Dart SHP Pro Iron 434
02-16-2020, 07:32 PM
#41
Hey Tony. No disrespect intended, and if you guys really have had 70 emails and two years of conversation I’ll stop recommending anything other than buying from you. My first thought was that the existing ls3 top end should just go back on and get the car running ASAP. As a guy in sales it’s nice when the long game pays off. I’m just an LS7 fanboy I put them on a pedestal compared to everything else, and the major barrier is that large bore. Makes me anxious seeing it unused 
To frame the responses from the peanut gallery...we’ve just watched an 80+ page thread covering Bortous modifying an existing, pretty good running 402 to try and chase a dyno number while also expounding the same message of not wanting a high stall converter, and wanting more low end grunt.
A much bigger hydraulic cam was fitted
A looser converter was fitted
Short runner fast intake was fitted
When that didn’t work an even larger solid roller was fitted
Actions have not been consistent with the message, but it sounds like you’ve been given the reigns on this one and will deliver an excellent balanced package.
To frame the responses from the peanut gallery...we’ve just watched an 80+ page thread covering Bortous modifying an existing, pretty good running 402 to try and chase a dyno number while also expounding the same message of not wanting a high stall converter, and wanting more low end grunt.
A much bigger hydraulic cam was fitted
A looser converter was fitted
Short runner fast intake was fitted
When that didn’t work an even larger solid roller was fitted
Actions have not been consistent with the message, but it sounds like you’ve been given the reigns on this one and will deliver an excellent balanced package.
I missed most of that other thread to be honest but was alerted to some of the shenanigans going on towards the end. I never found the time to respond
I would agree the four things you mentioned (bigger cam, loose converter, shorter intake runners etc) were all counter intuitive to Peter's goals but then again that's been some of the issues I have had helping to recommend parts with him....the wanting the cake and eating it to.....LOL
It seems he wants a little more camshaft than I would probably recommend if I were staying true to his lower/middle RPM performance objectives. We still have to hash that out regarding cam specs.
I'm even reconsidering the MSD and thinking about using the FAST with a slightly larger cam grind because if we cam it up a bunch and use the MSD we have given up some of bottom we were hoping to keep. If we truly want to focus on the light to light area under the curve portion of his power band (naturally at the expense of some peak power), I started thinking the FAST might still be the better play and I would be more comfy throwing a little more cam at the longer runner design of the FAST vs the MSD. In a perfect world we make more bottom and a flatter curve than the MSD would have have generated (even cammed up a bit) and we close the gap on the slightly higher peak the MSD might shown from 6500 - 7000. With a 7K ish shift point to keep the auto trans more happy we aren't going to exploit the MSD to its full potential anyway which starts to gap the FAST a bit more north of 7K. Its a hell of lot easier when a customer just wants to swing for the fences....I can tell you that!!
I haven't even discussed this potential intake situation with Peter yet so Im laughing at the thought of him seeing it for the first time here
Sorry Peter....just been something I have been thinking about....I have to build your heads yet so there is plenty of time to chew on this
Catch you guys later
-Tony
__________________
www.mamomotorsports.com
Tony@MamoMotorsports.com
Anything worth doing is worth doing well. Build it right the first time....its alot cheaper than building it twice!!
www.mamomotorsports.com
Tony@MamoMotorsports.com
Anything worth doing is worth doing well. Build it right the first time....its alot cheaper than building it twice!!
The following users liked this post:
G Atsma (02-16-2020)
02-16-2020, 09:14 PM
#42
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
All good....email count and timeline are accurate.....LOL
I missed most of that other thread to be honest but was alerted to some of the shenanigans going on towards the end. I never found the time to respond
I would agree the four things you mentioned (bigger cam, loose converter, shorter intake runners etc) were all counter intuitive to Peter's goals but then again that's been some of the issues I have had helping to recommend parts with him....the wanting the cake and eating it to.....LOL
It seems he wants a little more camshaft than I would probably recommend if I were staying true to his lower/middle RPM performance objectives. We still have to hash that out regarding cam specs.
