Ported LS7 Flow numbers
12-03-2006, 11:43 PM
#62
I don't recall if Greg is running the stock LS7 valves. I thought maybe he wasn't. If not, then the LSK will work, especially with those new Pacalloy beehive spings. Good harmonics.
Why not the LSK? I still prefer the XE-R, but it's hard to get the huge split without keeping the cam extremely mild on the intake side cuz of the 248 @ .050" limit. Even better are the EDC Hellion lobes.
Why not the LSK? I still prefer the XE-R, but it's hard to get the huge split without keeping the cam extremely mild on the intake side cuz of the 248 @ .050" limit. Even better are the EDC Hellion lobes.
12-03-2006, 11:59 PM
#63
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Elmhurst, IL (Chicago Suburb)
Posts: 1,851
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN,
There are the perfect heads for the 482 cubic inch LSX mountain motor I want to build in about a year or so, and with some good agressive tuning and the perfectly selected matched cam 700rwhp should be a reality at 11:0 to 1 compression on 93 octane!!
CAN you IMAGINE the TORQUE!!! 
There are the perfect heads for the 482 cubic inch LSX mountain motor I want to build in about a year or so, and with some good agressive tuning and the perfectly selected matched cam 700rwhp should be a reality at 11:0 to 1 compression on 93 octane!!
CAN you IMAGINE the TORQUE!!!
12-12-2006, 09:29 AM
#64
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These are my numbers I just got them yesterday. HPE did them. Left the runner diameter stock, worked elsewhere in the bowl.
Intake
.200/148 cfm .300/226 .400/300 .500/347 .600/ 383 .650/403
Exhaust (w/o pipe)
.200/132cfm .300/178 .400/220 .500/235 .600/243 .650/250
Will post my dyno results later.
Intake
.200/148 cfm .300/226 .400/300 .500/347 .600/ 383 .650/403
Exhaust (w/o pipe)
.200/132cfm .300/178 .400/220 .500/235 .600/243 .650/250
Will post my dyno results later.
Last edited by Patrick G; 12-21-2006 at 11:30 AM.
12-12-2006, 10:22 AM
#65
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gtovan - those are ported LS7 heads? I mean what MORE can you ask for?
Gregfell - your numbers should be higher than this. Maybe your intake manifold was damaged in the porting work. An easy test is to swap a stock LS7 intake on there.
Also maybe a cyllinder is down or out due to sealing, fuel, spark or water, or something.
There is no reason you shouldnt be over the 600rwhp barrier.
Gregfell - your numbers should be higher than this. Maybe your intake manifold was damaged in the porting work. An easy test is to swap a stock LS7 intake on there.
Also maybe a cyllinder is down or out due to sealing, fuel, spark or water, or something.
There is no reason you shouldnt be over the 600rwhp barrier.
12-12-2006, 12:47 PM
#67
Originally Posted by Greg Fell
I redyno'ed with the 232/240 @ 110+2 and made 485 rwhp w around 480 rwtq.
. What RPM was the rwhp developed at??? gtovan:
These are my numbers I just got them yesterday. HPE did them. Left the runner diameter stock, worked elsewhere in the bowl.
Intake
.200/148 cfm .300/226 .400/300 .500/347 .600/ 383 .650/403
Exhaust (w/o pipe)
.200/132cfm .300/178 .400/220 .500/235 .600/243 .650/250
Will post my dyno results later.
Intake
.200/148 cfm .300/226 .400/300 .500/347 .600/ 383 .650/403
Exhaust (w/o pipe)
.200/132cfm .300/178 .400/220 .500/235 .600/243 .650/250
Will post my dyno results later.
Can't wait to see your dyno #s. Last edited by Patrick G; 12-21-2006 at 11:30 AM.
12-12-2006, 01:21 PM
#68
TECH Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Posts: 4,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Greg Fell
I redyno'ed with the 232/240 @ 110+2 and made 485 rwhp w around 480 rwtq.
.
12-15-2006, 09:04 PM
#70
Originally Posted by Greg Fell
I'm running a 246/257 112+2 cam motion grind.
Going to a 232/240 110+0 comp xe-r. The IC is 45* I believe.
Going to a 232/240 110+0 comp xe-r. The IC is 45* I believe.
Maybe we've all been spoiled by the LSx H/C successes of the past. Is it possible that 400 cfm (or rather the large accompanying port volume) is just too much for a "streetable" HR cam? I wonder if those heads would be right at home on a 7000 RPM SR motor with a MUCH tighter LSA.
12-16-2006, 12:34 AM
#71
TECH Addict
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 2,869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bink
. What RPM was the rwhp developed at??? gtovan:
Can't wait to see your dyno #s.
12-19-2006, 06:25 PM
#72
Originally Posted by Quickin
Did you call Barry yet and chat with him? He just did 6 LS7 Vette's in Lauderdale and has 5 more sets sitting waiting, ported their heads and did a cam change. RWHP ranged from 556 to 586, with tiny cams in the 230's. He's porting the hell out of them.
.
.
My brother and I are researching a 427 LS7 block build and some of this info is alarming, to say the least. $175 truck heads are looking more like a bargain every day.
Just got off the phone with LG, and that conversation did nothing to ease the pain. $4000 gets me a cam, a set of springs locks and retainers, a set of valves, some minor (super secret) port work, head bolts, and gaskets. That's with me providing the bare LS7 heads. That's $6000 in round numbers to get 600 RWHP. The valves are supposedly necessary to ditch the lash caps, which become uncapped with this super secret cam. When I asked if they corrected the problem causing the valves to displace from the rockers, that was what the springs were for. Well, if the springs fixed the valve/rocker separation issue, why the need for different valves? My head is spinning.
