speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

LOL. That is a pretty specific position.

armyboyatc

iTrader: (29)

KCS I sure don't hope you own or work at a business that pertains to building LS motors cause you're losing customers with every post.

You're obviously blind to the facts and only see your opinions. You continue to agree with yourself because no one else is lol!

You're proving you don't know what your doing here. This is common knowledge guy. Suck it up and deal with it. You're not winning anything here and you're sure not proving anything.

Just continue to build your 2002 technology while the rest of us move forward with technology and we will see your motors at the finish line.

KCS

iTrader: (20)

It's specific to this thread. The OP asked for recommendations, and based off the information he provided, that's what I would suggest. It's not the gospel, its just a suggestion.

KCS

iTrader: (20)

I'm not trying to prove anything, I just stated my opinion and premise and you're getting all butthurt because you don't think it aligns with what you say is "common knowledge".

The fact is that I've had this argument before, several times, so I don't feel the need to lay it all out again and again and again. My own car with unported 241 heads is making as much as 50ft-lbs more than 99% of the LS3/L92's that get posted on here, and the clutch was giving up at 5000RPM. With the new clutch, I can get back on the dyno and see what the rest of the powerband looks like and determine if it was the clutch or the stock LS1 manifold that limited me to 430ft-lbs. I don't expect it to make as much peak power as the LS3/L92, but I will get to see how much better the midrange is. Then you may get a chance to make all new excuses and tell me I don't know what I'm doing. Lol

I'll be waiting on you...

armyboyatc

iTrader: (29)

I'm not butthurt, I'm laughing at you. And whether you believe it or not, it IS common knowledge.

That is a cool story about your unported 241 heads. I like to do more with more rather than spending a bunch of time trying to figure out how to maximize the flow of a head that's over a decade old.

Got news for you, peak power wins drag races. Period. High stall, high gear, RPM's and peaky power is king on the strip. Make all the midrange you want, most drag cars launch at 4500+. If they don't then they spend just the first touch of the race in midrange power. Then it's 6500rpm shifts where midrange doesn't mean squat

Dyno Junkie

[QUOTE=KCS;17888310 My own car with unported 241 heads is making as much as 50ft-lbs more than 99% of the LS3/L92's that get posted on here.[/QUOTE]

Wow, I wonder what it would do with 243 heads.

KCS

iTrader: (20)

We're talking about an engine with dished pistons going into a truck, not a drag car with a 5000RPM stall. That's why I'm saying the smaller chambers and smaller ports would be better for this application.

KCS

iTrader: (20)

I have a set that I'm machining for LS3 valves. Should be interesting with a FAST intake.

armyboyatc

iTrader: (29)

Same principals apply. This guy isn't towing houses, he is towing a small trailer.

At this point you're just being hard headed and stuck in your old ways.

Fact is that there are motors out there that are doing what he needs done with square port heads, producing plenty of torque in the lower RPM range and also shine up top. It's not solely about the heads here guy, it's the setup as a whole and being able to spec a cam and valvetrain to work with the heads so you get the best of both worlds.

Like I've been saying, just because you don't know how or haven't done it doesn't mean that it can't be done or others haven't.

KCS

iTrader: (20)

The same principles apply? To a 4300lbs truck?

What you consider "plenty of torque" is different than what I do. The heads are too big, and what you are seeing with the "setup as a whole" are just bandaids. With the cathedral port heads, you can do a little work on the valve job and port to make just as much, even more power than the L92 heads, but no matter what you do with the L92's, you will never make the low end and midrange of the cathedral heads. In this case, right out of the gate you have a 4-6cc larger chamber to deal with on the L92's, which is already a kick in the ***** when the pistons have a dish. You're going to have to mill down those L92's to 66cc just to get 10:1, while the 243 heads start at 64cc. I really don't think any magic cam profile is going to help overcome that without seriously giving up the higher RPM power you're raving about.

I don't have a problem with L92 heads as a whole, I just think they're a mismatch for the 6.2L and smaller engines. Especially a 6.0L LQ4. They're a great budget head for larger engines or something that only sees a narrow RPM range, but that's it.

There you go with that ignorant cop out again. You think that if someone doesn't love L92 heads as the best head out, then they just don't know how to make them work? That's stupid. The problem is that you don't know how to get cathedral port heads to work.

musclecarsrock68

wow guys thanks for all the replys. Just to clear a few things up real fast. The lq4 is bored over .020. so its not a 364, maybe a 366 now LOL also since I had to get new pistons I went ahead and got flat top to bring up my compression some and I already had the ls3 heads milled down .015 to help out my compression even more and pat g specd my cam for my truck and what I wanted. So I think I am going to stick with the ls3 top end. if I pull a trailer it wont be more then once a year and even then its realllllly light and on top of all that even the people who say i should go with the 799 heads are saying I would have to mill to bring up compression and get the cam just right witch i have already done both and got flat tops. how ever i am going to keep the fast 92 and ls6 heads and most likley build another 6.0 down the road. anyways as soon as my bearings get here the lq4/9 will be coming together and ill be sure to post results after its been broken in and dyno'd. Thanks again guys!

KCS

iTrader: (20)

Smart move going with the new pistons, I totally missed that part. You'll still be mid 10:1, which is still leaving a lot on the table, but on the bright side you can use cheap fuel! It should still be fun regardless which head went on there. Good luck.

musclecarsrock68

I plan on running 93 or 91 anyways and the heads are not on yet, how much more do you think i could mill with out having ptv problems?

KCS

iTrader: (20)

It depends on the cam. Patrick would probably know better than I would since he spec'd the cam and is probably more familiar with the lobes that I am. He probably spec'd you something with a mid 220's intake and 230's exhaust, which I would think might be okay if you took off another .015", but the LSA and ICL will play a role as well.

Did you get stock replacement type pistons or do they have valve reliefs?

musclecarsrock68

ok cool I will give him a call but they are replacement type pistons with no valve reliefs