2.08" INtake valves on a stock bore?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Dec 3, 2004 | 07:25 PM

#21

xssive

Thread Starter

TECH Addict

iTrader: (123)

Joined: Nov 2001

Posts: 2,256

Likes: 2

From: Austin, TX

Thats actually an old factory option on muscle cars. I forgot which car it was....

Dec 3, 2004 | 09:17 PM

#22

383LQ4SS

TECH Veteran

iTrader: (33)

Joined: Nov 2001

Posts: 4,266

Likes: 0

From: Port Richey

Rev Extreme just dynotuned a 2002 Z06 with stock bottom end with Trex cam and some TEA heads with 2.08 intake valve...it made 478 rwhp and 414 ft lbs tq through full exhaust (no cutout) and all belts. Peak power at about 7200 rpm.

Dec 3, 2004 | 09:21 PM

#23

wait4me

TECH Addict

iTrader: (10)

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 2,961

Likes: 2

From: warsaw, in

awsome. and here i was thinking i was nuts for going too big.. hee hehe... lol

Dec 3, 2004 | 09:28 PM

#24

99BackNBlackZ28

TECH Regular

iTrader: (5)

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 487

Likes: 0

From: Phoenix, AZ

I have a friend w/an 02 Z28 that had some hand ported heads that had 2.08/1.60 valves put in them. With those heads & a TR224 it dynoed 401/385 on 91 oct in Arizona heat.

Dec 4, 2004 | 12:53 AM

#25

Cheatin' Chad

TECH Addict

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Aug 2003

Posts: 2,561

Likes: 0

From: IL

IMO 2.08 on a stock LS1 bore is not optimal. I would go smaller on the valve or bigger on the bore.

Dec 4, 2004 | 07:25 AM

#26

grinder11

TECH Junkie

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Sep 2004

Posts: 3,212

Likes: 1,612

From: Michigan & Florida

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheatin' Chad

IMO 2.08 on a stock LS1 bore is not optimal. I would go smaller on the valve or bigger on the bore.

I think you have the right choice of words here. optimal. Optimal for what? In my case for a daily driver with, for now, stock heads and stock DISPLACEMENT, not necessarily stock BORE, I think you are probably right. But as Kumar was saying, he picked up 35 horsepower somewhere, and it wasn't all in the TB. But he has a 395 (stock bore, 4-1/8 stroke). And optimal for who? Some guys here really like to wind up their motors. That's cool. And I think that a 2.08 valve in a stock LS1 head would be borderline to show a gain. But I would also bet that in a ported LS1 or LS6 head with a T-rex or similar grind, a 2.08 would show a high rpm gain. Maybe some of our head porters/AFR/etc. would chime in with their .02 on what has turned into a cool thread here. I also think that it wouldn't be logical for AFR to put their valued reputation on the line by offering this 2.08 size as an option on their new heads, as if it were to be a performance no-gainer, it wouldn't be cool if a guy was at the strip and ran, say, 11.90 with stock displacement and a TR 224 and the AFR 225's w/2.08 intakes. And Joe Blowby ran an 11.50 w stock displacement, stock LS6 heads and a TR 224. Tuned equally and all else being equal, this wouldn't be cool for AFR at all. Just a long winded way of saying it wouldn't be there as an option if it wasn't worthwhile for someone's combo. Just a hypothetical situation and my .02, which may not be worth even .02!!

Dec 4, 2004 | 11:06 AM

#27

Cheatin' Chad

TECH Addict

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Aug 2003

Posts: 2,561

Likes: 0

From: IL

I made sure I chose my words carefully on this one. There definitely will be gains w/the 225's over a stock. I have no doubt in my mind of that.

However, is it the best choice for what you're doing? Will you pick up more power where you need it with the 225's than the 205's? It's definitely something to consider.

Tony Mamo's post about these heads made alot fo sense. A search for his post on the use for these would probably give you some good insight as to what AFR's intentions were with them.

Good luck.