402 L92/L76 is on the road
12-02-2006, 06:24 PM
#21
Must be in the low to mid 9s region then I'm guessing. Sounds like you are enjoying it, and that's all that matters. It'll be a good while before I head down the new engine road, so I'll have to see how this all plays out over the next 2-3 years.
12-03-2006, 12:47 AM
#22
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 WKMCD
It's higher than people believe is a good idea. SD tuning took care of any concerns.
When you hide critical information about the build, you are left with hardly anything useful you can take from the post.
My .02
Sweet setup though, almost spot on to what I was planning for my motor build.
12-03-2006, 08:16 AM
#23
Originally Posted by BlackHawk T/A
Not to be an *** here, but I really hate when people do this. I don't understand it - this is LS1Tech! People come here for this kind of information. They want to see the numbers!
When you hide critical information about the build, you are left with hardly anything useful you can take from the post.
My .02
Sweet setup though, almost spot on to what I was planning for my motor build.
When you hide critical information about the build, you are left with hardly anything useful you can take from the post.
My .02
Sweet setup though, almost spot on to what I was planning for my motor build.
People are paying a lot of money when doing stuff like this. He's been a guinea pig for the L-92/L-76 swap, and that takes nothing but time, money, and patience (and not necessarily in that order). This knowledge will become more common in the future, and I'm sure he'll release the information in good time. If it doesn't put down good numbers for some reason, there will be tons of people ragging on him about this and that and the other thing, and throwing out numbers (DCR, cam specs, etc) to try and fix the problem, even if they don't know what they are talking about (after all, we are talking about an entirely different head/intake architecture here). It gets aggravating. There are just too many people on this site (and others) that will bash you till they are blue in the face because you either:
A. Didn't put down enough HP
B. Didn't put down enough TQ
C. Spent too much doing it
If you are going to be doing the engine build yourself, you'll be going down similar roads to what he has to get this done. Why do you need the information now if you can't do anything with it? Planning can only get you so far...from what I've found, it is easier to plan how to get the money first, then worry about the details after you have that all in line. I'm sure Bret would be more than happy to discuss the cam specs when that time comes, and by that time, more information, research, and results will be available.
12-03-2006, 08:49 AM
#25
Originally Posted by MeentSS02
My $.02...
People are paying a lot of money when doing stuff like this. He's been a guinea pig for the L-92/L-76 swap, and that takes nothing but time, money, and patience (and not necessarily in that order). This knowledge will become more common in the future, and I'm sure he'll release the information in good time. If it doesn't put down good numbers for some reason, there will be tons of people ragging on him about this and that and the other thing, and throwing out numbers (DCR, cam specs, etc) to try and fix the problem, even if they don't know what they are talking about (after all, we are talking about an entirely different head/intake architecture here). It gets aggravating. There are just too many people on this site (and others) that will bash you till they are blue in the face because you either:
A. Didn't put down enough HP
B. Didn't put down enough TQ
C. Spent too much doing it
If you are going to be doing the engine build yourself, you'll be going down similar roads to what he has to get this done. Why do you need the information now if you can't do anything with it? Planning can only get you so far...from what I've found, it is easier to plan how to get the money first, then worry about the details after you have that all in line. I'm sure Bret would be more than happy to discuss the cam specs when that time comes, and by that time, more information, research, and results will be available.
People are paying a lot of money when doing stuff like this. He's been a guinea pig for the L-92/L-76 swap, and that takes nothing but time, money, and patience (and not necessarily in that order). This knowledge will become more common in the future, and I'm sure he'll release the information in good time. If it doesn't put down good numbers for some reason, there will be tons of people ragging on him about this and that and the other thing, and throwing out numbers (DCR, cam specs, etc) to try and fix the problem, even if they don't know what they are talking about (after all, we are talking about an entirely different head/intake architecture here). It gets aggravating. There are just too many people on this site (and others) that will bash you till they are blue in the face because you either:
A. Didn't put down enough HP
B. Didn't put down enough TQ
C. Spent too much doing it
If you are going to be doing the engine build yourself, you'll be going down similar roads to what he has to get this done. Why do you need the information now if you can't do anything with it? Planning can only get you so far...from what I've found, it is easier to plan how to get the money first, then worry about the details after you have that all in line. I'm sure Bret would be more than happy to discuss the cam specs when that time comes, and by that time, more information, research, and results will be available.
