lil john

They always have good articles in Popular Hot Rodding: specs ......everything,
Mast has a large bore rhs 427 with a whipple 2.9 =917hp & 817tq this would Challenge mark stielow camaro. cost 26,800 all US currency...or the 465 Olds with 876hp / 672 good reading before the game..

To the point all or most aftermarket heads are better than stock..Fact...... for a particular size engine some shine better than others...Take WKMCD he has a 427 stock with WCCH L92's and a small cam and it's a damn good combo or you can take a pair of TFS/AFR heads and do the same thing with a cam with more DURATION, intake runner is smaller so not as much TQ will be missed couple that with FAST intake...


I said all that to say this: TSP or any LS7 head will work with a 4.080 bore if you go down to 4.030 or smaller U will have to get an even smaller Exhaust valve the intake is not the problem 2.20 it's the exhaust. Exhaust will need to be in the 1.540 range or smaller and remember your port is 267cc they are better than ported LS3 head by way of 12deg vs 15deg..The TFS heads would make a better choice but TSP heads will not work with a bore smaller than....let me scroll up to there site......The PRC Small Bore LS7 cylinder heads are designed for both stroker, and stock cube applications with a 4.060"-4.100" bore....I already had my LS3 Vic Jr. intake so I'm running LS3 style heads...They sell TSP LS3 heads,TFS,AFR,you are not limited but your bore size is 4.005 Aluminum.That's why I'm trying to keep up with the big boy's 370 cfms with a 255 or smaller runner is something you better RECOGNIZE and bore size of 4.060-4.00.

I like the thought of smaller port's that are = to bigger size runner heads number's to .600 in flow ..... after that there heads are over 250cc's in runner size some 280 and larger.... Mast 305, RHS 296,TSP 285....I'm over 700 lift yet I'm willing to take 370-380 cfm's @ 700. That would be tremendous for a bore of only 4.030 matched with a runner size of 240cc you would basically be getting TFS LS3 heads with a smaller port if U take a look at what ETP use to sell the 240 port CR5 heads(U Got to get a intake carb style) there is no LS7 or LS3 head that could keep up...yet RED took a pair of Mast Small bore 240cc heads filled the bottom of the runner and raised the roof making it a raised runner and relocated the manifold bolts and Boom you now have a set of Jimmy Rigged 240cc CR5 heads 390CFM's and it works with LS3 intake...it in Popular Hot Rodding they didn't put this combo up yet on there web page.


BTW: Mast still sells the C5R heads:Inline Valve PXR 12 Degree 4.125"-4.200"6-Bolt CNC Has a 290cc intake port...... wont take a Fast intake

Blackpanther99

iTrader: (8)

Lil John literally went... Genius on us. Good info bro, how much you spend on books though?

lil john

only 1 mag to my mail box PHR and I do buy Engine Master Challenge mag ...Gmhightech...This is all old info everyone no's about canted 11thru23 degree heads.Mast or All Pro or Elderbrock don't make any thing for just your avg Joe..I come with all type's of Sh*t...Example ok GM has the LSX DR/CT heads the CT heads are better because valves are closer= they can be used with a smaller bore so U take the CT heads that are rough not CNC'ed I talked to MR. Rocko Parker head of LSX cylinder heads development about the Rough runner size and U could take them to BES/RFD and get a head that is a raised runner and 11* deg's ....intake is limited to LSX DR/CT intake carb style ....Custom size runner 250 and up ...I've priced it I love to design stuff.

lil john

CT head# are for a rough runner size : 1.3 by 1.95 and 1.33 by 1.53 intake and exhaust runner....LS engines are just better GEN 1's by way of better heads and distributor less engines make for better power..I could get 700hp from a SBC but at what cost..After market block Mucho $ for 15 degree or less heads, Solid roller and Distributor and hot box rev to 7800......about 10 grand the only thing I got special are adj. Rocker arms,EZ roller lifter's I could have gotten Comp or Luntia,Crane cheaper I wanted no bearings..and heads Mast 240's nothing special...just some work in the right places on the intake and heads to match the Solid roller...

