ls1 383 come on in!!!!!!
Trending Topics
06-20-2008, 03:01 PM
#8
On The Tree
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: York, Pa.
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are those heads pretty much the same as the TSP 2.5 5.3l heads. Cuz im goin to run the MS3 and the 2.5's w. my 383 and everyones telling me to **** can the MS3 and go bigger!!
06-20-2008, 03:25 PM
#10
Actually 548 RWHP was the best (close enough) but it laid down 540+ more consistantly....(not the "glory" run....LOL)
Solid roller (street friendly 242/248)
225 heads
11 to 1 CR
Mamo Ported 90/90
ARH 1.875 headers
Im building another 383 for a customer as we speak that I expect to have on the chassis dyno in a month or two. Similar to the above combo but with AFR 205's that I might do a little clean up on and a mild hydraulic roller cam (234/238 on a 114).
With the right tune I fully expect this new combo to comfortably exceed 500 RWHP....in fact if the customer opts for me to do a little headwork I fully expect to see it in the 510-520 range with a bunch of torque and throttle response to boot.
We will post results when the engine is finished and tuned on the dyno...
Regards,
Tony
Solid roller (street friendly 242/248)
225 heads
11 to 1 CR
Mamo Ported 90/90
ARH 1.875 headers
Im building another 383 for a customer as we speak that I expect to have on the chassis dyno in a month or two. Similar to the above combo but with AFR 205's that I might do a little clean up on and a mild hydraulic roller cam (234/238 on a 114).
With the right tune I fully expect this new combo to comfortably exceed 500 RWHP....in fact if the customer opts for me to do a little headwork I fully expect to see it in the 510-520 range with a bunch of torque and throttle response to boot.
We will post results when the engine is finished and tuned on the dyno...
Regards,
Tony
06-20-2008, 09:27 PM
#14
Also, any of you that follow my builds already know I dont like to skimp when it comes to my complete engine assemblies and I factored in what I would need to be paid in blueprint and assembly labor as well.
Some of that money is invested in higher quality parts and additional machining operations which equals more power sometimes but better reliability all the time. Better to spend 12K and have an engine last for years than 9K and need to buy another in 12 months or worse.
This particular project is actually based around my 383 shortblock that I just removed from my Corvette and completely disassembled. I honed the block and will be installing new file fit piston rings....the bearings looked like I installed them yesterday after 3 years and countless blasts to 7200+ RPM's and Im actually just reinstalling them (of course on their respective journals I carefully sized them for a long time ago).
I think the new engine will have a fair amount more bottom end than my 225 solid roller version and wont miss the peak numbers by that huge a margin (I'm hoping within 30 with less even better!)....at least thats my goal on paper (it wont have as wide a peak curve either with much of that due to the perfect valve control and area under the curve a solid roller set-up provides). Im confident that in light of the fact its not a huge stroker, the right combination and the attetion to detail in the build will still yield impressive results...at least if my hunch about the finished product is even close (fingers crossed!).
The best part is this will be literally a maintenance free daily driver style set-up with a cam you could live with every day (a 234/238 cam on a 114 LSA is quite user friendly with the additional displacement and piston speed the 383 provides....its the equivalent of a 228ish cam in a 346).
Should be interesting as its going in another C5 so driveline loss will be similar and it will be on the exact same chassis dyno that I have been utilizing for mine the last two years or so (Haddad Motorsports) which makes the results (and the comparisons) that much better.
Keep you guys posted...
Regards,
Tony
Edit: Check this out guys....figured if some of you couldnt appreciate it who would....LOL
BTW, Its a Clevite "H" series bearing for those likely to ask
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; 06-20-2008 at 09:56 PM.
06-20-2008, 11:40 PM
#17
My buddy took another about a week ago the last night I was out with it. I will see about posting that one so as not to bore others that saw the first!
It's different because the vantage point he was video taping from was couple of hundred feet in front of the car this time and you can hear the 7200 RPM induction roar as I'm approaching him and grabbing second even louder than the exhaust note till I go by him....then the whole tone of the run changes as I grab the last few gears. I also had more room this time (cut fourth down early on the first vid) and didn't lift till the shiftlight came on in 4th! (longer than a true quarter mile run for this car and just shy of 145 MPH)
Honestly the video footage isnt that great (its at night) but the sound clip is pretty good....
May take me awhile cause he's having trouble getting it off his camera (long story) but one way or another I will get my hands on it.
Tony
06-21-2008, 12:42 PM
#19
Their excellent....very high quality.
If you can swing the bankroll for them I wouldn't hesitate a minute. Lunati and Callies are pretty much the better quality cranks....the Callies rods are great bang for the buck (pictured above btw with my bearing photo) but the Lunati billet rods might be one wrung higher (albiet more expensive) but also require less block clearancing than the Callies H-beam design with the longer strokes (a big plus when your considering 4.125 stoke applications or larger). I can't say a bad thing about the Callies Compstar though because it has put up with insane rates of acceleration in my 83' for three years now (going from 4K to my 7400 rev limiter in a nano-second in the lower gears on street tires when traction wasn't quite up to snuff....a big problem at night or in cooler weather). I'm running an Eagle crank in the 83' btw and that has held up admirably as well. IMO Eagle gets a bad rap because soooo many people purchase their product due to cost and some of them dont have a right to hold a torque wrench in their hands and ultimately blow them up (blaming the crank and rods and not the fact their bearing clearance or crank endplay wasn't correct).
Anyway....the short answer to your question is the Lunati stuff is excellent so no worries there but there are other options worthy of consideration.
Tony
If you can swing the bankroll for them I wouldn't hesitate a minute. Lunati and Callies are pretty much the better quality cranks....the Callies rods are great bang for the buck (pictured above btw with my bearing photo) but the Lunati billet rods might be one wrung higher (albiet more expensive) but also require less block clearancing than the Callies H-beam design with the longer strokes (a big plus when your considering 4.125 stoke applications or larger). I can't say a bad thing about the Callies Compstar though because it has put up with insane rates of acceleration in my 83' for three years now (going from 4K to my 7400 rev limiter in a nano-second in the lower gears on street tires when traction wasn't quite up to snuff....a big problem at night or in cooler weather). I'm running an Eagle crank in the 83' btw and that has held up admirably as well. IMO Eagle gets a bad rap because soooo many people purchase their product due to cost and some of them dont have a right to hold a torque wrench in their hands and ultimately blow them up (blaming the crank and rods and not the fact their bearing clearance or crank endplay wasn't correct).
Anyway....the short answer to your question is the Lunati stuff is excellent so no worries there but there are other options worthy of consideration.
Tony