I'm even reconsidering the MSD and thinking about using the FAST with a slightly larger cam grind because if we cam it up a bunch and use the MSD we have given up some of bottom we were hoping to keep. If we truly want to focus on the light to light area under the curve portion of his power band (naturally at the expense of some peak power), I started thinking the FAST might still be the better play and I would be more comfy throwing a little more cam at the longer runner design of the FAST vs the MSD. In a perfect world we make more bottom and a flatter curve than the MSD would have have generated (even cammed up a bit) and we close the gap on the slightly higher peak the MSD might shown from 6500 - 7000. With a 7K ish shift point to keep the auto trans more happy we aren't going to exploit the MSD to its full potential anyway which starts to gap the FAST a bit more north of 7K. Its a hell of lot easier when a customer just wants to swing for the fences....I can tell you that!!
I haven't even discussed this potential intake situation with Peter yet so Im laughing at the thought of him seeing it for the first time here
Sorry Peter....just been something I have been thinking about....I have to build your heads yet so there is plenty of time to chew on this
Catch you guys later
-Tony
I missed most of that other thread to be honest but was alerted to some of the shenanigans going on towards the end. I never found the time to respond
I would agree the four things you mentioned (bigger cam, loose converter, shorter intake runners etc) were all counter intuitive to Peter's goals but then again that's been some of the issues I have had helping to recommend parts with him....the wanting the cake and eating it to.....LOL
It seems he wants a little more camshaft than I would probably recommend if I were staying true to his lower/middle RPM performance objectives. We still have to hash that out regarding cam specs.
I'm even reconsidering the MSD and thinking about using the FAST with a slightly larger cam grind because if we cam it up a bunch and use the MSD we have given up some of bottom we were hoping to keep. If we truly want to focus on the light to light area under the curve portion of his power band (naturally at the expense of some peak power), I started thinking the FAST might still be the better play and I would be more comfy throwing a little more cam at the longer runner design of the FAST vs the MSD. In a perfect world we make more bottom and a flatter curve than the MSD would have have generated (even cammed up a bit) and we close the gap on the slightly higher peak the MSD might shown from 6500 - 7000. With a 7K ish shift point to keep the auto trans more happy we aren't going to exploit the MSD to its full potential anyway which starts to gap the FAST a bit more north of 7K. Its a hell of lot easier when a customer just wants to swing for the fences....I can tell you that!!
I haven't even discussed this potential intake situation with Peter yet so Im laughing at the thought of him seeing it for the first time here
Sorry Peter....just been something I have been thinking about....I have to build your heads yet so there is plenty of time to chew on this
Catch you guys later
-Tony
Let me clear a few things up with other combination too.
Everything was a mismatch and let me explain.
I was chasing more top end power, not a dyno number. Previous cam that I had in there was not that strong above 6000rpm. Kind of ran out of breath.
Larger cams naturally produce more top end power in most cases.
So then what did I do.
I fitted heavier valves on intake and exhaust, heavier rockers, springs, converter was made larger and all this combined with a larger camshaft didn't really turn out good.
Also, the tune could not be completed due to the oil pressure issues so I never did find out what that combo was capable of making.
Although with the mid runner fast the engine did peak about 7000rpm and held that power to 7500rpm.
Engine is being stripped and selling it off for parts as I don't want to have engine fixed and I have never really been happy with these LS3 heads I have.
I have a feeling they were hogged out too much and the bottom and mid range felt lazy. Even the top end it did to some extent but it may have been attributed to the camshaft.
It just didn't have that intense rush of torque. The torque was there, but it still felt kind of airy/lazy. Bit hard to explain.
Also, engine has been pulled apart 14 times since I have had it, and being aluminium I don't feel comfortable using this block for long term reliability and yet again pulling it apart.
The chance for leaks and other issues is higher.
I decided to start from scratch with a much stronger foundation and build exactly what I want without me making the big decisions based on what I think will work.
This is Tony's job now and ultimately he will be the one to determine what we are to use.
The 4L65E transmission definitely has it's limitations too.
Don't worry Tony, I didn't read the part about maybe changing intakes. I skipped over it. Lol
02-16-2020, 09:27 PM
#43
TECH Senior Member
Bortous, I think now that you and Tony have gotten your heads on the same page, I anticipate good things happening under your hood (or bonnet... ).
02-16-2020, 09:37 PM
#44
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Not changing my mind there.
We just need to re work out this intake choice with Tony through private email.
