Cylinder Heads - What Matters Most?
#221
TECH Veteran
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I don't pay much attention to the strokers. I know more cubes is better, but I find that the LS really likes to be oversquare. 388 (4.125 x 3.622) vs 383 (3.9 x 4.0). Only 5 cubes difference, but the 388 will completely outclass the 383. If you're going to build a 416, I truly think you would do better to build a 427. You're forcing yourself to use a smaller valve to feed more cubes with a stroker. Most of the 416 type builds I see tend to be budget builds and use LS3 heads. Which are great factory heads.But I'm sure there are better heads for those builds.
Hammer always jokes about them being tow truck engines, but if you think about it..
Small valve feeding a big cylinder - great for torque, run out of flow up top
Longer lever arm for more torque, but resists revving
Improved intake manifold vacuum - also great for torque
On mine, I sometimes with I had just punched it out to 4.185 instead of 4.130 and been done with it.
Hammer always jokes about them being tow truck engines, but if you think about it..
Small valve feeding a big cylinder - great for torque, run out of flow up top
Longer lever arm for more torque, but resists revving
Improved intake manifold vacuum - also great for torque
On mine, I sometimes with I had just punched it out to 4.185 instead of 4.130 and been done with it.
LS7 blocks are known to crack a cylinder wall.
LSX blocks are just to damn heavy and i think all n/a cars perform better with aluminum blocks. Weight on the nose hurts performance. Im now running a LS2 block... before i had a LQ9 block. Never again will i make that mistake of going to a iron block.
I know you can sleeve a aluminum block but you take a chance then. Steve told me that two blocks are never the same in reality after sleeving. One may last 5 months and the next block could last years problem free. I just wouldn't want to risk it. The LS3 block 416ci motors seem to hold up however. I'll take less weight and 11 cubes less anyday of the week.
Ive seen a 416ci car go 9.8s in the quarter at bowling green at the LS fest with a 6 speed on pump gas using factory rocker arms and a hydraulic roller. Car weighed 3450lbs. The suspension was dialied in but not dialed in. Reason i say that the car lifted the front driver wheel pretty high while the passenger side tire stayed low. I was just wondering can anybody top that or beat that....
#222
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
When you talking 427 i think of a LSX block or LS7 block.
LS7 blocks are known to crack a cylinder wall.
LSX blocks are just to damn heavy and i think all n/a cars perform better with aluminum blocks. Weight on the nose hurts performance. Im now running a LS2 block... before i had a LQ9 block. Never again will i make that mistake of going to a iron block.
I know you can sleeve a aluminum block but you take a chance then. Steve told me that two blocks are never the same in reality after sleeving. One may last 5 months and the next block could last years problem free. I just wouldn't want to risk it. The LS3 block 416ci motors seem to hold up however. I'll take less weight and 11 cubes less anyday of the week.
Ive seen a 416ci car go 9.8s in the quarter at bowling green at the LS fest with a 6 speed on pump gas using factory rocker arms and a hydraulic roller. Car weighed 3450lbs. The suspension was dialied in but not dialed in. Reason i say that the car lifted the front driver wheel pretty high while the passenger side tire stayed low. I was just wondering can anybody top that or beat that....
LS7 blocks are known to crack a cylinder wall.
LSX blocks are just to damn heavy and i think all n/a cars perform better with aluminum blocks. Weight on the nose hurts performance. Im now running a LS2 block... before i had a LQ9 block. Never again will i make that mistake of going to a iron block.
I know you can sleeve a aluminum block but you take a chance then. Steve told me that two blocks are never the same in reality after sleeving. One may last 5 months and the next block could last years problem free. I just wouldn't want to risk it. The LS3 block 416ci motors seem to hold up however. I'll take less weight and 11 cubes less anyday of the week.
Ive seen a 416ci car go 9.8s in the quarter at bowling green at the LS fest with a 6 speed on pump gas using factory rocker arms and a hydraulic roller. Car weighed 3450lbs. The suspension was dialied in but not dialed in. Reason i say that the car lifted the front driver wheel pretty high while the passenger side tire stayed low. I was just wondering can anybody top that or beat that....
I will either use an LS9 or Dart Aluminium block when I build another engine one day.
Maybe I might even use an LS7 block if I plan to stay NA. I won't use this block with boost.
I really like the fact that you can make 600rwhp NA with a good LS7 combination.
#223
Super Hulk Smash
iTrader: (7)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Darton sleeved Gen IV blocks are the best option these days... low weight, stronger, and can support 454 with off the shelf parts easily or 468 with more custom stuff.
Dart SHP is a better block for boost and cheaper than the LSX block.
