L92
#1
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: dudley mass
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
These 402s are a god-send for sure. Everyone can afford a stroker motor now. But things are about to get even better. GM will be releasing their 6.2L L92 engine soon for production truck/SUV line. This block will basically be identical to the LS2 except it will have 4.065 bores rather than 4.00. Therefore, building a 427 will cost the same as the current prices on the 402s. Nice.
posted in another forum. sounds tempting
posted in another forum. sounds tempting
#2
TECH Addict
iTrader: (14)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
4.065" bore X 3.622" stroke = 376 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4" stroke = 415 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.1" stroke = 426 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.125" stroke = 428 cubic inches
...nice...![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Although the L92 heads have similar ports as compared to the LS7 the heads the L92's will not line up with the LS7 intake manifold at least from the comparison pics I've seen posted here... prolly be a sore subject until Wilson or somebody steps up with an aftermarket composite piece. Or maybe GM will shoehorn the L92, or a derivative of it, into a GTO, SSR, or Trailblazer at some point with a low profile intake...
Bill
4.065" bore X 4" stroke = 415 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.1" stroke = 426 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.125" stroke = 428 cubic inches
...nice...
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Although the L92 heads have similar ports as compared to the LS7 the heads the L92's will not line up with the LS7 intake manifold at least from the comparison pics I've seen posted here... prolly be a sore subject until Wilson or somebody steps up with an aftermarket composite piece. Or maybe GM will shoehorn the L92, or a derivative of it, into a GTO, SSR, or Trailblazer at some point with a low profile intake...
Bill
#3
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Or maybe GM will shoehorn the L92, or a derivative of it, into a GTO, SSR, or Trailblazer at some point with a low profile intake...
Trailblazer/SSR has the tall truck intake.
#6
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by billreid1@***.net
4.065" bore X 3.622" stroke = 376 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4" stroke = 415 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.1" stroke = 426 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.125" stroke = 428 cubic inches
...nice...![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Although the L92 heads have similar ports as compared to the LS7 the heads the L92's will not line up with the LS7 intake manifold at least from the comparison pics I've seen posted here... prolly be a sore subject until Wilson or somebody steps up with an aftermarket composite piece. Or maybe GM will shoehorn the L92, or a derivative of it, into a GTO, SSR, or Trailblazer at some point with a low profile intake...
Bill
4.065" bore X 4" stroke = 415 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.1" stroke = 426 cubic inches
4.065" bore X 4.125" stroke = 428 cubic inches
...nice...
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Although the L92 heads have similar ports as compared to the LS7 the heads the L92's will not line up with the LS7 intake manifold at least from the comparison pics I've seen posted here... prolly be a sore subject until Wilson or somebody steps up with an aftermarket composite piece. Or maybe GM will shoehorn the L92, or a derivative of it, into a GTO, SSR, or Trailblazer at some point with a low profile intake...
Bill
#7
TECH Addict
iTrader: (14)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Bink
But a Fast 90 will bolt up to the L92 heads ...correct??