JasonShort

iTrader: (242)

Personally, I would start with focusing on rpm's rather than cubes. If I were to start designing a motor to perform within those goals/parameters, that 4.125" stroke would be gone.

V6 Bird

iTrader: (15)

You are fool to think that it cant be done. Just takes some creative thinking. 427 should not have ANY problems making the power.

Im heading off to the dyno to watch an aluminum block 383 make that if not close to it with some dart heads and a solid roller. on top of that is bottle!

V6 Bird

iTrader: (15)

I agree Bret. A little money spent in the right places and its very attainable. Even a rev kit with a wild hydraulic cam, ls7 heads and intake its doable.

deputydog

You would have to be real creative with pump gas and hyd. lifters.

I/m building a carbureted 2 stage fogger motor and hope to make 650 without the nitrous with the following.

410ci (4.040 6.0 block 4.000 stroke)
ported LS6 heads 330/240
14.5 to 1 comp
solid roller
custom ford intake (see pic, adapter plates are made now the cutting and welding starts).

Stang's Bane

iTrader: (22)

I hope your right Bret

Stang's Bane

iTrader: (22)

Please forgive me being a dumbass, what is a rev kit?

matt346ls1

Not yet anyways. give it 100 passes and take it apart and you will know why people use a dry sump when pushing LSx's hard.

Matt

matt346ls1

Kevin, A couple quick questions, are you stuck on the pump gas? If ou think about it in the summer 93 octane will cost $2.50-3.00 at least, and 110 is only $4.00. Thats 20-30 free hp making it 13.5:1. I would use the L92 heads for sure, I can get a set for $600 last time I checked fully assembled. Jeff just touched up a set for us ( minor port work and a valve job, new springs and retainers) for $500 and they flowed 350 @ 700. Not bad for an $1100 set of heads After that I would throw on the L92 carbed intake and let it rip. We put a Wilson elbow on it with a 90mm acufab throttle body. I think with that little bump in compression and the right ring package for an NA set up you could achieve 700. Hell I had to be making that to go 9.2x @ 147 and I didn't even have that good heads or anything. Let me know what you want to do and I got a guy that can pick you a killer cam.

Matt

ls1 joe

iTrader: (37)

Matt,

Most of you guys keep forgetting we were turning my stock bottom end car 8200rpm's. It had between 400-600 passes when we pulled it apart to put the big inch engine in. We had several engine builders take a look at it and again no issues with oiling and we were advised that keeping this a wet sump would be just fine. I think most of the guys we asked have been in the engine building business for 25 plus years. Did you know that SBC's turned 9000rpms for years with a stock wet sump? Nascar was primarily a wet sump setup until the late 70's when they went to a dry sump setup. Just because some people can't keep them together doesn't mean in 100 passes we will have issues. We put about 1 year into this build doing research with both prostock guys we know, engine builders we know and so on. We built this thing to last so it does not have to be torn down. I will let you know in 150 passes if I have to tear it down but we don't think we will ever have an issue. It is more bearing clearance issues than anything. We now alot of SCCA guys turning in the low 8000rpms in the road racing because there class does not allow wet sumps.

Thanks,
Amber
T56Rebuilds.com

ls1 joe

iTrader: (37)

Oh and by the way, Bo Kennedy (Patterson Racing), they go buy CompBuilder on here, is turning his wet sump LS1 8400rpms and has set many national records and won the points last year in Top Stock. Just an FYI.

Thanks,
Amber
T56Rebuilds.com

V6 Bird

iTrader: (15)

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c3...k/HPIM0624.jpg
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c3...k/HPIM0622.jpg
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c3...k/HPIM0621.jpg

Stang's Bane

iTrader: (22)

Cool now what does it do? for valvetrain stability?

V6 Bird

iTrader: (15)

its put in place of the plastic lifter cups...To use a hydraulic lifter, and to run a pretty aggressive cam without worry of the lifter not staying on the cam itself and to help with valve float. I think thats a decent description..If not Im sure some will correct me or add to it.

matt346ls1

Believe me I wish you the best of luck with your combo, i went to 8000 without a problem either but after a while the oiling system will show it's faults.

Matt

ls1 joe

iTrader: (37)

Matt,

I know where you are coming from as well. One of the things we did to keep that from happening is using the Moroso Oil Pan with there pickup and custom remote oil filter. Joe said cavitation is a huge issue with these engines. Our oil pan, filter and pickup will hold 9.5 quarts. The oil filter alone hold 2 quarts. That is one of the reasons people have issues.

Thanks,
Amber

matt346ls1

Very good point, I have been told alot that the cavitating is what kills the LS1 oiling. Are you using the HP6 filter or the HP4? I have also heard of people using accusumps with some success.

matt

ls1 joe

iTrader: (37)

Matt,

We are not using either. We use a custom filter that you have to get from CV Products. They are $54.87 each and hold 1.5 quarts. It is a custom filter for there remote filter relocater.

Thanks,
Amber

matt346ls1

Sounds nice, a bit pricy but nice.

matt

SStrokerAce

iTrader: (2)

Jason, that's the expensive way to get there. A 427-440 cube motor can make 800hp much easier than a 365cube motor. RPM is great, but it costs money in terms of parts and repair every time.

L92 and LS7 heads done correctly can both attain the 700hp goal without a problem, just make sure you put enough cubes with them.

Bret

JasonShort

iTrader: (242)

Hey Bret, how are things going?

I totally agree that a rpm-capable motor costs money. However, he never mentioned that cost was a primary factor. He also mentioned that he would prefer a large cam (high rpm powerband). The cost difference in rev-capable parts would only add about 10% to the cost of the complete motor. Also, I never mentioned any statement on the actual cubes he should use(ex.,365ci) If it were my build, I wouldnt put anything more than a 4" stroke in it, which would still net quite a few cubic inches (~400-412ci).

Also, I never assume that any motor I design will make theroetical/calculated numbers. I usually set my power goals at 80% of what a motor *should* make on paper....that way I wont be let down.

On paper, a 427ci motor with 7500rpms *should* be able to make 700hp. But, it sucks when it only ends up making 650hp in actualilty

If I was starting from scratch with a naturally aspirated engine build with a desired hp in mind, I would always choose rpms over mega-cubes despite the additional cost. You gotta pay to play!

Jason