02-16-2020, 10:52 PM
#45
Nothing at all wrong with some big cathedrals on a 434ci, trickflow 245's have hung with ls7 heads on various cars. All I can say is tell Tony to make them at least as big as trickflow 245's. You will have a high compression 434ci, it can use a fairly large port and it will still have plenty of torque.
If your previous ls3 heads were too hogged out it makes sense the engine felt a bit flat. With mamo heads and ported intake on a big bore 434ci i think you will have another 100hp and more torques over the previous 408.
If your previous ls3 heads were too hogged out it makes sense the engine felt a bit flat. With mamo heads and ported intake on a big bore 434ci i think you will have another 100hp and more torques over the previous 408.
02-16-2020, 11:05 PM
#46
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Nothing at all wrong with some big cathedrals on a 434ci, trickflow 245's have hung with ls7 heads on various cars. All I can say is tell Tony to make them at least as big as trickflow 245's. You will have a high compression 434ci, it can use a fairly large port and it will still have plenty of torque.
If your previous ls3 heads were too hogged out it makes sense the engine felt a bit flat. With mamo heads and ported intake on a big bore 434ci i think you will have another 100hp and more torques over the previous 408.
If your previous ls3 heads were too hogged out it makes sense the engine felt a bit flat. With mamo heads and ported intake on a big bore 434ci i think you will have another 100hp and more torques over the previous 408.
Heads are 245cc to begin with Launch.
When Tony is done with the heads they end up being a 248cc (maybe 250cc) which is still plenty stout for this combo and without any loss of air speed which Tony is very adamant about.
Will see what happens with the intake also.
02-17-2020, 08:13 AM
#48
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
Bort, first I'm glad to kind of see your other thread end. it was getting to be a bit of a Schiff Show... That said, really looking forward to what you do with your extra cubes!
This is a key point, and I agree. We never did find out how it would have done. I wish we had, as honestly, I find most 408's to be underwhelming, and this one I thought had potential to be the exception rather than conform to the rule.
That is another key point. Sometimes it can be hard to admit, but the truth of the reason you went in for mod after mod after mod was that you were never really happy with it. It's the same reason i pulled my heads. I felt they were lazy, even at 12.3 compression. Especially after reading you've been emailing Tony for two years. That tells me how long you have truly been unhappy with this motor. And it predates your signing onto LS1Tech, if I'm not mistaken. Again, sometimes you just have to admit it's time to start over, as expensive as it can get...
You can mitigate that with some decisions up front. For example, use ARP studs. This will also keep coolant out of your bolt holes every time you pull the heads as well as less wear and tear on the threads. ASlo, don't be afrais fo some of the options that may at first appear gimmicky. Like EWP. They are effective at freeing up power. in Tusky's thread, you'l see EWP is a common theme.
I truly hope that this time the build goes much better, and I think it will. Personally, I like using the LS7 head on the LS7. In general, I like to use 54% of the bore for the intake valve as a general rule. But you and Tony have your goals worked out, and that's what matters. I do think that the heads you selected will still support great power, and I think that you'll have some pretty strong midrange grunt. Should have fun trying to make traction. So don't forget about the rest of the car...
Engine is being stripped and selling it off for parts as I don't want to have engine fixed and I have never really been happy with these LS3 heads I have.
I have a feeling they were hogged out too much and the bottom and mid range felt lazy. Even the top end it did to some extent but it may have been attributed to the camshaft.
It just didn't have that intense rush of torque. The torque was there, but it still felt kind of airy/lazy. Bit hard to explain.
I have a feeling they were hogged out too much and the bottom and mid range felt lazy. Even the top end it did to some extent but it may have been attributed to the camshaft.
It just didn't have that intense rush of torque. The torque was there, but it still felt kind of airy/lazy. Bit hard to explain.
Also, engine has been pulled apart 14 times since I have had it, and being aluminium I don't feel comfortable using this block for long term reliability and yet again pulling it apart.
I truly hope that this time the build goes much better, and I think it will. Personally, I like using the LS7 head on the LS7. In general, I like to use 54% of the bore for the intake valve as a general rule. But you and Tony have your goals worked out, and that's what matters. I do think that the heads you selected will still support great power, and I think that you'll have some pretty strong midrange grunt. Should have fun trying to make traction. So don't forget about the rest of the car...
02-17-2020, 08:14 AM
#49
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Witches and bitches, I have an update.
