bww3588

iTrader: (49)

thats where you run into trouble adding weight to a crank. i had to add weight to a misbalanced 305/350 crank (eagle) to make it work. it was one of the bad ones, so insted of sending it back and fourth and fighting with eagle, i just took it to the machine shop and had them add to it. never could get it 100 percent true.

Murdock

iTrader: (2)

C'mon guys, I'm tryin to sort through this LS7 crank deal. I can start you a separate "love eagle, hate eagle" thread if it'll help.

Anyway, it doesn't look like many (if any) have run a LS7 crank with forged rods and pistons. I'm going to go ahead and put one together, won't be for a couple months (don't want to disable the car until winter). I'll keep you posted with the results. Maybe it'll maybe not

KRAZY K 2000 TA

iTrader: (5)

sorry

Murdock

iTrader: (2)

no problem

Bring the Noise

Uh I guess it hasn't been mentioned yet but the LS7 crank is slightly longer due to the dry sump oil system.
You would need to make some changes to allow the LS7 to be used in a LS1/LS2/L92 block.

Murdock

iTrader: (2)

In my original post I said "machine the nose," meaning shorten it because it's too long. That's the easy part, hacksaw anyone?

antz01ta

iTrader: (3)

my Lunati crank needed a good bit of mallory to make it work with my new Diamond pistons. They have ceramic coated tops and moly coated skirts and are much heavier than the original Lunati pistons that i was running.

with Titanium connecting rods i would think that the LS7 crank would need alot of metal to balance it.

Willem @ Fuel Injection Concepts

iTrader: (2)

i'm building an LQ4 block using an ls7 crank, ls7 dry sump pump, ls7 oil pan, and aftermarket rods and pistons. haven't gotten to balancing the crank yet, still waiting on rods. has anyone actually balanced an ls7 crank to forged internals yet?

BrokenTA

if you stuff an ls7 crank into a stock 346 block what does that push your cubes to? Anybody know?

Beaflag VonRathburg

iTrader: (176)

2 * 3.1415 * 3.905 *3.905 * 4.00 = 383.2384963 cubic inches

NemeSS

iTrader: (127)

bore x bore x stroke x .7854 x # of cylinders = displacement

Paul.Kaos

uh... jfc did I just find the birthplace of the 383 ls stroker?

im trying to do a 360 stroker with a cast iron 5.3, shortened ls7 crank AND rods, and lightly reworked 862 heads.

im building it for adapter plates and an LSA blower

will the stock ls7 rotating assembly handle the lsa blower? im adding forced induction but reducing the displacement theyre built for by 67 cubes so... ?

im not really sure what to expect from a build like this

gobs of instant torque from a smaller motor is the idea.

smallest bore, longest stroke, boost on demand, right?

Kawboom

No

The LS7 crank is nothing to write home about, and cannot be used with heavier steel rods. The crank and rods are worth some money to LS7 builders, though, so think about that.

Adapting square port to cathedral port always loses a lot of flow.

​​​​​​​
Based on your parts list, headaches and if you do get it assembled you will not get as much power as you thought you would get.

​​​​​​​
Torque is not a function of stroke length. All cubic inches are created equal. This has been proven over and over on dynos and nobody has ever produced a data point that counteracts it.

If you want an engine that makes snappy torque, have the combination make sense.

jayyyw

Yes it can. It will just cost a ton of money to balance. Better off starting with an aftermarket crank.

Ryans99ls1

iTrader: (16)

a near 20 year old thread? oh nostalgia.

01CamaroSSTx

iTrader: (3)

You can always run billet aluminum rods for the machined LS7 crank. Won't have to use all that mallory to balance but the connecting rods aren't cheap either.