I don't really see the need to run anything else unless it's a JY 5.3L for a turbo build or a 6L JY motor for a nitrous build or something like that.
LS3 is expensive now. LS2 doesn't support enough cubes or bore. LS7 is overpriced for what it is. Getting any of those used helps a lot--but new they are not worth it.
The LS9 is less expensive than the LS3 block now and is better. But I'm not sure I'd pay $2200 for one when the Dart SHP is the same price, has 6-bolt heads, and priority main oiling, and oil squirters too.
I think anytime you can get to 4.100" bore and get to the LS7 architecture, you're going to do better with the motor. Or the aftermarket LS3 stuff--which performs pretty close to the LS7 stuff... But they all need more bore to shine.
As a side note... I've been looking at using a K1 3.900" stroke with the JE Asymmetric pistons. They are very light and allow for some interesting cube combos... 423 with a 4.155" bore or a 429 with a 4.185" bore... the bigger, heavier piston (relative to a 4.03" bore piston) has some of the applied force offset from a slightly smaller stroke.
Dart SHP is a better block for boost and cheaper than the LSX block.
I don't really see the need to run anything else unless it's a JY 5.3L for a turbo build or a 6L JY motor for a nitrous build or something like that.
LS3 is expensive now. LS2 doesn't support enough cubes or bore. LS7 is overpriced for what it is. Getting any of those used helps a lot--but new they are not worth it.
The LS9 is less expensive than the LS3 block now and is better. But I'm not sure I'd pay $2200 for one when the Dart SHP is the same price, has 6-bolt heads, and priority main oiling, and oil squirters too.
I think anytime you can get to 4.100" bore and get to the LS7 architecture, you're going to do better with the motor. Or the aftermarket LS3 stuff--which performs pretty close to the LS7 stuff... But they all need more bore to shine.
As a side note... I've been looking at using a K1 3.900" stroke with the JE Asymmetric pistons. They are very light and allow for some interesting cube combos... 423 with a 4.155" bore or a 429 with a 4.185" bore... the bigger, heavier piston (relative to a 4.03" bore piston) has some of the applied force offset from a slightly smaller stroke.
#224
TECH Veteran
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I will never use Iron or Cast iron blocks due to the much higher temperatures and big weight penalty.
I will either use an LS9 or Dart Aluminium block when I build another engine one day.
Maybe I might even use an LS7 block if I plan to stay NA. I won't use this block with boost.
I really like the fact that you can make 600rwhp NA with a good LS7 combination.
I will either use an LS9 or Dart Aluminium block when I build another engine one day.
Maybe I might even use an LS7 block if I plan to stay NA. I won't use this block with boost.
I really like the fact that you can make 600rwhp NA with a good LS7 combination.
#225
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Darton sleeved Gen IV blocks are the best option these days... low weight, stronger, and can support 454 with off the shelf parts easily or 468 with more custom stuff.
Dart SHP is a better block for boost and cheaper than the LSX block.
I don't really see the need to run anything else unless it's a JY 5.3L for a turbo build or a 6L JY motor for a nitrous build or something like that.
LS3 is expensive now. LS2 doesn't support enough cubes or bore. LS7 is overpriced for what it is. Getting any of those used helps a lot--but new they are not worth it.
The LS9 is less expensive than the LS3 block now and is better. But I'm not sure I'd pay $2200 for one when the Dart SHP is the same price, has 6-bolt heads, and priority main oiling, and oil squirters too.
I think anytime you can get to 4.100" bore and get to the LS7 architecture, you're going to do better with the motor. Or the aftermarket LS3 stuff--which performs pretty close to the LS7 stuff... But they all need more bore to shine.
As a side note... I've been looking at using a K1 3.900" stroke with the JE Asymmetric pistons. They are very light and allow for some interesting cube combos... 423 with a 4.155" bore or a 429 with a 4.185" bore... the bigger, heavier piston (relative to a 4.03" bore piston) has some of the applied force offset from a slightly smaller stroke.
Dart SHP is a better block for boost and cheaper than the LSX block.
I don't really see the need to run anything else unless it's a JY 5.3L for a turbo build or a 6L JY motor for a nitrous build or something like that.
LS3 is expensive now. LS2 doesn't support enough cubes or bore. LS7 is overpriced for what it is. Getting any of those used helps a lot--but new they are not worth it.
The LS9 is less expensive than the LS3 block now and is better. But I'm not sure I'd pay $2200 for one when the Dart SHP is the same price, has 6-bolt heads, and priority main oiling, and oil squirters too.
I think anytime you can get to 4.100" bore and get to the LS7 architecture, you're going to do better with the motor. Or the aftermarket LS3 stuff--which performs pretty close to the LS7 stuff... But they all need more bore to shine.