lil john

Here's another trick look up all of the good builder build's or dyno'ed proved performance the first is better... I've read Mamo's engine build's till I don't over look nothing.... you are getting 1st hand Knowledge just apply it to you given engine. Heads are the key...Mamo took a pair of AFR 245' ported them to 255's and Whoa........390cfm's for a 454= 750hp6800rpm band and a Fast intake.... Bryan Tooley took another route 4.25 stroke and TFS heads and ....what did U no 715hp 6500rpm band....I have a 408 and(*Banking On) 700hp I'm just a small fish in the ocean of power ......900rwhp+ car's..I may rev to a max of 7400-7300 but i got what I was asking.... with A/C they just have larger engine's with more TQ we can compensate for this.......... Solid roller comes to save the ole Day and truly I could have used a Hyd... roller yet that's a power loss and we are Banking on a # I can't lie, On my Own Quote.408 project Thanos.


Go Jets...LOL!

lil john

Anybody can have power 1 or 2 way's




1* spend for some 1's knowledge and expertise in your part selection

2* This is the best way,....... all engines have What 4 strokes? So all of them are the same now come's part selection....Research and knowing why a raised runner makes more power for example....all the small things, like Compression a efficient Combustion Chamber doesn't need as much timing as say one that has less efficiency...So I would bump it up to 12.07 compression with a Mast head apposed to 11.75 with a ported set of L92's.(They need more timing).....Total Seal Rings,G-Z vacuum pump, ported Vic Jr,EFI 4150, Solid roller,*.Blue Printed Long Block*....... .036 to .042 Quench area all this will help...Knowing Y.....I'm taking these steps is the Key...
We are going to say a guy with large lungs is the 440+
And I'm Young lungs actual Nick name.... we are both running to 100m he has bigger everything Power TQ you name it he got it...How would you go about keeping up.
Me....... keep it short and quick=RPM and make each Breath Count = Solid roller & Mast 240's with a Custom LS7 2.160 valve job & bowl work/short side radius.
His lungs are bigger but for my size my breath is = to his same breath actually even better by comparison relative to port runner and bore size Remember Small Runner 240cc C5r heads. Small bore Mast heads Flow the same amount as AI/WCCH @ .700 355cfm's 3.900 bore vs 4.030 and 267cc port vs 240....I'm Just a real *** *!#^$ who no's how to get things done .....real talk.I ain't rich....I no how to cheat...... knowing parts selection & the rest is fill in the blank Car wt and trans/ rear gear+ up.....I've heard Tony say with this much TQ on his 454 he would like to use the Holley Ram ....Y you can't put but so much TQ of the line.....= tire spin Hp keeps us pushing along ole battle HP vs TQ.

bmf5150

Liljohn, you are full of knowledge, thanks for the great post

lil john

Take John B's engine which head has more potential other than a LS7 or better........Tony' engine is more street-able but once you get into Potential of a head for a larger size engine .........As REX Ryan should say:No comment. this the same thing Hot rod did in LS head challenge Who always won....it's all about what you desired or what will be compromised Tony has the best Cathedarl port I've seen besides Mast 275 do you think any of these would out perform a Greg Good head @ any point limiting factor is intake no need for this much lift with a FAST 102 BIG mouth....... it ain't 4500 t/b big...it's the match up's
• Engine/Drivetrain Spec’s
• Stock 2006 LS7 crate motor short block
• Stock GM LS7 heads hand ported by Greg Good
-400+ CFM intakes
-250+ CFM exhausts
-66cc combustion chambers
-277cc intake runners
- PAC 1.55” Springs 640/240lbs
• 0.040” Cometic MLS head gaskets (11.79 SCR, 8.84 DCR)
• Solid Roller Cam by Bullet
-258*/273*; 112* + 4* LSA installed 108.5*
-0.781” intake
-0.747” exhaust
-Isky EZ-roll SR lifters
-Smith Bros 3/8” pushrods
-Jesel 1.8RR
-C5R Timing chain
-Crower adjustable Cam gear
• Mast LS7 intake and 4500 T/b = 690 rwhp

lil john

I got a good buzz here's a article I had not put into my file you all can have it to hope U like it...U will learn: Thanks U guy's for letting me express my mind........Try this for kicks. The next time you’re surrounded by your gearhead buddies, ask them to explain the difference between horsepower and torque. The participants will immediately divide into “pro torque” and “pro horsepower” camps, and at the end of two hours—or two years—worth of arguing, all you’ll have to show for it are a bunch of lame clichés.