I removed another thread for exactly the same BS you mentioned. In that thread, I shared absolutley everything about the build except the cam specs and those Bret requested that I not. I deleted it because I just got tired of the BS and personal stuff.
12-03-2006, 09:15 AM
#26
Banned
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Pittsburgh!!!!!!!! Pa
Posts: 4,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its deffently a interesting topic here. im close to assembling mine but waiting on time to see exactly how his ^^^^^^^^^^^^ works. i also have a 408 L92/L76 setup
12-03-2006, 10:14 AM
#27
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 MeentSS02
My $.02...
People are paying a lot of money when doing stuff like this. He's been a guinea pig for the L-92/L-76 swap, and that takes nothing but time, money, and patience (and not necessarily in that order). This knowledge will become more common in the future, and I'm sure he'll release the information in good time. If it doesn't put down good numbers for some reason, there will be tons of people ragging on him about this and that and the other thing, and throwing out numbers (DCR, cam specs, etc) to try and fix the problem, even if they don't know what they are talking about (after all, we are talking about an entirely different head/intake architecture here). It gets aggravating. There are just too many people on this site (and others) that will bash you till they are blue in the face because you either:
A. Didn't put down enough HP
B. Didn't put down enough TQ
C. Spent too much doing it
If you are going to be doing the engine build yourself, you'll be going down similar roads to what he has to get this done. Why do you need the information now if you can't do anything with it? Planning can only get you so far...from what I've found, it is easier to plan how to get the money first, then worry about the details after you have that all in line. I'm sure Bret would be more than happy to discuss the cam specs when that time comes, and by that time, more information, research, and results will be available.
People are paying a lot of money when doing stuff like this. He's been a guinea pig for the L-92/L-76 swap, and that takes nothing but time, money, and patience (and not necessarily in that order). This knowledge will become more common in the future, and I'm sure he'll release the information in good time. If it doesn't put down good numbers for some reason, there will be tons of people ragging on him about this and that and the other thing, and throwing out numbers (DCR, cam specs, etc) to try and fix the problem, even if they don't know what they are talking about (after all, we are talking about an entirely different head/intake architecture here). It gets aggravating. There are just too many people on this site (and others) that will bash you till they are blue in the face because you either:
A. Didn't put down enough HP
B. Didn't put down enough TQ
C. Spent too much doing it
If you are going to be doing the engine build yourself, you'll be going down similar roads to what he has to get this done. Why do you need the information now if you can't do anything with it? Planning can only get you so far...from what I've found, it is easier to plan how to get the money first, then worry about the details after you have that all in line. I'm sure Bret would be more than happy to discuss the cam specs when that time comes, and by that time, more information, research, and results will be available.
But, it isn't my car. Carry on.
12-03-2006, 11:20 AM
#29
10 Second Club
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: by my computer
Posts: 2,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Louis
Props on not revealing cam specs. 
What pushrod length did you end up with?
What pushrod length did you end up with?
I can understand why you are keeping the cam on the low. As far as general input, I assume we all can assume that a cam with slightly less lift and equal intake duration to the proven LS2/LS6 ported heads would suffice. The only added benefit with these heads is added cfm and a loss of compression.
Most of those that install ported LS1 or Ls6 heads on a big bore motor run into compression issues anyway.... so the loss of compression and increased runner volume is not that big of an issue in my opinion. I bet simply milling the heads a bit, changing the valves to stainless, a valvejob, and porting a bit on the exhaust side of things should be enough to make this combo similiar to some of those 2k+ aftermarket heads.
