Top End Kits
There's a big hidden lesson in that thread. For those who haven't taken the time, PatG did that with a fast 90 intake, AFR 205 heads, and a 23x/24x cam, and - dare I say it - YT rockers. Think of how much "better" hardware we have now vs 2007 when PatG wrote that thread.
He chose AFR 205 over the AFR 225 - smaller port, better airspeed. Airspeed > flow numbers for making power. He even mentioned it in one of this posts. Ever stop and think about this: Why do so many end up in the 450-480 hp range with bigger heads, bigger cams, fast 102 intakes, etc, etc, etc? Talk to any of the big boys out there, and they'll tell you the top three concerns for designing heads are airspeed, airspeed, and airspeed. All too often I see people go for the biggest port they can find so they can make the big power numbers and fall short. I'm to the point that I recommend spending the money on a 5 angle valve job before porting the factory heads - especially the LS3 heads.
There's a part of me that wishes I had more time for this type of build, but I'd love to put together a LQ9 bottom end with AFR 205's and a single pattern 220/220-110+4 cam for an absolute torque-monster of a truck engine.
He chose AFR 205 over the AFR 225 - smaller port, better airspeed. Airspeed > flow numbers for making power. He even mentioned it in one of this posts. Ever stop and think about this: Why do so many end up in the 450-480 hp range with bigger heads, bigger cams, fast 102 intakes, etc, etc, etc? Talk to any of the big boys out there, and they'll tell you the top three concerns for designing heads are airspeed, airspeed, and airspeed. All too often I see people go for the biggest port they can find so they can make the big power numbers and fall short. I'm to the point that I recommend spending the money on a 5 angle valve job before porting the factory heads - especially the LS3 heads.
There's a part of me that wishes I had more time for this type of build, but I'd love to put together a LQ9 bottom end with AFR 205's and a single pattern 220/220-110+4 cam for an absolute torque-monster of a truck engine.
David Vizard has some good power videos on youtube. One thing I picked up on was that airspeed on a cathedal port is on the top side of the runner. The lower side has slower airspeed. Hogging out the runner is detrimental. He showed how raising the intake port floor increased velocity.
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 51
Likes: 3
From: Southern Minnesota
David Vizard has some good power videos on youtube. One thing I picked up on was that airspeed on a cathedal port is on the top side of the runner. The lower side has slower airspeed. Hogging out the runner is detrimental. He showed how raising the intake port floor increased velocity.
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 51
Likes: 3
From: Southern Minnesota
There's a big hidden lesson in that thread. For those who haven't taken the time, PatG did that with a fast 90 intake, AFR 205 heads, and a 23x/24x cam, and - dare I say it - YT rockers. Think of how much "better" hardware we have now vs 2007 when PatG wrote that thread.
He chose AFR 205 over the AFR 225 - smaller port, better airspeed. Airspeed > flow numbers for making power. He even mentioned it in one of this posts. Ever stop and think about this: Why do so many end up in the 450-480 hp range with bigger heads, bigger cams, fast 102 intakes, etc, etc, etc? Talk to any of the big boys out there, and they'll tell you the top three concerns for designing heads are airspeed, airspeed, and airspeed. All too often I see people go for the biggest port they can find so they can make the big power numbers and fall short. I'm to the point that I recommend spending the money on a 5 angle valve job before porting the factory heads - especially the LS3 heads.
There's a part of me that wishes I had more time for this type of build, but I'd love to put together a LQ9 bottom end with AFR 205's and a single pattern 220/220-110+4 cam for an absolute torque-monster of a truck engine.
He chose AFR 205 over the AFR 225 - smaller port, better airspeed. Airspeed > flow numbers for making power. He even mentioned it in one of this posts. Ever stop and think about this: Why do so many end up in the 450-480 hp range with bigger heads, bigger cams, fast 102 intakes, etc, etc, etc? Talk to any of the big boys out there, and they'll tell you the top three concerns for designing heads are airspeed, airspeed, and airspeed. All too often I see people go for the biggest port they can find so they can make the big power numbers and fall short. I'm to the point that I recommend spending the money on a 5 angle valve job before porting the factory heads - especially the LS3 heads.
There's a part of me that wishes I had more time for this type of build, but I'd love to put together a LQ9 bottom end with AFR 205's and a single pattern 220/220-110+4 cam for an absolute torque-monster of a truck engine.
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 51
Likes: 3
From: Southern Minnesota
This old thread may make for an interesting read.
Recipe-500-rwhp-heads-cam
Yes, several LS1/LS6 cars have hit 500+ whp with ported factory heads. The ones I'm aware of had Total Engine Airflow (TEA) ported LS6.
That of course with all the supporting mod's like a crank scrapper, under drive pulley etc.
450 whp is pretty doable with a heads, cam, intake package using factory heads without busting the budget. The next 50 whp to 70 whp tends to get expensive
Definitely contact Tony Mamo. He is outstanding to talk with, work with on a project and very helpful. His attention to detail gets great results.
Recipe-500-rwhp-heads-cam
Yes, several LS1/LS6 cars have hit 500+ whp with ported factory heads. The ones I'm aware of had Total Engine Airflow (TEA) ported LS6.
That of course with all the supporting mod's like a crank scrapper, under drive pulley etc.
450 whp is pretty doable with a heads, cam, intake package using factory heads without busting the budget. The next 50 whp to 70 whp tends to get expensive
Definitely contact Tony Mamo. He is outstanding to talk with, work with on a project and very helpful. His attention to detail gets great results.
David Vizard has some good power videos on youtube. One thing I picked up on was that airspeed on a cathedal port is on the top side of the runner. The lower side has slower airspeed. Hogging out the runner is detrimental. He showed how raising the intake port floor increased velocity.
I find the fast 102 is a better intake vs the fast 90. I wasn't trying to trash it at all. I was more stating what PatG did was all the more impressive, given that he did NOT have the fast 102 available. I did a comparison thread with a ported fast 102 vs the msd on my motor, and you can see the midrange ont he 102 is really strong. I'll try to find that thread. It was in the external gen 3 section....
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...o-fast102.html
There it is. Post 9 has the curve overlays
The Fast 102 has about 1 to 1.5 inch shorter runners vs the Fast 92. That might make for faster airflow since it's less distance traveled. I'd assume the plenum is slightly larger as well.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Topdon ONE vs. Artidiag 800 BT2: Which is the Diagnostic Tablet For You?
Pouria Savadkouei
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
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
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 22,308
Likes: 3,625
From: Central Cal.
Those shorter runners will also weaken low end power compared to if longer ones were available.