Raging debates and a healthy discourse of divergent opinions is part of what makes building hot rods so much fun, but the key issue at hand here is the lack of knowledge or history per se. Few people seem to truly understand the difference between the two units of measurement, and those who do can be hard pressed to explain it in a way that most people can understand. Fortunately, we know some really smart dudes who have both the knowledge and ability to lay it all out in a palatable fashion. Our cast includes Jon Kaase of Jon Kaase Racing Engines, Judson Massingill of the School of Automotive Machinists, Scott Shafiroff of Shafiroff Racing Engines, and Harold Bettes of Power Technology Consultants. Depending on your preconceived biases, the truth might be difficult to accept, but the experts have spoken once and for all.
The Difference Between Horsepower And Toque Engine On Dyno

Horsepower Defined

Harold Bettes: An engine produces a twisting force at the flywheel, typically measured in lb-ft of torque. One lb-ft of torque is equivalent to the force of a 1-pound weight pulling down on a 1-foot-long lever. Horsepower, by definition, is torque times rpm divided by 5,252. In a running engine, you can’t have torque without horsepower and horsepower without torque because they’re interrelated. The horsepower formula was invented by Scottish engineer James Watt in the late 18th century to help him market his newly invented steam engine. Since his new invention was competing with horses, he had to come up with a way to relate the output of his steam engine to horses. The problem was that his engine produced a twisting force, or torque, while horses performed work. In other words, horses performed work and therefore made power, not torque. If he told potential buyers that his steam engine made more torque than their horses, no one would have known what he was talking about. Watt determined that the typical horse could pull 33,000 pounds of weight 1 foot in one minute, and he had to figure out a way to relate the rotary motion of his steam engine to the linear motion performed by horses. To do this, he divided 33,000 by 6.28, since the circular distance a 1-foot lever travels in one revolution of a crankshaft is equal to 2 pi. By dividing 33,000 by 6.28, Watt came up with the constant of 5,252 that’s now used universally in the horsepower formula. Consequently, an engine that’s producing 33,000 lb-ft of torque per minute—or 550 lb-ft of torque per second—is producing 1 hp, and the constant 5,252 is used to convert the rotational motion of a crankshaft into linear motion.
The Difference Between Horsepower And Toque Drag

Force vs. Work

Judson Massingill: There is a distinct difference between force and work. You can push against a wall with incredible force, but if the wall doesn’t move then you haven’t performed any work. You may have worn yourself out, but you still haven’t performed any work. The same applies to an engine. Torque is just a force, and horsepower is a unit of work that measures the rate at which torque is applied. That means that an engine that produces half as much torque as another engine needs to turn twice as many rpm to produce the same amount of horsepower. For instance, let’s say I need a ditch dug on both sides of my desk. On one side I have Arnold Schwarzenegger with a big shovel, and on the other side I have a skinny guy with a small shovel. If Schwarzenegger throws out 3 cubic feet of dirt with each scoop, and the skinny guy takes out 11/2 cubic feet of dirt with each scoop but works twice as fast, they’ll both dig a ditch the same depth in the same amount of time. Therefore, they’ve accomplished the same amount of work.
The Difference Between Horsepower And Toque Top Of Engine

This example shows why you can have a big engine that makes much more torque than a smaller engine, but doesn’t produce any more horsepower. Torque is important, but it’s not nearly as important as the rpm at which that torque is produced. To illustrate the point, let’s compare a ’70 Buick 455 to a ’70 LS6 big-block Chevy. The Buick made 510 lb-ft of torque compared to the Chevy’s 500 lb-ft. If you thought that the Buick could outrun the Chevy because it made more torque, you were living in a dream world. Since the Chevy made peak torque at 3,600 rpm instead of 2,800 rpm, it made 450 hp compared to the Buick’s 350 hp. Torque is directly related to displacement, and in the last 40 years, torque output per cubic inch has only gone up 10 percent at most. On the other hand, horsepower per cubic inch has gone up dramatically, nearly 30 percent, in that time. That’s because today’s engines aren’t producing that much more torque, but they’re maintaining that torque at a much higher rpm before it drops off.

