thoughts or comments on going to a 2.020 valve on this particular application? Since the valves are the same cost and only a seat job, maybe adding more air to this odd engine out would be a good idea.
I'm sorry about the lack of interest guys but my wife's car is still too slow and she's getting bored with it!
You could send me everything for the 372 and I'll build it here with my own block and dyno it for you! We would do a great wideband tune and have the converter locked up (4L60e) and run it on a mustang dyno lol.
I really don't know anything but I would guess that the valve sizes are most likely to become a flow restriction at high rpm on the larger combinations. I would say for sure put the bigger valves in the 372. Since 333 is basically just a de-stroked 372 it would probably be OK as well but it could hurt power on the small bore stuff. Again I have no data to back up my claims lol
02-16-2018, 12:56 PM
#35
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,836 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
I've been very surprised by that too. I expected this thread to blow up.
At least 40k in testing
At least 40k in testing
02-16-2018, 03:03 PM
#36
I will have pictures soon. That will help.
Not alot of before and after of the 333 but more of the others. Just after of it.
The knee jerk reaction is a bigger valve is needed, but i am pretty interested to see what would happen with a 2.000 valve from the 360/372 to the 313 if i can get a spare 5.3l block.
Using stock heads will cut some numbers down BUT there has to be a control somewhere. I dont just want a ***** nilly build. Dollar per hp is easy to lose sight of.
Not alot of before and after of the 333 but more of the others. Just after of it.
The knee jerk reaction is a bigger valve is needed, but i am pretty interested to see what would happen with a 2.000 valve from the 360/372 to the 313 if i can get a spare 5.3l block.
Using stock heads will cut some numbers down BUT there has to be a control somewhere. I dont just want a ***** nilly build. Dollar per hp is easy to lose sight of.
03-01-2018, 03:50 PM
#39
A little update this week and even more next week!
Picture of the pistons being used in both YES BOTH our iron 5.7 AND our 5.1l 313. Its an IG link with mult pictures so scroll away!
These also come in our regular ls1 rebuild kits and the same style (smaller bore) for the flat top 4.8 and 5.3l build.
So we are doing both engines and turning this into a 5 engine build! Cuz why not right?
Maybe a few pics later on of the dyno rig also.
Hopefully block pics and some install pics next week! Its just been way too busy!
Cam lobe development is coming along also.
Picture of the pistons being used in both YES BOTH our iron 5.7 AND our 5.1l 313. Its an IG link with mult pictures so scroll away!
These also come in our regular ls1 rebuild kits and the same style (smaller bore) for the flat top 4.8 and 5.3l build.
So we are doing both engines and turning this into a 5 engine build! Cuz why not right?
Maybe a few pics later on of the dyno rig also.
Hopefully block pics and some install pics next week! Its just been way too busy!
Cam lobe development is coming along also.
Last edited by tech@WS6store; 03-04-2018 at 01:43 PM.