An unconventional one to say the least.
After many more exchanges with Tony only for today we have decided we are going to be using the FAST 102mm intake.
(By the way I did not plead with Tony for this change out of fear for not enough torque. Tony came to this decision himself based on my goals)
I know some of you reading this will think we have gone off the deep end as one member put it but let me explain why and it might make more sense.
The MSD while it will make more peak power above 7000rpm it is lower in hp and torque (especially) off idle till about 6500rpm.
I don't plan on revving out my engine to 7500rpm.
I only want to go to 7000rpm or maybe a tiny bit over at most if the power is still hanging on. Tony's ported FAST does go out a few hundred rpm more too.
This way, because of the already super strong low and mid range torque, we can use extra camshaft timing to help the engine hang up on top to the desired RPM range while sacrificing some hp and torque in an already strong rpm range. (Low and mid)
Using a solid roller will also help this also.
Cam specs are being worked on and I will post these soon once we have settled on the final ones. The specs may surprise some of you.
Also we are using Manley NExt Tek springs for my setup as recommended from Tony for perfect valvetrain control.
I really like what I'm seeing so far and Tony is great to work with.
An unconventional one to say the least.
After many more exchanges with Tony only for today we have decided we are going to be using the FAST 102mm intake.
(By the way I did not plead with Tony for this change out of fear for not enough torque. Tony came to this decision himself based on my goals)
I know some of you reading this will think we have gone off the deep end as one member put it but let me explain why and it might make more sense.
The MSD while it will make more peak power above 7000rpm it is lower in hp and torque (especially) off idle till about 6500rpm.
I don't plan on revving out my engine to 7500rpm.
I only want to go to 7000rpm or maybe a tiny bit over at most if the power is still hanging on. Tony's ported FAST does go out a few hundred rpm more too.
This way, because of the already super strong low and mid range torque, we can use extra camshaft timing to help the engine hang up on top to the desired RPM range while sacrificing some hp and torque in an already strong rpm range. (Low and mid)
Using a solid roller will also help this also.
Cam specs are being worked on and I will post these soon once we have settled on the final ones. The specs may surprise some of you.
Also we are using Manley NExt Tek springs for my setup as recommended from Tony for perfect valvetrain control.
I really like what I'm seeing so far and Tony is great to work with.
02-17-2020, 08:52 AM
#50
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Bort, first I'm glad to kind of see your other thread end. it was getting to be a bit of a Schiff Show... That said, really looking forward to what you do with your extra cubes!
This is a key point, and I agree. We never did find out how it would have done. I wish we had, as honestly, I find most 408's to be underwhelming, and this one I thought had potential to be the exception rather than conform to the rule.
That is another key point. Sometimes it can be hard to admit, but the truth of the reason you went in for mod after mod after mod was that you were never really happy with it. It's the same reason i pulled my heads. I felt they were lazy, even at 12.3 compression. Especially after reading you've been emailing Tony for two years. That tells me how long you have truly been unhappy with this motor. And it predates your signing onto LS1Tech, if I'm not mistaken. Again, sometimes you just have to admit it's time to start over, as expensive as it can get...
You can mitigate that with some decisions up front. For example, use ARP studs. This will also keep coolant out of your bolt holes every time you pull the heads as well as less wear and tear on the threads. ASlo, don't be afrais fo some of the options that may at first appear gimmicky. Like EWP. They are effective at freeing up power. in Tusky's thread, you'l see EWP is a common theme.
I truly hope that this time the build goes much better, and I think it will. Personally, I like using the LS7 head on the LS7. In general, I like to use 54% of the bore for the intake valve as a general rule. But you and Tony have your goals worked out, and that's what matters. I do think that the heads you selected will still support great power, and I think that you'll have some pretty strong midrange grunt. Should have fun trying to make traction. So don't forget about the rest of the car...
This is a key point, and I agree. We never did find out how it would have done. I wish we had, as honestly, I find most 408's to be underwhelming, and this one I thought had potential to be the exception rather than conform to the rule.
That is another key point. Sometimes it can be hard to admit, but the truth of the reason you went in for mod after mod after mod was that you were never really happy with it. It's the same reason i pulled my heads. I felt they were lazy, even at 12.3 compression. Especially after reading you've been emailing Tony for two years. That tells me how long you have truly been unhappy with this motor. And it predates your signing onto LS1Tech, if I'm not mistaken. Again, sometimes you just have to admit it's time to start over, as expensive as it can get...