As a side note... I've been looking at using a K1 3.900" stroke with the JE Asymmetric pistons. They are very light and allow for some interesting cube combos... 423 with a 4.155" bore or a 429 with a 4.185" bore... the bigger, heavier piston (relative to a 4.03" bore piston) has some of the applied force offset from a slightly smaller stroke.
#226
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I don't pay much attention to the strokers. I know more cubes is better, but I find that the LS really likes to be oversquare. 388 (4.125 x 3.622) vs 383 (3.9 x 4.0). Only 5 cubes difference, but the 388 will completely outclass the 383. If you're going to build a 416, I truly think you would do better to build a 427. You're forcing yourself to use a smaller valve to feed more cubes with a stroker. Most of the 416 type builds I see tend to be budget builds and use LS3 heads. Which are great factory heads.But I'm sure there are better heads for those builds.
Hammer always jokes about them being tow truck engines, but if you think about it..
Small valve feeding a big cylinder - great for torque, run out of flow up top
Longer lever arm for more torque, but resists revving
Improved intake manifold vacuum - also great for torque
On mine, I sometimes with I had just punched it out to 4.185 instead of 4.130 and been done with it.
Hammer always jokes about them being tow truck engines, but if you think about it..
Small valve feeding a big cylinder - great for torque, run out of flow up top
Longer lever arm for more torque, but resists revving
Improved intake manifold vacuum - also great for torque
On mine, I sometimes with I had just punched it out to 4.185 instead of 4.130 and been done with it.
#227
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
What? That may be true that the OEM LS3 heads run out of air on a 416, not so with better aftermarket heads. I built a 13:1 416 with AFR heads with 2.17/1.60 valves, LLSR and 105mm Hi Ram to make peak at 7000 + and I have no doubt about it’s ability to do that, NO tow truck 416 motor here, 140 + trap speed, 9.60 or quicker, 625rwhp are my goals. Oh, that’s faster than Hammer’s 10.0 and 139mph with said 670 plus rear wheel BTY.
And I wasn't trying to be that big a jerk about the strokers. I realize in hindsight my post doesn't read entirely what I was thinking. If I could politely rephrase to say the typical stroker builds tend to underwhelm for the reasons I listed? Those builds have kind of soured me on 383's, 408's, 414's etc. mea culpa.
#228
TECH Veteran
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
What? That may be true that the OEM LS3 heads run out of air on a 416, not so with better aftermarket heads. I built a 13:1 416 with AFR heads with 2.17/1.60 valves, LLSR and 105mm Hi Ram to make peak at 7000 + and I have no doubt about it’s ability to do that, NO tow truck 416 motor here, 140 + trap speed, 9.60 or quicker, 625rwhp are my goals. Oh, that’s faster than Hammer’s 10.0 and 139mph with said 670 plus rear wheel BTY.
#229
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Darth people build the ls3 to 416 cubes so they can do another rebuild down the road.
If you do a 427 on an LS3 it's a throw away if it ever needs to be rebuilt again.
Same with my LS2 408.
When I build another engine one day I will either use the LS9 or Dart Aluminium Block.
If you do a 427 on an LS3 it's a throw away if it ever needs to be rebuilt again.
Same with my LS2 408.
When I build another engine one day I will either use the LS9 or Dart Aluminium Block.
When you talking 427 i think of a LSX block or LS7 block.
LS7 blocks are known to crack a cylinder wall.
LSX blocks are just to damn heavy and i think all n/a cars perform better with aluminum blocks. Weight on the nose hurts performance. Im now running a LS2 block... before i had a LQ9 block. Never again will i make that mistake of going to a iron block.
I know you can sleeve a aluminum block but you take a chance then. Steve told me that two blocks are never the same in reality after sleeving. One may last 5 months and the next block could last years problem free. I just wouldn't want to risk it. The LS3 block 416ci motors seem to hold up however. I'll take less weight and 11 cubes less anyday of the week.
Ive seen a 416ci car go 9.8s in the quarter at bowling green at the LS fest with a 6 speed on pump gas using factory rocker arms and a hydraulic roller. Car weighed 3450lbs. The suspension was dialied in but not dialed in. Reason i say that the car lifted the front driver wheel pretty high while the passenger side tire stayed low. I was just wondering can anybody top that or beat that....
LS7 blocks are known to crack a cylinder wall.
LSX blocks are just to damn heavy and i think all n/a cars perform better with aluminum blocks. Weight on the nose hurts performance. Im now running a LS2 block... before i had a LQ9 block. Never again will i make that mistake of going to a iron block.
