</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by LS1derfull:
[QBmaybe readings get screwed up below the equator, making some confused as to your data[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's the counter-clockwise swirly that screws them up...

SC

 

> Scott if you're a sponsor I don't think you can have home ported heads. You have Jantzer motorsports heads.

ROFL <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

Jantzer,

I appreciate your data.

Ignoring the compression ratio, are the 5.7L & 6.0L heads similar enough that if you were to do a full port on each would you end up with the same result, or would the 6.0L heads have an advantage because of some difference in their casting?

Also, are there any issues bolting a 6.0L head on a 5.7L block? Things that come to mind are the bore, the deck thickness (which would necessitate a pushrod length change), valve relief location, valve size, and port alignment (do the 6.0L ports match up to 5.7L intake and exhaust?)

Thanks!

Steve Sadler

Will the 6.0L heads bolt on to the 5.7L block?

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by MelloYellow:
<strong> We'd just like to know what the test pressure was.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That asn't given up front, but has been now.
I agree with Howquick, its not exacting data, but it is comparative data....
Quote by SSBlue:
Its the counter clockwise swirly that screws them up

Thats hilarious. At least you can be funny <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

 

You guys are funny <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> America can be like the old guy and Australia his wife hitting him with her purse telling him to fix something while he just sits there <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" /> Peace

 

Gee...I find it ALL funny <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />

The arrogance you have shown over a simple request is astounding and desplays to people like me why your country has so many Foreign Policy Crisis'...no I won't answer the question cause I don't want to...what a DH.

For what it's worth....it has taken you more time to crap on about why you don't want to answer the question than if you had answered it in the first place.

SILLY <img border="0" title="" alt="[Sad]" src="gr_sad.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Sad]" src="gr_sad.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Sad]" src="gr_sad.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />

[/QUOTE]Originally posted by LS1derfull:
<strong>Scott your flow data was within 1-3 cfm of my own on my Superflow 600 bench. As for test pressure, i think any bench tester(professional know it all) could see from your results that 28 inches was your test pressure, maybe readings get screwed up below the equator, making some confused as to your data? Keep up the helpful info Scott, not many post the good stuff.</strong>[/QUOTE]

yeah I worked it straight out fella....cause I could...I have the conversion etc BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE ON HERE WHO DON'T?? Professional know it all? Far out I aren't the one spending half my day trying to explain why my testing is so good I don't have to quantify the findings....FUNNY <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />

<small>[ June 22, 2002, 10:29 PM: Message edited by: HOWQUICK ]</small>

 

Jantzer I appreciate your help with my car from previous postings and I am very graceful. Your information is always good and is backed by the times you run---one of the fastest in the country. Good enough for me. Cheers---------Kent.

 

HOWQUICK All us NASA scientists want to know.......does the swirl vane make intake flow go backward down under? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> Lots of head gurus here in the US of A swear that the intake ports benefit from the swirl generated by the lopsided intake valve guide boss. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> Does this mean that the LS1 intake ports' swirl down under flow better, worse or the same?

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by HOWQUICK:
<strong>Gee...I find it ALL funny <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[jester]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_jest.gif" />

The arrogance you have shown over a simple request is astounding and desplays to people like me why your country has so many Foreign Policy Crisis'...no I won't answer the question cause I don't want to...what a DH.

</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Please don't make generalized statements about our country based on one person. Otherwise, I might be inclined to imply something about your country based on your actions in this thread. How stupid would that be?

Thanks,

Eric

 

So these were the LQ4 heads?

I would really prefer to see a LQ9 aluminum head (same as LS6 in all respects except for larger combustion chamber) flow, compare to an LS1 and LS6 head.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Will Race 4 Food:
<strong>Quote by SSBlue:
Its the counter clockwise swirly that screws them up

Thats hilarious. At least you can be funny <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks, Will Race 4 Food. I really haven't been trying to crack on you, it just seemed to work out that way.

No hard feelings?

SC

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by kewlbrz:
<strong>So these were the LQ4 heads?