You can mitigate that with some decisions up front. For example, use ARP studs. This will also keep coolant out of your bolt holes every time you pull the heads as well as less wear and tear on the threads. ASlo, don't be afrais fo some of the options that may at first appear gimmicky. Like EWP. They are effective at freeing up power. in Tusky's thread, you'l see EWP is a common theme.
I truly hope that this time the build goes much better, and I think it will. Personally, I like using the LS7 head on the LS7. In general, I like to use 54% of the bore for the intake valve as a general rule. But you and Tony have your goals worked out, and that's what matters. I do think that the heads you selected will still support great power, and I think that you'll have some pretty strong midrange grunt. Should have fun trying to make traction. So don't forget about the rest of the car...
I hope to never go through all that crap again.
And I am also looking forward to what happens here also.
Tony will be making the calls on what goes together.
Honestly, I'm not fussed what the engine would have made.
I'm just relieved it's over and I am starting fresh with something I know will give me what I am after.
You are correct in saying I was never really happy with it.
Now that I think of it I was never really happy with it ever since I put those ported LS3 heads on years ago.
They made good power but the power didn't translate into a great driving experience.
They never had that torque curve I was wanting in the real world and made my car feel slower.
Also i already have a mezeire electric water pump installed. The 55GPM version.
The engine did have ARP studs and some of the threads still needed to be repaired a while ago too.
Because of what I have been through the builder is putting together this new engine for me at a very low price.
I got the block at cost too as well as the DART parts kit.
I will be getting the info on the new pistons tomorrow and paying for them also and I will post photos of the block.
In regards to these heads, LS7's are a great head but if you have read this entire post Tony explains how each head performs.
The cathedral is stronger in hp and torque to about 6000rpm. Only after 6000rpm is when the Ls7 really starts to shine.
With what you are doing it's the perfect head for you and I'm all for it and hope you get your engine fixed. I really want to see it running and see if you get close to that magic 700rwhp number. (The MSD is a no brainer on an LS7 setup)
Being in a light car like yours an LS7 head makes perfect sense. You won't need the torque and you will already have enough anyway.
My vehicle weighs 4000lb with me in it so it's quite heavy.
The rest of the car will be upgraded if something breaks. Haha.
Also what heads did you pull off again that you were not happy with?
I can't remember.
Last edited by bortous; 05-09-2020 at 12:51 PM.
02-17-2020, 08:57 AM
#51
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
Darth I'm glad my other thread is over too.
I hope to never go through all that crap again.
And I am also looking forward to what happens here also.
Tony will be making the calls on what goes together.
Honestly, I'm not fussed what the engine would have made.
I'm just relieved it's over and I am starting fresh with something I know will give me what I am after.
You are correct in saying I was never really happy with it.
Now that I think of it I was never really happy with it ever since I put those ported LS3 heads on years ago.
They made good power but the power didn't translate into a great driving experience.
They never had that torque curve I was wanting in the real world and made my car feel slower.
Also i already have a mezeire electric water pump installed. The 55GPM version.
The engine did have ARP studs and some of the threads still needed to be repaired a while ago too.
Because of what I have been through the builder is putting together this new engine for me at a very low price.
I got the block at cost too as well as the DART parts kit.
I will be getting the info on the new pistons tomorrow and paying for them also and I will post photos of the block.
In regards to these heads, LS7's are a great head but if you have read this entire post Tony explains how each head performs.
The cathedral is stronger in hp and torque to about 6000rpm. Only after 6500rpm is when the Ls7 really starts to shine.
With what you are doing it's the perfect head for you and I'm all for it and hope you get your engine fixed. I really want to see it running and see if you get close to that magic 700rwhp number. (The MSD is a no brainer on an LS7 setup)
Being in a light car like yours an LS7 head makes perfect sense. You won't need the torque and you will already have enough anyway.
My vehicle weighs 4000lb with me in it so it's quite heavy.
The rest of the car will be upgraded if something breaks. Haha.
Also what heads did you pull off again that you were not happy with?
I can't remember.
I hope to never go through all that crap again.
And I am also looking forward to what happens here also.
Tony will be making the calls on what goes together.