Matching a cam to these heads is a matter of time. I personally dont want to be the one experimenting with this combination. It would be nice to see some off the shelf cams or dyno numbers comming out w/ these heads on a 408+ cubed engines.
Personally I am leaning more and more towards a middle of the road cam vs rumblin stumblin valve spring killer.
238/244 .615/.625 LSK on a 110+2 sounds good to me........ seems to be a nice compromise on the exhaust. Would yall consider this big or small?
12-03-2006, 01:06 PM
#31
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 Forteen3GT
238/244 .615/.625 LSK on a 110+2 sounds good to me........ seems to be a nice compromise on the exhaust. Would yall consider this big or small?
Lobe#, Dur. @ .006", .050", .200", & Lift w/1.7 rocker
2130 289 239 164 .649"
2132 297 247 171 .656"
110+0. I don't think a +2 advance would be necessary, it is only going to peak at ~6400rpm give or take depending on your intake.
Last edited by BlackHawk T/A; 12-03-2006 at 01:23 PM.
12-03-2006, 01:20 PM
#32
Originally Posted by WKMCD
Thank you and well said.
I removed another thread for exactly the same BS you mentioned. In that thread, I shared absolutley everything about the build except the cam specs and those Bret requested that I not. I deleted it because I just got tired of the BS and personal stuff.
I removed another thread for exactly the same BS you mentioned. In that thread, I shared absolutley everything about the build except the cam specs and those Bret requested that I not. I deleted it because I just got tired of the BS and personal stuff.
Pro stock cam lol
12-03-2006, 01:26 PM
#33
Guys, let me explain something about the cams specs....
Like Lou I don't fell like I should do someone elses R&D for them. My interest in the L92 heads is for my personal car, I'm building a LS2 for myself with PROFESSIONALLY ported heads and ever since I learned about these heads (well over a year now) I've been interested in them.
Kevin came to me to ask for my advice and after talking to a few other guys asked if I could do a cam for him. I said yes as long as the specs remained private. It's a one off deal with the right person with the right setup at the right time. That's all. Besides if you saw the cam specs unless you knew the cam lobes, lobe areas, all the valve events you couldn't come close to drawing conclusions and MOST people around here wouldn't have an idea of what to do with them. The ones that would, get the most out of it which is FREE R&D. I don't care what another shop, cam guy or company suggests because we all do things differently. If they have respect for my cam specs being private I have respect for them.
Only two things I cared about in this build were Kevin's comments.... "It has a nice nasty idle, pulls like and electic motor and has no valvetrain noise." He's happy with it, and for super big ports that defiy conventional wisdom for CSA sizing pulling like an electric motor is a big deal.
Guys don't worry in a year or so maybe someone will have stumbled across a cam that works for this combo by then.... maybe.
Bret
Like Lou I don't fell like I should do someone elses R&D for them. My interest in the L92 heads is for my personal car, I'm building a LS2 for myself with PROFESSIONALLY ported heads and ever since I learned about these heads (well over a year now) I've been interested in them.
Kevin came to me to ask for my advice and after talking to a few other guys asked if I could do a cam for him. I said yes as long as the specs remained private. It's a one off deal with the right person with the right setup at the right time. That's all. Besides if you saw the cam specs unless you knew the cam lobes, lobe areas, all the valve events you couldn't come close to drawing conclusions and MOST people around here wouldn't have an idea of what to do with them. The ones that would, get the most out of it which is FREE R&D. I don't care what another shop, cam guy or company suggests because we all do things differently. If they have respect for my cam specs being private I have respect for them.
Only two things I cared about in this build were Kevin's comments.... "It has a nice nasty idle, pulls like and electic motor and has no valvetrain noise." He's happy with it, and for super big ports that defiy conventional wisdom for CSA sizing pulling like an electric motor is a big deal.
Guys don't worry in a year or so maybe someone will have stumbled across a cam that works for this combo by then.... maybe.
