Richard@WCCH

iTrader: (3)

What was your expectation with ported heads only? What's an averge hp increase with only a port job? The averages I've seen range from -30 to +20. Very rarely do we get to view the effects of just a port job. I really appreciate Kevin and Ed's willingness to make the extra effort and post the results. Even thought it was less than I wanted, I was pleased to see an increase in power for a first dyno effort. I don't remember if it was previously stated, but L92's are a good flowing head straight out of the box and making big number or percentage gains in useable hyd. roller lift ranges isn't possible. That doesn't mean porting them is futile. Our program removes such a minor amount of material that only 40%-50% of the cast intake port is touched. We take a head that flows a little under 330cfm peak to one that flows a bit over 350cfm peak with a volume increase of 9cc. This increased flow trend is consistent with the many other heads we've made CNC programs for so I expect power increases to come around with further development of cams, intake and exhaust systems.
I've been spending some time test flowing stock and ported heads with L76 and L92 intakes in place and the results will be posted up next week.

Thanks for your respect.

Richard

See5

iTrader: (53)

I, like most who buy L92 heads, ported or not, recognize that they are a great value and not the optimum no holds barred setup. What is the ultimate cam combination for these heads, depends on your criteria and I think we are exploring that?
Are there heads with more ultimate potential, absolutely!
This is not an ego contest, just a technical discussion- I hope.

edcmat-l1

iTrader: (10)

AGREED. Completely. What I want to know is, what is it taking folks to make 500 at the tires with 402 cubes and cathedrals.
Actually, I already know, I'm just trying to keep the conversation on topic.
If he (BT) wants to compare, then lets compare. I by no means think that the L92 is the be all end all. but it does look like an attractive piece based on the $ and results with less than radical cam profiles.

SideStep

Looking forward to seeing the test results....

Richard@WCCH

iTrader: (3)

A bit too early to tell right now. Obviously the deck section of the L92's is not the same as many aftermarket heads so I don't expect them to hold up to severe abuse.

Richard

Juiced

iTrader: (2)

Richard,

is there anyway to *** material to the deck, o use some sort of filler to increase the integrity of the head?

WKMCD

iTrader: (2)

Chris and I were just talking about your build. We think in the absence of evidence for a BIG turbo setup on the L92's your probably better off with one of the thick deck aftermarket heads. You should probably look at AFR's or Edelbrocks. Those are the only two that I can think of.

StingrayCrazy

iTrader: (5)

https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...&highlight=l92

Richard sectioned one of the earlier castings and found .500" decks. If the 823's are the same thickness they should at least be as strong as a 317 head, right? I have 317's and 823's and as far as I can tell both decks look to be the same thickness. I'm hoping they will hold at least 15lbs...

Frank

Big-DEN

I'm not "defending" just pointing out some facts.

Brian Tooley name has come up about as long as I've been interested in making more power out of a motor.

The shop he has specialized initially on porting TFS heads for the ford and now has branched to everything else.

He has flowbenches, CNC machines, has many cars using his product going very very fast.

I'm not sure how someone can "shut him down" here, because the product speaks for itself, and alot more than any of us can say having one or two or even three projects going simultaniously.

I don't expect tooley or any of the other porters to know everything about airflow dynamics, whats really going on with making power.

If everyone did, there would be no advances still being made.

Remember in the B1/T1 camshaft days?

That was a lot of power for a street 350ish cubic inch motor.

Ford sold a crate 385HP/351W that was supposed to be a good deal, and you werent having many over 400HP not RWHP 350's on the chevy side that werent super high compression and solid rollers.

Today, the hydrualic roller 500rwhp/450rwtq 346 stock blocks are making more than 95% of hot racer 350's did about 7 years ago.

The power is being made at lower rpm point.

If you would've told any of us, Tooley included that you were going to make 500rwhp out of 346 cubic inches at 6250RPM we'd said you where crazy.

When people got over 400rwtq out of 346 cubic inches we thought that was nice.

That went up to 410
420
430 and now 450's.

400rwtq is being exceeded for 2500RPM out of 346 cubic inches now adays.

Don't think any one of us can slam:

Tooley
Ed Curtis
Steve D or "racer7008" from old Houston Performance

This thread has gotten slightly off track with some trying to bash Tooley...

Me,

I can say that the L92 heads are going to make power.

Its a very similar head to the LS7 and LG Motorsports is popping over 600rwhp/530tq out of a 427 using it.

That TQ number looks good.

Right now, we are still in a discovery phase of whats going to work....

2c5s

iTrader: (11)

If Brian has an opinion on L92 heads etc., maybe he should have enough courtesy to get off Kevin's thread & stop trolling for business. He should start his own thread. That's the bottom line, he's been asked by the O.P. to stop hijacking the thread, and then he keeps doing it for the audiance. That shows poor taste, period.

Brian, start your own thread and those that want to listen to you will join in. Give the rest of us a break.

Big-DEN

You feel like he tried to knock the L92 head and tout his "small valve" TFS?

2c5s

iTrader: (11)

Have you read his post's?

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

500 at the wheels with a 402? AFR 205 and a 232 XE-R cam with a FAST 90. It's been done at least five times that I know of on this forum, and once I've seen in person. Doesn't seem that magical to me. But it also takes time and money to set up quench, to set up the valvetrain corrently, to run the correct exhaust, and to effectively port the intake. It also takes a UD pulley and EWP. Those little things end up costing quite a bit, but it can be done to keep drivability very good. Most people on here simply don't do that. Huge cam, really huge ported heads, poor quench/valvetrain, and the wrong exhaust. 500rwhp with a 25x duration cam seems like the norm on LS1Tech, but it's not a good indicator of what a cathedral port head could do with a small cam.

550rwhp can be done with AFR 225/TFS 225/ETP 225 with a 24x type of cam and the same attention to detail.

Big-DEN

2c5s,

I wasn't focused on it from the perspective of him trying to pimp a product he had...

Richard@WCCH

iTrader: (3)

Have you read post #116?

Richard

2c5s

iTrader: (11)

I think he has come across as a pompus know it all _ _ _, ultimately pushing his product.

I have never knocked Brian's work before, I run his heads on my 408 in my C5, but I will say I have lost a ton of respect for him with his attitude and agenda on this one. The o.p. has spent plenty of money on labor, parts, more labor, more parts and not to mention additional tuning to have Brian come in here and repeatedly **** all over his results. Bottom line according to Brian, his head's are end all be all, as passive aggressive as he wants to behave about it.

As I said earlier, he should start his own thread to hawk his products.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but maybe the TF heads are not selling as well as they should be........ and it's only going to get worse now. JMO of course.

WKMCD

iTrader: (2)

There are a couple of 500RWHP L92 setups here that we done with guestimates. As you pointed out with a lot of work and additional cost it can be done with cathedral port heads. Who knows where the L92 setups will go.

These several builds are only starting points. But from the RWHP and RWT numbers that have been "stumbled" upon this setup should have a great future.

WKMCD

iTrader: (2)

You don't? I acknowledge that BT knows more about heads than I ever will. But if he ever needs some lessons in very very basic marketing and communication skills he's welcome to PM me.

Big-DEN

WKMCD,

About to look at this post #119...

WKMCD

iTrader: (2)

Look at #116. The first of many.

I even PM'd BT congratulating him on a great product and explaining that this was a creative excersize and would remain so. I asked him several times to stop hijacking the thread in which we tried to produce nothing but a factual account of the process and results - good or bad. We wanted to take the opportunity to openly discuss the build. To have a vendor/sponsor repeatedly pipe in to bash any build to promote their product does a disservice to and discourages forum members from participating. Who really needs the BS.