Honestly, I'm not fussed what the engine would have made.
I'm just relieved it's over and I am starting fresh with something I know will give me what I am after.
You are correct in saying I was never really happy with it.
Now that I think of it I was never really happy with it ever since I put those ported LS3 heads on years ago.
They made good power but the power didn't translate into a great driving experience.
They never had that torque curve I was wanting in the real world and made my car feel slower.
Also i already have a mezeire electric water pump installed. The 55GPM version.
The engine did have ARP studs and some of the threads still needed to be repaired a while ago too.
Because of what I have been through the builder is putting together this new engine for me at a very low price.
I got the block at cost too as well as the DART parts kit.
I will be getting the info on the new pistons tomorrow and paying for them also and I will post photos of the block.
In regards to these heads, LS7's are a great head but if you have read this entire post Tony explains how each head performs.
The cathedral is stronger in hp and torque to about 6000rpm. Only after 6500rpm is when the Ls7 really starts to shine.
With what you are doing it's the perfect head for you and I'm all for it and hope you get your engine fixed. I really want to see it running and see if you get close to that magic 700rwhp number. (The MSD is a no brainer on an LS7 setup)
Being in a light car like yours an LS7 head makes perfect sense. You won't need the torque and you will already have enough anyway.
My vehicle weighs 4000lb with me in it so it's quite heavy.
The rest of the car will be upgraded if something breaks. Haha.
Also what heads did you pull off again that you were not happy with?
I can't remember.
I had stock ported LS7 heads.
02-17-2020, 09:01 AM
#52
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
Bort, first I'm glad to kind of see your other thread end. it was getting to be a bit of a Schiff Show... That said, really looking forward to what you do with your extra cubes!
This is a key point, and I agree. We never did find out how it would have done. I wish we had, as honestly, I find most 408's to be underwhelming, and this one I thought had potential to be the exception rather than conform to the rule.
That is another key point. Sometimes it can be hard to admit, but the truth of the reason you went in for mod after mod after mod was that you were never really happy with it. It's the same reason i pulled my heads. I felt they were lazy, even at 12.3 compression. Especially after reading you've been emailing Tony for two years. That tells me how long you have truly been unhappy with this motor. And it predates your signing onto LS1Tech, if I'm not mistaken. Again, sometimes you just have to admit it's time to start over, as expensive as it can get...
You can mitigate that with some decisions up front. For example, use ARP studs. This will also keep coolant out of your bolt holes every time you pull the heads as well as less wear and tear on the threads. ASlo, don't be afrais fo some of the options that may at first appear gimmicky. Like EWP. They are effective at freeing up power. in Tusky's thread, you'l see EWP is a common theme.
I truly hope that this time the build goes much better, and I think it will. Personally, I like using the LS7 head on the LS7. In general, I like to use 54% of the bore for the intake valve as a general rule. But you and Tony have your goals worked out, and that's what matters. I do think that the heads you selected will still support great power, and I think that you'll have some pretty strong midrange grunt. Should have fun trying to make traction. So don't forget about the rest of the car...
This is a key point, and I agree. We never did find out how it would have done. I wish we had, as honestly, I find most 408's to be underwhelming, and this one I thought had potential to be the exception rather than conform to the rule.
That is another key point. Sometimes it can be hard to admit, but the truth of the reason you went in for mod after mod after mod was that you were never really happy with it. It's the same reason i pulled my heads. I felt they were lazy, even at 12.3 compression. Especially after reading you've been emailing Tony for two years. That tells me how long you have truly been unhappy with this motor. And it predates your signing onto LS1Tech, if I'm not mistaken. Again, sometimes you just have to admit it's time to start over, as expensive as it can get...
You can mitigate that with some decisions up front. For example, use ARP studs. This will also keep coolant out of your bolt holes every time you pull the heads as well as less wear and tear on the threads. ASlo, don't be afrais fo some of the options that may at first appear gimmicky. Like EWP. They are effective at freeing up power. in Tusky's thread, you'l see EWP is a common theme.
I truly hope that this time the build goes much better, and I think it will. Personally, I like using the LS7 head on the LS7. In general, I like to use 54% of the bore for the intake valve as a general rule. But you and Tony have your goals worked out, and that's what matters. I do think that the heads you selected will still support great power, and I think that you'll have some pretty strong midrange grunt. Should have fun trying to make traction. So don't forget about the rest of the car...