We want to give someone a significant amount of money for the right combo,
but the greed and misinformation makes me pine for the blue oval again.
500 RWHP is a friggin' joke. We're 20 off that with a moderate effort 383.
12-19-2006, 08:08 PM
#73
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kennesaw, Ga
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something is WRONG !!!A stock LS7 in a Z06 with air intake kit and headers is good for ~ 500 rwhp.
See some of Katech's info... not sure what's happening here.
Good Luck...
Last edited by trumperZ06; 12-19-2006 at 08:54 PM.
12-20-2006, 10:01 AM
#74
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
somethine is wrong;
1. cyllinder out (fuel, spark, rings, preload, bent pushrod?, lifter, valve, gasket )
2. manifold broke due to porting ( hole, seal to head, internal leak, map sensor )
3. tune ( knock retard due to whatever, af between 12 and 13;1?, etc )
4. computer issues ( maf sensor used, tps?, map sensor?, vacuum? )
something is amiss.
1. cyllinder out (fuel, spark, rings, preload, bent pushrod?, lifter, valve, gasket )
2. manifold broke due to porting ( hole, seal to head, internal leak, map sensor )
3. tune ( knock retard due to whatever, af between 12 and 13;1?, etc )
4. computer issues ( maf sensor used, tps?, map sensor?, vacuum? )
something is amiss.
12-21-2006, 01:46 AM
#75
Originally Posted by 429 Mustang
Just got off the phone with LG, and that conversation did nothing to ease the pain. $4000 gets me a cam, a set of springs locks and retainers, a set of valves, some minor (super secret) port work, head bolts, and gaskets. That's with me providing the bare LS7 heads. That's $6000 in round numbers to get 600 RWHP. The valves are supposedly necessary to ditch the lash caps, which become uncapped with this super secret cam. When I asked if they corrected the problem causing the valves to displace from the rockers, that was what the springs were for. Well, if the springs fixed the valve/rocker separation issue, why the need for different valves? My head is spinning.
We want to give someone a significant amount of money for the right combo,
but the greed and misinformation makes me pine for the blue oval again.
500 RWHP is a friggin' joke. We're 20 off that with a moderate effort 383.
We want to give someone a significant amount of money for the right combo,
but the greed and misinformation makes me pine for the blue oval again.
500 RWHP is a friggin' joke. We're 20 off that with a moderate effort 383.
Im responding to that email.
12-21-2006, 11:00 AM
#76
Louis
After reading my post again, let me say that I did not mean to imply that you guys were greedy. It was a huge mistake to put that statement in the same post where I quoted the price I was given by LG. The rant about greed and misinformation was WRT the wringer I've been run through over the last couple of weeks by all sorts of posers and pretenders. I did mean to stir the pot, but it was not directed at anyone in particular, and certainly not LG.
Tom
After reading my post again, let me say that I did not mean to imply that you guys were greedy. It was a huge mistake to put that statement in the same post where I quoted the price I was given by LG. The rant about greed and misinformation was WRT the wringer I've been run through over the last couple of weeks by all sorts of posers and pretenders. I did mean to stir the pot, but it was not directed at anyone in particular, and certainly not LG.
Tom
12-22-2006, 07:34 PM
#78
Considering that LG's stuff makes over 600rwhp and they're not posting up 400+cfm flow numbers, and everyone else is and not getting close to that makes you wonder what everyone elses problem is? My thought is LG knows what to do and what not to do, so reguardless of the cost it works, either way it's a deal in the end since nobody else gets there from here. My guess is even though the cam specs are secret (which they should be) it's not just that.
3 LS1 cams at $450 a pop is a hell of a lot better than one set of custom intake valves????? That logic escapes me.
Bret
3 LS1 cams at $450 a pop is a hell of a lot better than one set of custom intake valves????? That logic escapes me.
Bret
12-23-2006, 07:28 AM
#79
Originally Posted by SStrokerAce
Considering that LG's stuff makes over 600rwhp and they're not posting up 400+cfm flow numbers, and everyone else is and not getting close to that makes you wonder what everyone elses problem is? My thought is LG knows what to do and what not to do, so reguardless of the cost it works, either way it's a deal in the end since nobody else gets there from here. My guess is even though the cam specs are secret (which they should be) it's not just that.
3 LS1 cams at $450 a pop is a hell of a lot better than one set of custom intake valves????? That logic escapes me.
Bret
3 LS1 cams at $450 a pop is a hell of a lot better than one set of custom intake valves????? That logic escapes me.
Bret
I've already broken the news to my brother that cheap gets 550, but 600+ is gonna cost. $125 apiece for custom Ti intake valves being a large factor.
Since ours is a track only car, I've run the idea of solid rollers with stainless valves up the flagpole, waiting to see who salutes. Of course, the Jesel/T&D adds to the cost, but in the long run, this might be a better choice.
12-23-2006, 09:11 AM
#80
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SStrokerAce
Considering that LG's stuff makes over 600rwhp and they're not posting up 400+cfm flow numbers, and everyone else is and not getting close to that makes you wonder what everyone elses problem is? My thought is LG knows what to do and what not to do, so reguardless of the cost it works, either way it's a deal in the end since nobody else gets there from here. My guess is even though the cam specs are secret (which they should be) it's not just that.
3 LS1 cams at $450 a pop is a hell of a lot better than one set of custom intake valves????? That logic escapes me.
Bret
3 LS1 cams at $450 a pop is a hell of a lot better than one set of custom intake valves????? That logic escapes me.
Bret
600rwhp is no secret, a little head work, 12.25/12.5 SCR w/ forged pistons and a big cam to match the proper DCR and 7000rpm rev limit and you're there. Vette Doctors already got to 640 rwhp with this recipe albeit at 13/1 cr.