87silverbullet

iTrader: (11)

I just found this vid and thought it was quite impressive to make 540 hp with less cubes than an ls1 and at such a lower rpm. It made that hp at only 6400 rpms.

DietCoke

iTrader: (18)

Eh... most 5.3s will do those numbers with a medium cam and decent heads. That would only push 450-470 at the tire in most setups.

87silverbullet

iTrader: (11)

Yeah spinning them to 7000+ rpm this motor did it at only 6400. There are many guys not pushing those rwhp numbers with 346's

Mike@Diablosport

iTrader: (2)

I'll admit, when I saw the thread title, I was expecting a 9000 rpm monster that made like 700+...

I'd agree that it would have easily made the same power or more with the stock stroke and at a reasonable rpm as well, weird.

SSCamaro99_3

iTrader: (1)

I can't watch the video at work. I am assuming this is something like a 4.03x3.25 setup. My personal ssumption is that this would be about a 450-475 hp engine installed. Which a 4.03x3.63 LQ9 could accomplish, just with a softer torque curve and a little more rpm. Exactly why I doubt the new Gen V's will be 5.5L. A short stroke big bore engine does not have enough inherent advantages in a street engine than maintaining the standard stroke. Just some random thoughts.

midevil1

iTrader: (17)

what heads did they use?

87silverbullet

iTrader: (11)

I couldn't really tell from the vid. It looks like the stock 317's with work done to them.

Wnts2Go10O

iTrader: (12)

no accessories and no belt drive water pump. i would bet money that with the usual things added that it would bring the number down to around 500 or 490 at the fly and 420ish wheel.

topbrent

iTrader: (1)

D&A competed in the 2011 Engine Masters competition with this engine. In the Feb 2012 Popular Hotrodding issue, there was a full description of all of the competitors combos.

The details given for this particular engine were:

- 6.0 iron block (4.030"), decked .050
- 4.8 crank (3.268"),
- 6" rod.
- Reworked Mahle 350sbc pistons
- nicely ported L92 heads,
- GM L92 dual plane intake.
- Crane Solid Roller, .649/.649, 232/240, 108LSA+5°
- Harland Sharp 1.7 rockers.
- 11.5 compression


Don and Andy have posted info about this engine here on LS1tech, SpeedTalk, ect.

Here is a pic of it at the 2011 Engine Masters competition.

midevil1

iTrader: (17)

My 370 made 504whp with the same comp. and similar cam specs. Lightly ported L92's and Ported LS3 intake. I don't think destroking the 6 liter is worth it...

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

Looks like great power and torque for the displacement, but I just can't see the point of destroking the motor. In that RPM range, whatever that motor can do a 6.0 can do better.

topbrent

iTrader: (1)

This engine was specifically built to take advantage of the EMC cubic inch rules, not necessarily to make some magical huge power numbers.

For what it is, it is cool.

bww3588

iTrader: (49)

That's my dyno cell! Had a lot of good times in that cell.

CAMSTER

iTrader: (10)

I say 1.62 hp per cube using only 11.5 comp with that small cam is excellent, i have experience, with short stroke engines and they ran very different, they can live you at the dig in a flash, so don't underestimate the numbers, will have about 460 rwhp on stick car, I'll love to drive...

Havoc40

Gotta miss UNOH

(fellow alum.)

wildcamaro

iTrader: (15)

I like to see different builds like this...now strap it in a car with all accessories and see what it does at the track which is the only measuring stick that counts out there! Cool engine though nonetheless

LS6

That is very bad killer engine

redtan

iTrader: (5)

There's nothing "small" about a 23x/24x cam in a 5.5L engine, but still.

It's making decent power for what it is and sure there are setups that that will work well in, most likely a track oriented car with sustained high rpms.

D&A Machine Shop

Hi everyone.
A friend told me about this thread so I thought I would give a little more info as to why we built it the way we did.
As was mentioned by Brent we decided on the smaller cube engine because of the scoring system that is use at the engine masters competition.
We also were trying to build an engine that would perform better with a restrictive muffler that was used.
It seemed like an interesting combination so we went for it.
We did try the single plane intake that gmpp has for the L92 engine and made over 560 hp with that intake but the torque was down which hurt our overall score.
It was also something that some of our customers were interested in because they still love the way an old school 327 runs so we thought it would be interesting to see what the same basic bore and stroke would do with the new design.
I am in the process of breaking it down now and will post pictures of the parts used if anybody would like to see them. Also if there are anymore questions or comments lets have them.

Andy

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

Hey Andy, thanx for posting. I would love the see the two dyno graphs so we could compare the power curves between the dual plane and single plane. Many of us have seen tests and have experience with the Edelbrock Performer RPM cathedral port dual plane but not the GMPP dual plane.