But the MSD does keep pulling I know especially above 7000rpm.
If the engine ends up being too torquey I can always go back to a 3:46 rear gear. Lol
02-17-2020, 09:08 AM
#53
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
I bolded and underlined a key point. And many people could stand to take that point seriously. there are people who will recommend throwing together a bunch of cheap parts to make cheap power, and this is exactly what you get. A lot of power and a poor driving experience. If you want the power and the driving fun, there really are not any short cuts.
I had stock ported LS7 heads.
I had stock ported LS7 heads.
Another reason why I went for the Cathedral.
I know Tony's LS7 heads will certainly be better down low and in the mid range compared to my LS3 heads though but not to the level I am wanting.
Did you feel the same way about your LS7's heads also?
They felt lazy?
Who ported them?
02-17-2020, 09:53 AM
#54
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
That underlined point is a good one.
Another reason why I went for the Cathedral.
I know Tony's LS7 heads will certainly be better down low and in the mid range compared to my LS3 heads though but not to the level I am wanting.
Did you feel the same way about your LS7's heads also?
They felt lazy?
Who ported them?
Another reason why I went for the Cathedral.
I know Tony's LS7 heads will certainly be better down low and in the mid range compared to my LS3 heads though but not to the level I am wanting.
Did you feel the same way about your LS7's heads also?
They felt lazy?
Who ported them?
02-17-2020, 10:23 AM
#55
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
They probably hogged out the ports too much.
I have looked around on here and most shops hog them out to get that extra CFM which probably affects the air speed too.
Sounds like what happened with mine too.
It just makes the engine feel lazy and when you get into it even up top you kind of feel that the air isn't rushing into the ports quickly and giving the vehicle a lethargic kind of feel and just feeling generally slower.
It is a difficult one to explain.
Tony's heads should feel MUCH better compared to what you had before.
Did your stock LS7 heads feel better before they were ported?
Were they more punchier and the car felt quicker?
I have looked around on here and most shops hog them out to get that extra CFM which probably affects the air speed too.
Sounds like what happened with mine too.
It just makes the engine feel lazy and when you get into it even up top you kind of feel that the air isn't rushing into the ports quickly and giving the vehicle a lethargic kind of feel and just feeling generally slower.
It is a difficult one to explain.
Tony's heads should feel MUCH better compared to what you had before.
Did your stock LS7 heads feel better before they were ported?
Were they more punchier and the car felt quicker?
02-17-2020, 10:25 AM
#56
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,452
Received 1,852 Likes
on
1,152 Posts
They probably hogged out the ports too much.
I have looked around on here and most shops hog them out to get that extra CFM which probably affects the air speed too.
Sounds like what happened with mine too.
It just makes the engine feel lazy and when you get into it even up top you kind of feel that the air isn't rushing into the ports quickly and giving the vehicle a lethargic kind of feel and just feeling generally slower.
It is a difficult one to explain.
Tony's heads should feel MUCH better compared to what you had before.
Did your stock LS7 heads feel better before they were ported?
Were they more punchier and the car felt quicker?
I have looked around on here and most shops hog them out to get that extra CFM which probably affects the air speed too.
Sounds like what happened with mine too.
It just makes the engine feel lazy and when you get into it even up top you kind of feel that the air isn't rushing into the ports quickly and giving the vehicle a lethargic kind of feel and just feeling generally slower.
It is a difficult one to explain.
Tony's heads should feel MUCH better compared to what you had before.
Did your stock LS7 heads feel better before they were ported?
Were they more punchier and the car felt quicker?
02-17-2020, 11:14 AM
#57
TECH Veteran
LS3 heads are the the most MISTAKENLY heads in hot rodding.....
The guys that really go fast using them have tight lips about their cam specs
The guys that really go fast using them have tight lips about their cam specs
02-17-2020, 11:17 AM
#58
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
02-17-2020, 11:23 AM
#59
TECH Veteran
02-17-2020, 11:29 AM
#60
This happens all the time at the drag strip. People decide they want to take their big block and go faster. They buy the biggest heads they can find, usually used for dirt cheap, and the cars won't even get out of their own way going down track. They also won't get up on the converter on the starting line from an idle. They sound sick.