Torque Rules

Jon Kaase: Horsepower is just a figure that’s calculated from math. When you put the gas pedal to the floorboard, torque is what you feel. In a street car, you want lots of torque. Let’s say you have a small-block V-8 that makes 250 hp at 5,500 rpm and a small Japanese V-6 that makes 250 hp at 7,000 rpm. If you drove both of them back to back, there would be no comparison on how much faster the V-8 would feel because the smaller motor makes far less torque. Having too much torque is like having too much money. You don’t want any less of it. You just have to learn how to manage your account better. If you’re making so much torque that your car is blowing off the tires, either get some bigger tires or manage the power more efficiently with better electronics.
The Difference Between Horsepower And Toque Camaro

Horsepower is King

Judson Massingill: The 433ci LS small-block in our ’99 Camaro drag car makes 1,050 hp naturally aspirated, and has an 8,000- to 9,600-rpm powerband. We don’t even know what the peak torque output is because the motor never turns that low rpm. The reason I quit paying attention to peak torque in race motors is because the vast majority of them operate at rpm that are above peak torque the entire run, whether it’s in NHRA Pro Stock or circle track. If peak torque was more important than peak power, we’d be better off putting our turbo diesel in our race car instead of in our tow rig since it makes more torque than our race engine. If torque is all that matters, why not put some taller gears in our Camaro so the rpm drops down to 7,000 rpm between shifts instead of 8,000? Our 433 small-block might make more torque at 7,000 rpm than at 8,000, but it makes far less power at 7,000 so the car would fall on its face and slow way down. Gearing multiplies torque, and turning more rpm enables you to run shorter gears. In many road racing and circle track applications, a high-rpm motor with lots of gear will make more torque at the rear wheels than a low-rpm motor with less gear since they’ll be turning more rpm and getting more torque multiplication coming off of a corner.

From our racing experience, it’s our opinion that the minimum rpm at which you can go wide-open throttle without breaking the tires loose is the most important part of the power curve. With our Camaro, that point happens to be right around 8,000 rpm. In some respects, the horsepower it makes at 8,000 rpm is more important than peak horsepower. That’s because if the engine speed drops down to 8,000 between shifts, the motor better have some beans at that rpm to keep the car moving down the track. At the end of the day, I am a “bottom end” kind of guy. I just refer to it as horsepower instead of torque.
The Difference Between Horsepower And Toque Dyno

Harold Bettes: For people who say that they would rather have torque than horsepower, you have to think about where in the rpm range that torque is produced. Torque multiplication with the transmission in Reverse is greater than in any of the forward gears. If that’s the case, a car will produce the most torque at the rear wheels while in Reverse, so shouldn’t you just leave it in Reverse and mash the gas? Of course not. Likewise, if you prefer torque over horsepower, maybe you should try leaving a car in First gear all the way down the dragstrip. Let’s say you have a motor that makes 400 lb-ft of torque that’s matched with a 2.50:1 First gear ratio and 4.00:1 ring-and-pinion set. That equates to 4,000 lb-ft of torque that’s being applied to the axles at the engine’s torque peak. However, since the transmission gear ratios get taller with every upshift that means the torque applied to the axles drops significantly in each successive gear. Obviously, if you leave the car in First gear just to maximize the torque that’s applied to the axles and wheels, you’re not going to go very fast. This example clearly illustrates that it’s not torque that pushes a vehicle down the road, but rather horsepower.

lil john

RPM = Power

Judson Massingill: In the racing world, the motor that makes the most explosions going down the track is going to win the race. In other words, the motor than turns the most rpm is probably going to win. Again, that’s because torque per cubic inch is difficult to increase, so the next option is turning more rpm. Not surprisingly, unless the rule book restricts it, engines in every form of racing turn more rpm every year. With today’s cylinder head technology, torque curves stay flat even at high rpm so turning more rpm is the key to making power. In most race engines, horsepower will continue climbing even after peak torque, and as long as rpm increases faster than the rate at which torque drops off after its peak, horsepower will continue to increase. An extreme example is Formula 1. Since the rules limit displacement to 2.4 liters, the motors barely make more than 200 lb-ft. By revving them up to 18,000 rpm, however, they make an incredible 800 hp.

