As the title says.
Has anyone made 400hp N/A at all 4 wheels through a 4L65E AWD system.
I'm in Australia and about to embark on trying to achieve this challenge with a stock stroke 3.622 crank and 3.903 bore ls6.
My current list of parts consists of.
DSS Racing 6cc dome top pistons
Callies comp star H beam 6.3'' rods
Factory ls6 crank and block.
Johnson tie bar short travel hydraulic roller lifters
Comp cams 54 458 11 cam and matching valve springs 26926ts-kit.
holley midrise 300 137 manifold
1000cfm 4bbl throttle body
2''spacer plate for throttle body
Bosch 550cc @43psi injectors
walbro 255 intank pump. Will increase to 460 if not enough flow.
-8 fuel lines.
Undecided on cylinder heads as yet.
But tossing up between the mamo motorsport 227 heads and the TEA stage 2 243 hrads.
custom 4 into one headers for my car along with twin/dual 3'' exhaust system 100 cel cats David Vizard expansion chamber theory and glass packed straight through race mufflers.
Static compression ratio will be in the 11.4 to 11.5 range with a dynamic compression ratio around 8.8 to 1.
final drive ratio is 3.46 to 1 with a 25'' tall tyre.
Has anyone on here managed to achieve this target at all?

 

Not too many 4-wheel dynos around, so info on this might be tough to come by....

 

No disrespect to the TEA heads but the MMS 227 comparison is apples and oranges

The TEA is certainly a good ported factory casting....but it is still a ported factory casting and as a designer that limits what you can achieve in regards to total airflow and efficiency (airspeed especially). When I design a port a pay special attention to dead areas of the port where I can ADD material to improve flow.....shrinking the port and picking up airflow does wonder for performance.

The MMS 227 product is a clean sheet design (chambers, intake and exhaust ports) and provides more airflow across the entire lift curve and a bunch more airspeed to pack the cylinder. I could elaborate more but that is the meat of the performance advantage an optimally shaped clean sheet design offers the end user and it increases throttle response, torque and HP output as well as fuel economy if you keep your foot out of it. It makes the engine a more efficient air pump and increases the engines volumetric efficiency.

I don't really know what's capable on an AWD dyno as they are not very common as G Atsma mentioned as well (and naturally it depends on all the rest of the supporting mods) but my 227 head is the highest flowing head I have ever tested on a 3.900 bore and its going to perform better than any other head out there on a 346 or 383 combination (basically any 3.900 ish bore engine configuration).

If you would like more information feel free to reach out to me if you haven't done so already

Cheers,
Tony
661-714-1317 (Cell)

 

Thanks Tony.
I know that you're heads are far superior to the tea s2 heads.
But due to some private health issues with my wife $$$ have become very tight. To the point it would take me 3 to 4 years to be able to buy a set.
it's the only reason why I've even looked at a cheaper option.

 

Cheers.
I don't think anyone would try it with a stock stroke 3.622 crank either personally.
I'd say most would go with boost.
I just don't have that option with our road rules in Australia.

 

The MMS 227 heads are $3500 ish....not sure what you heard regarding pricing so wanted to confirm.

Honestly looking for any kind of number from your car on a tight budget is always extremely difficult. When the smoke clears these projects always cost a little more than you plan for.

Good luck....if something changes and I can be of assistance let me know

-Tony

 

I'm in Australia so with the exchange rate they are around $5000 for me to buy plus shipping and taxes. Will make it closer to $6000.

 

My TBSS is/was AWD, it's a solid 20% drivetrain loss on those. So figure you need at the very least 500hp at the crank to come close to your goal. I have a set of Tony's MMS235 heads on my engine, they are definitely great heads and exceeded my expectations, can't go wrong if they fit your budget.

 

You will have to forgive me I'm in Australia. So I don't know what a TBSS is.
What gearbox and diffs do they run?

 

It's a Trailblazer SS, it uses a 4L70E(4L60e) trans with a transfer case and front and rear diffs. The rear diff is quite strong, the front not so much.

 

sounds very similar to what we have here. 4L65E with transfer are 68 rear 32 front split. Borgwarner 78 rear diff 30 spline axles front diff I don't know what brand they are from factory. They bolt through the engine sump and run CV shafts to wheel hubs.