Bret
12-03-2006, 01:45 PM
#34
TECH Senior Member
Lower int duration/higher exht duration (rather big split), choice of lobes / tighter lsa/ICL to tune IVO,EVC
Equidistant IVO and EVC, mid>upper 40's IVC/ low 50's EVO
Equidistant IVO and EVC, mid>upper 40's IVC/ low 50's EVO
12-03-2006, 02:55 PM
#36
Originally Posted by Sams00vette
Hey kevin hows the car running. I'm thinking mid to low 5's on the hp level. Figure i'd chime in because the car will never see a track or a dyno.
We still need to work on that 1500RPM thing when Phil gets back. I think your probably right about the RWHP. I'm thinking 525-540 but a really big RWT number.
It may actually see a dyno soon but probably never a track. Thanks for working with Phil on the car.
Last edited by WKMCD; 12-03-2006 at 03:00 PM.
12-03-2006, 03:38 PM
#40
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Goshen,In.
Posts: 1,027
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SStrokerAce
Guys, let me explain something about the cams specs....
Like Lou I don't fell like I should do someone elses R&D for them. My interest in the L92 heads is for my personal car, I'm building a LS2 for myself with PROFESSIONALLY ported heads and ever since I learned about these heads (well over a year now) I've been interested in them.
Kevin came to me to ask for my advice and after talking to a few other guys asked if I could do a cam for him. I said yes as long as the specs remained private. It's a one off deal with the right person with the right setup at the right time. That's all. Besides if you saw the cam specs unless you knew the cam lobes, lobe areas, all the valve events you couldn't come close to drawing conclusions and MOST people around here wouldn't have an idea of what to do with them. The ones that would, get the most out of it which is FREE R&D. I don't care what another shop, cam guy or company suggests because we all do things differently. If they have respect for my cam specs being private I have respect for them.
Only two things I cared about in this build were Kevin's comments.... "It has a nice nasty idle, pulls like and electic motor and has no valvetrain noise." He's happy with it, and for super big ports that defiy conventional wisdom for CSA sizing pulling like an electric motor is a big deal.
Guys don't worry in a year or so maybe someone will have stumbled across a cam that works for this combo by then.... maybe.
Bret
Like Lou I don't fell like I should do someone elses R&D for them. My interest in the L92 heads is for my personal car, I'm building a LS2 for myself with PROFESSIONALLY ported heads and ever since I learned about these heads (well over a year now) I've been interested in them.
Kevin came to me to ask for my advice and after talking to a few other guys asked if I could do a cam for him. I said yes as long as the specs remained private. It's a one off deal with the right person with the right setup at the right time. That's all. Besides if you saw the cam specs unless you knew the cam lobes, lobe areas, all the valve events you couldn't come close to drawing conclusions and MOST people around here wouldn't have an idea of what to do with them. The ones that would, get the most out of it which is FREE R&D. I don't care what another shop, cam guy or company suggests because we all do things differently. If they have respect for my cam specs being private I have respect for them.
Only two things I cared about in this build were Kevin's comments.... "It has a nice nasty idle, pulls like and electic motor and has no valvetrain noise." He's happy with it, and for super big ports that defiy conventional wisdom for CSA sizing pulling like an electric motor is a big deal.
Guys don't worry in a year or so maybe someone will have stumbled across a cam that works for this combo by then.... maybe.
Bret
a lot of people tout small runners,but from what i've learned,the CSA is more important even if the volume is bigger(200cc compared to a 230cc volume for example).
i respect that you want to keep the cam specs secret,it's part of how you make your living.i've read the cam discussion thread,along with other threads about head flow and things i've learned thru modding my car. i think i have a basic understanding of what goes on inside a motor.but there's so much more to a properly spec'd cam than IVC,EVO,dur.@.200 lift etc. i would never try to spec out a cam for myself.i could pick out some lobes and get something that would do ok just from what i've learned here and from others.but to get a full understanding of it all would take years of experience and schooling.why give some of that away for free on the internet?i don't blame you one bit....
Last edited by 66deuce; 12-03-2006 at 05:51 PM.