Jon Kaase: Horsepower is torque multiplied by rpm, so if you have a drag car with flat torque curve, the horsepower will keep climbing for a while because of the way the math works out. In other words, if an engine produces lots of torque at high rpm, it will make a ton of power. A Pro Stock motor makes about 1.7 lb-ft per cubic inch, while a very healthy street engine can make as much as 1.5 lb-ft per cubic inch. The big difference is that a race engine will continue to maintain high torque output even after its torque peak. All they’re doing in a Pro Stock engine is raising the rpm where torque is made, and they don’t make that much more peak torque than they did six to eight years ago. Most engines will usually turn a couple thousand rpm past their torque peaks. If horsepower drops off any quicker than that, it usually indicates a problem with the motor. Either the heads, camshaft, intake manifold, carb, or headers are too small, or it’s running out of valvetrain. Scott Shafiroff: In racing, rpm is critical. If you think about it, the greater the number of explosions per second an engine produces, the better it will accelerate a car down the track. In race cars, you look at the horsepower an engine makes and the rpm it turns, and gear it accordingly. You never want a motor to be below peak torque, which requires keeping the rpm up. On each gear change, you want the rpm to drop down to the torque peak and then accelerate beyond power peak. Engine design is about making compromises. You don’t want to trade a lot of torque for only 2 hp, but you do need to sacrifice some torque in order to make horsepower up top.

Area Under the Curve

Harold Bettes: People like to argue over torque and horsepower, but in the process they often overlook the area under the curve. That refers to the average horsepower an engine produces throughout its operating range. Let’s say one engine produces a power curve that looks like a church steeple, while another engine has a power curve shaped like the top of a balloon. Even if both engines produce the same peak power, the engine with the broader curve will be both more fun to drive and substantially faster at the track. That’s because when you shift gears, the engine with the balloon-shaped torque curve will be making more horsepower. For this reason, the area under the curve, or average horsepower, is a much more effective way of gauging how well an engine will perform than peak torque or horsepower.

Scott Shafiroff: People want to see a big peak horsepower number, but average horsepower is much more important. It’s not just the peak number that counts, but rather the horsepower that’s produced over an engine’s rpm range. Some people think that building street motors is easier than building race motors, but that’s not always the case. In some ways it’s harder to build a street motor since they have to operate in a broad rpm range. Whether it’s a street motor or a race motor, the goal is to maximize the average horsepower output.

Low End vs. Top End

Judson Massingill: In America, we tend to look at low-rpm engine output in units of torque and high-rpm output in units of horsepower. However, the truth of the matter is that you can’t separate the two since horsepower is a derivative of torque that’s mathematically calculated from torque and rpm. People are familiar with the formula horsepower equals torque times rpm divided by 5,252. So if you have more torque at, say, 5,000 rpm, than the guy in the other lane, you’ll have more horsepower as well. Likewise, if an engine is producing lots of torque at 3,000 rpm, it’s also producing lots of horsepower at 3,000 rpm. Another way to look at it is that if you’re building an engine to maximize torque output at low rpm, you’re also building an engine that makes lots of horsepower at low rpm. People tend to get very passionate about the horsepower versus torque topic, and some people are torque guys while others are horsepower guys. I’ve been at engine conferences where people got so riled up about this debate that they had to be escorted out of the room by security. The funny thing is that they’re arguing about the same thing. CHP Holla back

bmf5150

Wow great info!!tell me more ...lol

lil john

This is a build Advanced Inductions did it's me except for they used a Carb...(me Fast4150 t/b) 13.1 comp and Hyd roller I'll make it up with better heads and a solid roller..LOL....Solid roller .12.07 comp vs 13+comp hyd roller I have same intake and I use 93 octane