I know you can sleeve a aluminum block but you take a chance then. Steve told me that two blocks are never the same in reality after sleeving. One may last 5 months and the next block could last years problem free. I just wouldn't want to risk it. The LS3 block 416ci motors seem to hold up however. I'll take less weight and 11 cubes less anyday of the week.
Ive seen a 416ci car go 9.8s in the quarter at bowling green at the LS fest with a 6 speed on pump gas using factory rocker arms and a hydraulic roller. Car weighed 3450lbs. The suspension was dialied in but not dialed in. Reason i say that the car lifted the front driver wheel pretty high while the passenger side tire stayed low. I was just wondering can anybody top that or beat that....
If y'all ever seen a 18-wheeler engine, they are shop-resleevable. There's a tool you use the pull the sleeves out and install new sleeves. No machine work required. Part of the repower kit. New rings, bearings, and sleeves. Kinda cool.
#231
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Darton sleeved truck blocks will be down at least 20hp against an ls7 block due to a lack of bay to bay breathing. Great cheap option for a low rpm boosted motor or just a high power build that you can turn the ****. Not so great on a high reving NA motor where 20hp can be extremely difficult and expensive to find.
LS7 blocks are gems from the factory for NA builds. If anyone doesn’t want one because they think they’re junk I’ll take them all haha. Someday people are going to want ls7 parts again...I’m almost to the point of buying them for spares for the future.
LS7 blocks are gems from the factory for NA builds. If anyone doesn’t want one because they think they’re junk I’ll take them all haha. Someday people are going to want ls7 parts again...I’m almost to the point of buying them for spares for the future.
#232
TECH Veteran
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Lets not forget Darton blocks tend to heat up quicker and run a little warmer vs a GM production block. The darton block also requires Evans Coolant which is higher than the typical antifreeze we get at autozone etc.....
#233
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So basically, your AFR heads corrected the very issue that I was pointing out by going with a larger valve? That was a smart move. Did you choose the valve size or was that how they ship from AFR? Also, looks like you made similar decisions I made. Don't worry about torque - build for power and rpm and you'll have torque on a big motor. I aimed for peak HP at 7000 rpm also. sniper though to fit the cowl. And LLSR. I peaked right at 7K, carried to 8K. I'm guessing your cam is mid to high 240's intake?
And I wasn't trying to be that big a jerk about the strokers. I realize in hindsight my post doesn't read entirely what I was thinking. If I could politely rephrase to say the typical stroker builds tend to underwhelm for the reasons I listed? Those builds have kind of soured me on 383's, 408's, 414's etc. mea culpa.
And I wasn't trying to be that big a jerk about the strokers. I realize in hindsight my post doesn't read entirely what I was thinking. If I could politely rephrase to say the typical stroker builds tend to underwhelm for the reasons I listed? Those builds have kind of soured me on 383's, 408's, 414's etc. mea culpa.
#234
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Darth, no offense taken just defending the 416 a bit, and yes I kinda saw what you’re stating about valve size having to do more work to make the same power per c.i. No and yes, 1.60 is the AFR sized valve out of the box and the 2.17 is a size Tony sells for that application, they are the hollow option 94g vs.the 125gm 2.165” that came with the head, they’re 5.200”? long and stainless so they’re apt to be a little heavy. Cam is 251-263 111+4 .700-.680 lift, Steve at Cam motion specced it. Honestly, I think the goals of this motor are realistic, the 4.00” arm might be what makes it go, or it might be what I did wrong, IDK.Going to use a TSI glide with 1.80:1 low, 5800 stall 4:30s 27” Hoosier radial to start off. Let the bench race begin.
I think you did it right. I look at bigger motors like this -- the old poncho 428 made 475 lbs of torque almost by accident. Top end (heads, cam, intake) were not really that good, and it still made torque. So I figure that you do not need to build a big cube motor for torque. You need to build for power and uncork it. It'll still make torque. By doing what you did, I think it'll rev great. Sure it might pull the power band down vs a 376 due to the 4" arm, but put that cam and intake on a stock ls3, and you're likely talking 8000 RPM peak power.
I go back and forth on the valves. Lighter is better and more lighter is more betterer. But stronger is more betterer too. I like the titanium valves, but I can see why guys would do stainless. I guess as long as you spring up and give enough pushrod, it's fine, but still seems there would be parasitic losses. Some of the snappiest engines I've felt were LS1's with PSI1511 springs and titanium locks. Over 1-lb out of the valve train vs stock LS1, and very snappy revving motors.
