Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Would Stage III heads be good on a ...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-16-2002, 07:39 PM
  #1  
On The Tree
Thread Starter
 
Slammed Vette's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: IL
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Would Stage III heads be good on a ...

382 stroker?????Or should I go with stage II with 2.055 and 1.60's??
Old 10-16-2002, 11:23 PM
  #2  
TECH Addict
 
AlonzoVersion 1.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Fort Worth,TX
Posts: 2,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Would Stage III heads be good on a ...

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Slammed Vette:
<strong>382 stroker?????Or should I go with stage II with 2.055 and 1.60's??</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I would stick with the 2.05 valves.BUt thats just me though.Unless I was going all out(race motor)then I wouldnt go that big as I believe it could hurt more than help.But I could be wrong though.
Old 10-17-2002, 08:52 PM
  #3  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
beardWS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lake Jackson,TX
Posts: 2,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default Re: Would Stage III heads be good on a ...

Just a note. My car is at MTI right now getting MTI S2 heads/ X1 cam and a whole lot of stuff. Josh is doing it. My heads flowed 290 which is really good. You can overflow your heads if your bottom-end is not built for it.Josh sayed build your heads to match your bottom. Don`t try to get flow numbers for bragging rights. Mine are perfect for a stock bottom. You could go with a stroker and they will work. I believe it`s another 25rwhp with S3 heads, maybe alittle more. It`s up to you. For the money get S2 and spray it, I am hehe! Good luck!
Old 10-17-2002, 10:49 PM
  #4  
Moderator
 
xp3nd4bl3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Murrieta
Posts: 814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default Re: Would Stage III heads be good on a ...

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Alonzo:
<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 Slammed Vette:
<strong>382 stroker?????Or should I go with stage II with 2.055 and 1.60's??</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I would stick with the 2.05 valves.BUt thats just me though.Unless I was going all out(race motor)then I wouldnt go that big as I believe it could hurt more than help.But I could be wrong though.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It should be noted my stock bottom ended (346) with LQ9 heads 2.08" and 1.60" did 436rwhp today untuned with a stock screened MAF, a stock TB on 17x11's with 315 Nitto DR's. I'm hoping for 450 with my MAF and TB back on and some tuning.

The heads flowed 342/237 @ .600

<small>[ October 17, 2002, 10:51 PM: Message edited by: MicahJam ]</small>
Old 10-18-2002, 02:11 AM
  #5  
TECH Addict
 
AlonzoVersion 1.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Fort Worth,TX
Posts: 2,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Would Stage III heads be good on a ...

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by MicahJam:
<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 Alonzo:
<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 Slammed Vette:
<strong>382 stroker?????Or should I go with stage II with 2.055 and 1.60's??</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I would stick with the 2.05 valves.BUt thats just me though.Unless I was going all out(race motor)then I wouldnt go that big as I believe it could hurt more than help.But I could be wrong though.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It should be noted my stock bottom ended (346) with LQ9 heads 2.08" and 1.60" did 436rwhp today untuned with a stock screened MAF, a stock TB on 17x11's with 315 Nitto DR's. I'm hoping for 450 with my MAF and TB back on and some tuning.

The heads flowed 342/237 @ .600</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thats very good but what would be a better comparison would be to use 2.02's and 1.57's and see what you get.I said it hurts some times not all the time.What is your compression ratio,cam specs etc...that all plays parts in it.For me though thats to big for stock displacement and I will say I believe you would make more with smaller valves but we wont know because with those numbers its not worth the hassle to find out. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48 PM.