How much can stock crank and block take??
10-03-2005, 01:56 PM
#21
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
I've used cryo treated cranks , piston rings, cylinder sleeves etc.. in 900 > 1200 HP Toyota twin Turbo six and skyline R32's.
it does work.
The only thing I had to change often were my clutches and trannies.
it does work.
The only thing I had to change often were my clutches and trannies.
good to go
10-04-2005, 12:09 AM
#22
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Buffalo, N.Y.
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The stock crank is known to consistently handle over 500HP, naturally aspirated, and 650HP turbocharged in street engine usage.
One LS1/LS6 reference book I have syas that W2W (Wheel to Wheel Powertrain) routinely builds 500+ HP LS1/LS6 engines WITHOUT touching the short block. The cast iron Gen III can easily handle over 800HP, and, if you have the money and you really want to go nuts, the C5R will handle well over 1,000HP.
One LS1/LS6 reference book I have syas that W2W (Wheel to Wheel Powertrain) routinely builds 500+ HP LS1/LS6 engines WITHOUT touching the short block. The cast iron Gen III can easily handle over 800HP, and, if you have the money and you really want to go nuts, the C5R will handle well over 1,000HP.
10-04-2005, 06:38 AM
#24
I think my quest is over, read the details on Kevin's car on the Stenod web page http://stenodracing.com/projects/cur...vin/index.html notice the stock GM crank that is used. That car rocks 
10-04-2005, 07:55 PM
#25
Originally Posted by Slicknic
I think my quest is over, read the details on Kevin's car on the Stenod web page http://stenodracing.com/projects/cur...vin/index.html notice the stock GM crank that is used. That car rocks
sweet jesus. case dissmissed
10-04-2005, 09:11 PM
#26
TECH Resident
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the block will definately hold up! the crank is still a cast product so it's not going to be the strongest...it's recommended for 500 HP along with the Pistons and rods but that's probably only for safety, I would personally change the whole bottom end, but if you plan to keep the stock one then at least just change the rod bolts. Them things are very weak.
10-04-2005, 10:47 PM
#27
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Buffalo, N.Y.
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I have only two LS1/LS6 reference books, so I DEFINITELY haven't read it all. I'm still learnin'...that's why I joined this site.
Even though the crank is cast, its strength supposedly comes from the fact that it's manufactured using rolled fillets on the journals, which are claimed to reduce stress risers.
The powdered-metal, cracked-cap con rods are supposed to be VERY strong, as are the eutectic, flat-topped pistons. I agree with the comment abovbe about the rod bolts. though. Even though the rod bolt design was strengthened in 2000, most hi-performance engine builders think they still suck canal water.
I would be comfortable putting down a N/A 450-475 RWHP without worrying about the bottom end.
Even though the crank is cast, its strength supposedly comes from the fact that it's manufactured using rolled fillets on the journals, which are claimed to reduce stress risers.
The powdered-metal, cracked-cap con rods are supposed to be VERY strong, as are the eutectic, flat-topped pistons. I agree with the comment abovbe about the rod bolts. though. Even though the rod bolt design was strengthened in 2000, most hi-performance engine builders think they still suck canal water.
I would be comfortable putting down a N/A 450-475 RWHP without worrying about the bottom end.