I would really prefer to see a LQ9 aluminum head (same as LS6 in all respects except for larger combustion chamber) flow, compare to an LS1 and LS6 head.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So there are different 6.0L aluminum heads or are the LQ4 heads the iron '99-'00 version?

John

PS - Good info Jantzer98SS <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by SS00Blue:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Will Race 4 Food:
<strong>Quote by SSBlue:
Its the counter clockwise swirly that screws them up

Thats hilarious. At least you can be funny <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks, Will Race 4 Food. I really haven't been trying to crack on you, it just seemed to work out that way.

No hard feelings?

SC</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">SS00Blue (SC),
None here. If thats an apology, its accepted. I'm thick skinned anyway, and I'm only on here for 2 reasons...One is to gain knowledge about LS1 quirks that I'm not up on yet, and secondly, to help others from my experiences. If they don't agree, then it doesn't matter to me as their not the people they were intended for, they were intended for the majority of users here that are still learning the basics of engines, drag racing, etc.
Cheers to you. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

 

> The arrogance you have shown over a simple request...

He provided us with data. We should be thankful for that. Good data is uncommon in the hotrodding world, because most people who have the brains to generate it feel a need to be secretive to protect their business interests.

You shoudln't go around complaining because it's not good enough data for you. It was meant to illustrate one thing (that the LQ4 head has better intake flow than the LS1 head) and nothing else.

If you want more data asking nicely for it is ok, but insulting him for trying to do us a favor isn't going to get what you want and it's going to discourage good data in the future.

I've said it once, but it should be said again. I appreciate that Jantzer posted this data.

> For what it's worth....it has taken you more time to crap on about why you don't want to answer the question than if you had answered it in the first place.

I absolutely agree with him. Even on the same flow bench I dont think figures should be compared from two different technicians. There is way too much room for error as a result of variations in the testing procedure.

Of course if controls are put in place to ensure both testers follow the exact same procedure then that'd be different, but the hot rodding community generally doesn't think that way.

Controls like this make gathering data a pain, but at least the data is valid. I'd rather have no data (and have to gather my own), that rely on data that I can't trust. Anybody who is willing to rely on bad data is setting themselves up for failure.

Might work fine in low power applications with lots of safety margin, but those of us who want to push power to the limit have to sacrafice those margins to reach our goals, and in order to do that we need good data.

I can't speak for jantzer, but if I were in his shoes I would be concerned that if people wanted the test pressure so they could compare his figures to other heads (and obviously that's why people want it).

If he condoned that it would be scientifically improper because it would be implying that such comparisons would be accurate, when they are not.

He gave us this data in hopes that it would help. From that data one conclusion can be made, that the intake on a LQ4 head flows better than a LS1 head.

If you're not happy with his test you should perform your own and post it.

- Steve Sadler

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Terry Burger:
<strong>Scott if you're a sponsor I don't think you can have home ported heads. You have Jantzer motorsports heads. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Shutup Terry! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

This set will always be home-ported based on the fact I did them without prior experience in the confines of my home.

The 6.0L heads that were tested were 2001 castings. I can't recall the casting numbers. The intake ports are 210cc vs. 200cc for the LS1 head and have better runners. The short side is longer with a better radius into the seat. I'm absolutely certain that the 6.0L heads will flow better once ported, but I can't give first hand data as of yet to substantiate my claims. The LS6 ports are similar but slightly different from what I hear. I'll be doing testing with the LS6 ports in the next couple months. So this is just a start.

The car/truck castings are interchangeable. The 6.0 heads wouldn't be a big deal to bolt on a car. But compression definately becomes a concern since the chambers are larger.

I also will comment and say the 5.3L truck intake ports ARE different than the LS1 as well. The short side is different and probably will not flow quite as good as an LS1 port with similar port work. But they are close to the same.

HOWQUICK:

I didn't answer the question because of the way it was asked. I'm more than happy to help anybody as long as they have the right attitude. You don't always give a crying baby what it wants do you? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> And for the purpose of my argument, it wasn't important. The target of the topic is not bench owners themselves, because if they're that interested in the info they should have already flowed everything themselves. I'm trying to help out the average enthusiast on this site, not the guy trying to calibrate his bench to mine.

