01ls1lover

iTrader: (18)

I need some advice.. im in Iraq rite now and ive got some money saved up im looking to put heads and a cam on/in my car but dont know what to get. Its a daily driver but i want good hp gains but still a daily driver, anyone have any advice?, also be helpfull if anyone knew a good shop for ls1 in northern cali? keep in mind i would also like to pass emissions and have a nice sounding cam.

jaberwaki

cali emissions are a bitch,
to slide by the sniffer you have to keep the duration of the cam below 224.
i think a nice comp cams xe-r 220/220 114 lsa cam would keep you sniffer friendly and the 205 afr heads would squeeze all the power you can out of that mild grind.
tuning should be very strait foward,
it will drive like stock , idle very smooth , and have just enought lope to let people know theres alittle something extra there

grinder11

iTrader: (1)

Hi there. I agree totally with Jaberwaki. I know less about the 205's than the 225's, as I am purchasing a set of the ;atter for my own combo. However, I would contact tony or jason at AFR and explain, as I believe they are in Cali.. The 205's may have upgrades/options to fine tune your setup, which may be camshaft limited such as Jaberwaki posted. You may be able to run several different cams here, research is key. Check some of JRP's posts (Search Button director), and I think you may be able to "cheat' a little on the cam, as a Thunder Racing 224/224 may pass IF ground on a 114 LSA. I have for sale a LPE 222/222/.566 lift grind, but I don't think it would pass your sniffer, as it's on a 112 LSA. As far as the heads, I don't know your exact needs, but being limited with the cam, you may be able to have 2.05 or 2,08 intakes installed as an option, along with larger exhaust valves, as this would get the absolute max out of a smaller cam. And if purchasing these heads new from AFR, these upgrades are REAL reasonable IF purchased as an option. Much more money later. Good luck.

PREDATOR-Z

I would have to dissagree with that. A small duration cam will not benefit from bigger valves, actually quite the contrary.
Velocity and flow are the 2 main producer of power, but one can make the mistake of sacrificing one for the other. So the trick is to maximise flow while maintaining peak velocity.

66deuce

iTrader: (1)

good point predator.that's why i'm taking off my patriots.i'm going with a stg. 1 type 5.3 head with 2.00int. 1.57 exh. valves.i'm not knocking the patriot heads,but the ports are too big for my little cam.minimal porting and smaller valves to increase velocity.plus on a stock bore you are limited with the valve sizes due to shrouding caused by the bore.

VASTREETRACER

Where are you in Iraq I am in Tallafar going to do the same thing as soon as I get home, but dont have the restrictions you do since I live in VA

66deuce

iTrader: (1)

both you guys watch your backs and come home safe.

grinder11

iTrader: (1)

I am speaking from my experiences only. In my case, 2 different times in fact, I have seen a reasonable performance increase going to larger valves/ports with an after market cam already installed that wasn't changed, but the head work was. On an air cooled motorcycle engine, I picked up 3 MPH and .2 in ET in the 1/8 mile, which would be a little more in a longer stretch (1/4 mile). On an older 383 stroker I had (Gen. I smallblock), I picked up 4-5 mph and .2-.3 in ET in a 1/4 mile race. One only has to look at our own LS6 motors to see this is an acceptable theory. I'll bet half, if not more, of the 60 h.p. increase they enjoyed stock over my LS1 comes from the heads which, while not having larger valves, do have larger intake port volumes, like 210cc vs. what, 190 or so? It's just my .02.I do agree with you Predator , that it was camshaft limited in both instances, and not the optimum combo. My point is that this guy is limited with the emissions testing and it is possible that he could see some gains by experimenting, and I don't think the porting/valve sizes would affect his emissions results. The key isn't going hog wild. Sure, you cant run a baby cam with 250 cc intake ports and 2.100 valving. And again, I might be full of it as we have all seen that these engines are unlike others before them. That is why I suggested he call AFR, as being in Cali., they have a ton of experience giving the sniffers, shall we say, plugged sinuses!!

PREDATOR-Z

Yeah, I can see why you would make such an assumption. SBC's react totally different and the heads flow is very weak compared to a LSx series motor.
I do not see a 220 duration cam benefiting from a 2.08 valve.

66deuce

iTrader: (1)

while you COULD make more peak power with the bigger valves,you would not make more power over the entire rpm range.especially if it's a cali emissions car.your exhaust then becomes a bigger restriction.and the stock size bore will shroud a 2.05 or 2.08 intake valve anyway,IMO

grinder11

iTrader: (1)

As Predator and I have been discussing, this engine is a different breed of motor than we are used to. Whether it is a long rod from the factory stock or the 15 degree valve angle, or whatever, things are not as they once were. A recent test in Car Craft showed almost no gain from 1-3/4 " headers over the stock C5 exhaust manifolds- and I just bought the 1-3/4's (less than 3 h.p.!)!!!!!. So you guys who are looking to buy, maybe the 1-7/8 ARE the ones to go with. They also discovered that a stock LS1 crate motor, though rated at 345 h.p. from the general, actually came in at 400+!!. Many articles I've read recently have shown that, unlike the traditional smallblock, the smaller bore in the LS1-LS6 DOES NOT shroud the valves at all. This may be due to the 15 degree valve angle or a number of other factors. In fact, when I recently talked to Jason at AFR, I had him ask Tony whether it would be beneficial to angle mill my 225's. He checked with Tony, and came back with a defininte NO! They are of the opinion that the Gen. 1's valve angle of 23degrees shrouds the valves greatly compared to our 15 degree figure, and it would be fruitless to do this angle mill, which was/is so popular with the Gen. 1's, on my heads. FWIW.

66deuce

iTrader: (1)

good point.i didn't take the 15*valve angle into account.but a lot of the old rules still apply to our motors,including velocity and runner volume.that's one of the reasons the afr 205 head works as good as it does,high port velocity with a smaller intake runner.i'm testing that theory this winter by going with heads that after mild porting will have around 215cc volume on the int. port with 2.00int. 1.57 exh.valves.as opposed to my patriots that have closer to 230cc int. runner volume,i'll know for sure when i take them off and have them flowed and measured.i don't expect big peak gains but more power across the entire rpm range.

66deuce

iTrader: (1)

i saw the same test in car craft.but i don't think they did any tuning after the header installs.LT headers are known to make the motor run richer.tuning could have netted another 10-15 hp.i gained 10hp (at the wheels) just by leaning out the AFR from 11.9-1 to 12.8-1 after i installed my hooker LTs.but the vette manifolds are more efficient than the f-bodys,so the gains would be more if they would have started with the f-body manifolds.

66deuce

iTrader: (1)

most of the increase does come from the heads.but most of the increase in power doesn't come in until a little higher in the rpm range,probably 3500 or so.this is also partly do to the higher dur.of the Z06 cam.

01ls1lover

iTrader: (18)

m in mosul at fob patriot it sux ***** here....im with 25th ID INF

VASTREETRACER

Going to Mosual tommarow to FOB Marez I am with the 276th engineers attached to the 25th strykers