Ai 416 – 700hp+
________________________________________
Gents,

On occasion we like to build test engines to document both the potential of our products, as well as to collect data. Sometimes we are fortunate enough that our need for data coincides with a customer's need for a similar powerplant. I thought we'd share a little data on an engine that was built recently for a friend/customer - Tireburnin/Sean. Beyond data collection, our goal was to put together a low maintenance package that could essentially do it all - cruise, drag race, and tolerate a few hundred hp worth of n2o should the need arise. Sean was looking for ~650hp on pump fuel, which is typically easily attainable with the common 400cid+ engines. As a departure from the norm, we decided to give a carbureted 13:1 E85 setup a try. Our motivation was largely attributable to the prevalence of E85 in SOCAL, his familiarity with carburetion, and fueling consistency if he decided to bracket race the car. As an added benefit, this helped maintain a clean and simple look, so as to arouse minimal suspicion at the local races.
The Basics:

Block: GM LS3
Crank: Compstar 4" Stroke
Rods: Compstar H-Beam
Pistons: JE 4.070"
Rings: Total Seal
Heads: Ai 267cc CNC'd L92
Manifold: Victor Jr. - As Cast
Valve Train: Ai HR, Comp 1.7 Rockers, 3/8" PR, Morel HR Lifters

As with most of our setups, our primary focus is reliability and efficiency. To that end we are particularly over insured in regard to valve train on Sean's setup. Though we are running lobes that we can control with a beehive, we wanted to step it up a bit in the event Sean decided to have us revise the top-end for more power. With Ferrea valves, Morel HR lifters, Comp shaft mounts, and our custom Ti-17 retainers on PSI dual HR springs we're in a position to either move to something aggressive like an LSL, LSK, etc., or raise the operating range if so inclined. For now, due to concerns about drive train breakage leading to over revs, we decided to stick with something we can control to ~8000rpm.

The manifold was chosen simply because we were wanting to do some testing with it. As cast the Victor Jr. should easily support ~700hp, and running our smallest L92/LS3 CNC option, there was little reason to invest time in modifying it for this go 'round. For carburetion we ran two carbs from a known good supplier - Pro Systems. Both are 940-950cfm 4150 carbs, one for gas & one for E85.

As we're mostly using shelf parts, the valve train came together largely without issue. The head and valve covers both required minimal clearancing for the rocker system & pushrods, but that is not uncommon. Having done various mockups, we can now simply CNC the appropriate clearance into L92/LS3's for various shaft systems
Testing

For safety's sake we started on a known good non-oxygenated 108 octane fuel for break in and testing before going to E85 pump fuel. Timing was handled by an MSD 6LS box using GM LS1 coils. As we exceeded our goals, we were not inclined to push the limits on either fuel for the sake of dyno racing. We ran 34deg max on the 108, which consistently made 710-715 depending on temps. While E85 may often allow more timing, we backed it down 4-6deg through the entire curve. We're covered with high nickel content exhaust valves for n2o use, and were more concerned about possible issues on the pump fuel than the slightly higher EGT's. During pump fuel pulls the objective was to simply verify that it would run safely on E85 under load, not so much to determine what is possible with it since the load will vary slightly in real life vs. controlled dyno testing. Additionally, even with little timing, we wanted to collect #'s from low in the RPM range vs. the 108 octane testing which focused on the RPM range Sean will actually use it in. Once it is under the load range it will operate within, we will begin creeping up on it and fatten the low/mid curves on E85.

Results 703 hp@7000 with 576tq@5400 470hp@ 4000rpms
they didn't list there cam mid 240 I would think..Me I'm at 256/270...715/715 lift..... 256 solid is more like 252-250 duration@ .050 on a hyd. roller

lil john

Did this make for good reading info...I have plenty more....Gotta go do some stone work...Holla back.

po feng

so if 408ci Turbo is to configure Which head tfs 235 , tfs 245,prc 237,prc247,cnc 823 ?

Tuskyz28

In your case your best result come from a TFS 245 head.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

After some posts lately id go TFS 245. I was in the LS3 camp for your setup until I saw some recent back to back posts.