Comments regarding Foreign Policy and the US is uncalled for and frankly diaria of the mouth. You have to be more mature than that.

I'm not trying to explain my testing practices or prove how good they are. You're trying to prove how bad they are and I rebuttled with information that even you haven't been thinking about. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> I can spend a whole day here explaining things because that's what I like to do and it doesn't bother me. Whatever it takes to help others understand the broad scope of the topic at hand.

FWIW: I don't like Tazmanian Devils. But the Shotover Jet Boat excursion was definately fun over there. Those guys are nuts! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

I'm glad we're all thick skinned. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by kewlbrz:
<strong>So these were the LQ4 heads?

I would really prefer to see a LQ9 aluminum head (same as LS6 in all respects except for larger combustion chamber) flow, compare to an LS1 and LS6 head.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sounds good! You send them and I'll flow them. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

Does anybody know the casting numbers on the LQ4 and LQ9 heads? I do have some 99 cast iron 6.0 heads that I'll get around to testing some time. Maybe they rule and nobody knows it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Jantzer98SS:
HOWQUICK:

I didn't answer the question because of the way it was asked. I'm more than happy to help anybody as long as they have the right attitude. You don't always give a crying baby what it wants do you? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> And for the purpose of my argument, it wasn't important. The target of the topic is not bench owners themselves, because if they're that interested in the info they should have already flowed everything themselves. I'm trying to help out the average enthusiast on this site, not the guy trying to calibrate his bench to mine.

Comments regarding Foreign Policy and the US is uncalled for and frankly diaria of the mouth. You have to be more mature than that.

I'm not trying to explain my testing practices or prove how good they are. You're trying to prove how bad they are and I rebuttled with information that even you haven't been thinking about. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> I can spend a whole day here explaining things because that's what I like to do and it doesn't bother me. Whatever it takes to help others understand the broad scope of the topic at hand.

FWIW: I don't like Tazmanian Devils. But the Shotover Jet Boat excursion was definately fun over there. Those guys are nuts! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

I'm glad we're all thick skinned. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> [/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">fella,

you obviously have a low opinion of everyone else on the forum....I hadn't thought of the stuff you quote? I just couldn't be bother rebutting your rantings. I never questioned your procedure just asked for the test pressure...you came back insultingly so THEN I questioned your methods (I would still be interested to see the difference on a 4" bore from a 3.9" with the two heads).

I constantly get asked by customers why their heads don't flow like that fellas....I reply; what test pressure was it conducted at? The stunnded look comes on the customers face...hence the analogy between the sump of oil and flow figures. You know, we even get people testing at 32" to gain commercial advantage...it's lame!!

I still consider you arrogant not to answer the question regardless of how you interpret as being written or the relivence of it... my experience in the Land Down Under with the reverse swirl(come on guys....you can do better than that) is as such;

200 300 400 500 550
134 183 216 213 219 Std LS1 @ 25"H2O SuperFlow 600 3.9" bore

knew you would like the Foreign Policy thing <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

and to all the other knockers...if you are happy to have half the story...you are easily pleased!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Sad]" src="gr_sad.gif" />

Aussie over and out <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" />

<small>[ June 23, 2002, 11:17 PM: Message edited by: HOWQUICK ]</small>

 

Hey guys,
FWIW, there was a comparison done on a flow bench some time back and posted. It contains LS1/LS6 heads, with manifolds (LS1/LS6/Truck [6 litre?]) bolted in place. By 'kewlbrz'. Heres the link:
www.ls1tech.com/ubb/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005068
It hasn't got the truck heads per say, but it makes for interesting reading. Maybe kewlbrz has done the truck head (6 litre) by now?

Cheers from Aussieland

<small>[ June 23, 2002, 10:01 PM: Message edited by: Will Race 4 Food ]</small>

 

Bringing this old topic back up TOP ! Any recent tests done on LS1/6/Q4 both stock and ported?

 

When LQ9 heads are bolted onto the 5.7L (stock LS1) what compression ratio is netted?

 

9.8:1 or slightly less.