 

I was going to say you definitely following the path of a TBSS for goals as they are equipped with an LS2 and were either AWD or RWD.

My RWD made 38x whp with a Thunder Racing LS2 cheater cam (baby cam 215/231), bushing OEM rocker arms, pushrods, long tube headers, 4" exhaust otherwise stock. Back then the solid performing heads were TFS 205, TFS 225, or AFR 230's, now you have a good amount more of choices however are slightly limited by bore. I think the newly released Brodix BR 5.3 heads could be an option, certainly more flow than OEM, utilize stock rocker arms, and would match your bore pretty well. Saw them for $2700 on Scottywheels website which I think he is may be a member of this forum too. I think those would be for future growth type goals though.

Lots of options today for porting OEM heads: WCCH heads, Hooper Heads, CT Porting, LME, FED (Frankenstein Heads), and certainly a few more I've missed but most are around the $1500-$1800 range with a spring package supplying cores.

I'd say unless you could score a good deal on aftermarket heads I'd just pick a porter and have a set of 243's and call it good. Probably going to have to get a little rowdy on cam but I think that's in your Aussie DNA isn't it? You guys like to party from what I've seen.

 

I have the equipment to port 243 heads myself but will probably get some cnc ported for good measure.
Not lucky enough to have a ls2 6.0L. Stuck with the ls1/6 bottom end.
Cam I'm running with is a comp 54 458 11 cam.
227/235 on a 113+4LSA.
So its definitely bigger than what you had. But not the engine size is down.

 

Bottom ends are virtually, if not totally, identical. You arent "stuck" with an inferior bottom end. They both have a 3.622" stroke. LS2 has a .100" bigger bore than the LS1/LS6, 4.00" vs. 3.900"

 

in terms of cubic inch size there is a good difference between them with that extra .100 bore size.
346.7 vs 364 cubic inch engines. 18.7 cubic inch.
so when you look at hp per cubic inch say 1.4hp per cubic inch on average that a tad over 26hp you are giving away straight up.
so to make up for that you need to increase compression ratio or have way better cylinder heads.
Im going for both heads and compression ratio bump.
I'm bumping the static compression upto between 11.33 to 11.45 to 1 with a dynamic comp of 8.7 to 8.8 to gain that little bit extra hp out of the little LS6

 

Hi Tony.
what do you think of the Yellow Terra ultralight roller rockers.
I see they have a set that is OK for maximum 487lb over the nose, my springs are 470lb over the nose. Not sure if the standard ultralights are the way to go or just get the ultralight pro's that are rated for 600lb over the nose. But these are adjustable vs the standard ultralights that aren't adjustable.
part number for each is YT6721 and YT6683.

 

I don't question the cubic inch difference. I stated the .100" difference in bore size, so I am aware of that. YOU stated you were "stuck" with an inferior LS1/LS6 lower end. The lower ends are the same, no inferiority exists. If you state you're stuck with less displacement, that is different from the lower end. I guess you could state you're stuck with an inferior (your words!!) TOP end. There is also a 17.3 cubic inch difference, NOT 18.7 cubic inches. That smaller displacement can still be modded into one Helluva powerful engine...

 

One thing you could try, if the dyno operator would be willing to do it, which he may not. That would be to dyno each end of the vehicle. It would entail a lot more dyno time, and I'm not sure whether or not the dyno roller would register output if the roller was spun the opposite direction, if that's what had to be done. I'm sure it would increase costs dramatically, but I don't know of any other way to get an exact reading without using percentages, which may, or may not, be totally accurate.....

 

Just to reinforce what grinder said above-
The lower end is comprised of the crank, rods, and main bearings/webs. These parts are IDENTICAL between both engines (and most all LS engines). Same crank, rods, main and rod bearings, block (except for bore ONLY). Hence, no lower end is inferior to any other within the LS family. The .100 bore increase makes no difference in durability between them either.

 

Tony uses the YT rockers exclusively on his builds, I have them on mine, they are a solid rocker arm, nothing I am worrying about. What springs are you using? I have Manley Nextek springs rated at 170lbs installed and 446lbs open, I can't imagine a scenario where you would need more than that with what you're doing. My rockers are non adjustable.