#235
TECH Veteran
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Darton sleeved truck blocks will be down at least 20hp against an ls7 block due to a lack of bay to bay breathing. Great cheap option for a low rpm boosted motor or just a high power build that you can turn the ****. Not so great on a high reving NA motor where 20hp can be extremely difficult and expensive to find.
LS7 blocks are gems from the factory for NA builds. If anyone doesn’t want one because they think they’re junk I’ll take them all haha. Someday people are going to want ls7 parts again...I’m almost to the point of buying them for spares for the future.
LS7 blocks are gems from the factory for NA builds. If anyone doesn’t want one because they think they’re junk I’ll take them all haha. Someday people are going to want ls7 parts again...I’m almost to the point of buying them for spares for the future.
#237
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
“If you are running NA I suggest you start with a new LS2 block. The 5.3 is better for high power or long duration desert racing because the main bearing bulkheads are solidwhich increases the strength. However there is a horsepower penalty at higher revs of approximately 20 horsepower due to reduced bay to bay breathing in the bottom end.”
He said a vacuum pump or dry sump would reduce the penalty but it is still there.
I know TSP cab machine a hole in the block to vent, but still not ideal.
4” stroke cranks add a ton more windage vs a stock stroke crank. I think that contributes a lot to the underwhelming top end performance of most strokers.
#238
TECH Veteran
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
An email from Steve at R.E.D.
“If you are running NA I suggest you start with a new LS2 block. The 5.3 is better for high power or long duration desert racing because the main bearing bulkheads are solidwhich increases the strength. However there is a horsepower penalty at higher revs of approximately 20 horsepower due to reduced bay to bay breathing in the bottom end.”
He said a vacuum pump or dry sump would reduce the penalty but it is still there.
I know TSP cab machine a hole in the block to vent, but still not ideal.
4” stroke cranks add a ton more windage vs a stock stroke crank. I think that contributes a lot to the underwhelming top end performance of most strokers.
“If you are running NA I suggest you start with a new LS2 block. The 5.3 is better for high power or long duration desert racing because the main bearing bulkheads are solidwhich increases the strength. However there is a horsepower penalty at higher revs of approximately 20 horsepower due to reduced bay to bay breathing in the bottom end.”
He said a vacuum pump or dry sump would reduce the penalty but it is still there.
I know TSP cab machine a hole in the block to vent, but still not ideal.
4” stroke cranks add a ton more windage vs a stock stroke crank. I think that contributes a lot to the underwhelming top end performance of most strokers.
Its hidden cost of running a darton block like that Vacuum pump deal you mentioned and the Evans Coolant I mentioned. Im not a fan of hidden costs.
#239
ModSquad
iTrader: (6)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Tusky, you don’t need the Evans stuff for the Darton dry sleeve, which is much more affordable than the MID Darton setup, which does require the Evans stuff. The Darton dry sleeve is excellant for a street build or even a mild race type build.
I had Proline polish my crank when I did my tear down due to rings, and was talking to them about possibly honing/touching my block with a dingleberry setup to remove possible glazing issues (40 miles). Chris told me that if I had the MID Darton setup, he wouldn’t touch it. Said that the setup just doesn’t stay stable enough for his liking.
Hey guys, let’s get back to talking cylinder heads...
I had Proline polish my crank when I did my tear down due to rings, and was talking to them about possibly honing/touching my block with a dingleberry setup to remove possible glazing issues (40 miles). Chris told me that if I had the MID Darton setup, he wouldn’t touch it. Said that the setup just doesn’t stay stable enough for his liking.
Hey guys, let’s get back to talking cylinder heads...
#240
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So can we agree these are the top five concerns when designing and/or purchasing cylinder heads?
1. Intended application
2. Bore and stroke
3. Port velocity
4. Valve job
5. Intake valve size
Note on 2, I did not say displacement. Because if you look at 4.1 stroked 3.9 bore, you have a 392. But you are looking at 220 being about the biggest port you can fit
Now look at a 4.150 bore and 3.622 stroke. Now you can use any head you want and rev to the moon. So it is not displacement so much as the actual bore and stroke. And maybe really only bore...?
CSA likely belongs on the list but not sure if it is top 5. Because it is likely covered by port velocity anyway.
1. Intended application
2. Bore and stroke
3. Port velocity
4. Valve job
5. Intake valve size
Note on 2, I did not say displacement. Because if you look at 4.1 stroked 3.9 bore, you have a 392. But you are looking at 220 being about the biggest port you can fit
Now look at a 4.150 bore and 3.622 stroke. Now you can use any head you want and rev to the moon. So it is not displacement so much as the actual bore and stroke. And maybe really only bore...?
CSA likely belongs on the list but not sure if it is top 5. Because it is likely covered by port velocity anyway.