L92 DynoJet Numbers Plus Plan B, C, D, E and F...
#782
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Was your old Intake valve a 2.200 as well ?? Just curious if the increased flow is soley due to porting, or if a larger intake valve was helping the cause ?
How big was the intake port prior to being opened to 380 cc's ?
How do you anticipate Throttle response to be ? Especially at tip in which you were so happy with on the 403?
I wish I had your money Kevin.
How big was the intake port prior to being opened to 380 cc's ?
How do you anticipate Throttle response to be ? Especially at tip in which you were so happy with on the 403?
I wish I had your money Kevin.
Last edited by allngn_c5; 02-15-2010 at 01:31 PM.
#783
9 Second Club
iTrader: (104)
That should be enough air for an honest 760-770 flywheel HP in an 'optimized' engine package.
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
#784
That should be enough air for an honest 760-770 flywheel HP in an 'optimized' engine package.
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
I'm still horribly dissapointed in the FAST 102 when I think that the intake is still the weakest link with making big power with these heads.
#785
FormerVendor
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia Beach,Virginia
Posts: 2,991
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Those who have followed this over the past couple of years have probably figured out I could have made more power for less money. That's not the point at all. I continue to be amazed at what these GM castings are capable of if handled properly.
I'm still horribly dissapointed in the FAST 102 when I think that the intake is still the weakest link with making big power with these heads.
I'm still horribly dissapointed in the FAST 102 when I think that the intake is still the weakest link with making big power with these heads.
#787
#788
8 Second Club
iTrader: (40)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Raleigh,North Carolina
Posts: 1,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That should be enough air for an honest 760-770 flywheel HP in an 'optimized' engine package.
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
#789
FormerVendor
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Virginia Beach,Virginia
Posts: 2,991
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
That should be enough air for an honest 760-770 flywheel HP in an 'optimized' engine package.
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
Hard to believe just 10 years ago running 280cc intake runner 14 degree heads with 2.200" intake valves were suited to a 'drag only' 8500-9000RPM SBC. Amazing to see heads like this today can 'fit' a street car and work out with a docile camshaft and lower compression, yet still perform.
Look forward to the results and the driving impression!
I remember back in 95 when i was building my 421 n2o engine.Bought about the baddest small block chevy heads at the time.15 degree valve angle
2.185 1.60 valves.290cc intake runners flowed 360 intake 250 exhaust.Cost me over $5000.00.Now you can have the same thing for $2000.00.And they say going fast is expensive-should have tryed it back then.
My new bbc heads flow 585 on the intake-i think it will be awhile before any factory casting can flow that
#791
On The Tree
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Deep In The South, Coral Gables.FL
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those who have followed this over the past couple of years have probably figured out I could have made more power for less money. That's not the point at all. I continue to be amazed at what these GM castings are capable of if handled properly.
I'm still horribly dissapointed in the FAST 102 when I think that the intake is still the weakest link with making big power with these heads.
I'm still horribly dissapointed in the FAST 102 when I think that the intake is still the weakest link with making big power with these heads.
Richard from West Coast Cylinder Heads
18405 Hart St. Reseda, CA 91335
(818) 705-5454 is a master....plain and simple.
He knows what is going on with theses heads, I have a funny feeling that once it's all settle the Bubble is going to burst.....
For a moment there i was going to give up on these heads, but you guys have made a believer out of me that these heads can and will make POWER in the right hands.....Richard / Kevin / VA Speed you "DA" man......thank you for all the research you guys have invested in this project
#792
9 Second Club
iTrader: (104)
Those who have followed this over the past couple of years have probably figured out I could have made more power for less money. That's not the point at all. I continue to be amazed at what these GM castings are capable of if handled properly.
I'm still horribly dissapointed in the FAST 102 when I think that the intake is still the weakest link with making big power with these heads.
I'm still horribly dissapointed in the FAST 102 when I think that the intake is still the weakest link with making big power with these heads.
I am not sure I would consider it a 'cheap' build, but definitely a nice build. Sleeved block, CNC'd heads, etc., It is looking to be a very nice combination of parts.
I just can't help but be a little questionable/ on the fence about a head with so much runner volume and the performance down low. I think it will scream between 5000 -7500 RPM if the cam/valvetrain/intake will take you there. Don't get me wrong, I hope it is an all around performer. Pretty interested in this combo.
I really don't have any experience with these heads on these engines to speak from. Looking to learn something.
I remember back in 95 when i was building my 421 n2o engine.Bought about the baddest small block chevy heads at the time.15 degree valve angle
2.185 1.60 valves.290cc intake runners flowed 360 intake 250 exhaust.Cost me over $5000.00.Now you can have the same thing for $2000.00.And they say going fast is expensive-should have tryed it back then.
My new bbc heads flow 585 on the intake-i think it will be awhile before any factory casting can flow that
2.185 1.60 valves.290cc intake runners flowed 360 intake 250 exhaust.Cost me over $5000.00.Now you can have the same thing for $2000.00.And they say going fast is expensive-should have tryed it back then.
My new bbc heads flow 585 on the intake-i think it will be awhile before any factory casting can flow that
I remember buying a set of Pro Action 14 degree heads for my blown alcohol 400" SBC back in 1999. They had just hit the market then. The New Zealanders 'advertised' 400 cfm intake and 300 cfm exhaust. After waiting for 3 months, they showed up and went straight to the flow bench. Peak numbers on the intake were in the low 380 range and the exhaust went mid 270's. Yep, they were about 5000.00 with Ti valves. I would have never dreamed of installing them on a street car with low compression and a hydraulic roller, that is what I find so interesting with these L92's/LS3's/LS7's, etc.
These L92's look impressive, but aren't they limited to spring options (diameter/seat pressure) and then isn't the deck thickness pretty thin? I would just have to question them, from a dollar perspective, as a choice for a 'race' motor where a power adder may get used, at 2k plus the options start to open up out there. Not many classes out there these days run straight up motor any more. So I guess their 'fit' is in an application like this. As mentioned earlier, I am very interested to see the overall the result - peak numbers, under the curve numbers, and overall seat of the pants driving experience (throttle response and mid range power/torque). It looks like the FAST intake will help with some of that.
#793
Your probably right about the intake, at least a FAST, being the limiter, hell even a Super Victor would choke that intake (out of the box). This would need either a thoroughly worked over Super Vicotr or Cary's intake to be optimized. I have not read the whole the thread, I am just curious to see the end result of this level of the build.
I am not sure I would consider it a 'cheap' build, but definitely a nice build. Sleeved block, CNC'd heads, etc., It is looking to be a very nice combination of parts.
I just can't help but be a little questionable/ on the fence about a head with so much runner volume and the performance down low. I think it will scream between 5000 -7500 RPM if the cam/valvetrain/intake will take you there. Don't get me wrong, I hope it is an all around performer. Pretty interested in this combo.
I really don't have any experience with these heads on these engines to speak from. Looking to learn something.
Thats Shafiroff for you , most good head porters get 420 cfm @ .850" or so out of the 'good' intake runner on early Dart 360's. Shafiroff is known to be just a little bit more than 'optimistic' in his advertising. Today, guys like Curtis Boggs at RFD are getting an honest 500 cfm, or close to it, out of a 'conventional' BBC head, Edelbrock Victor casting actually.
Is that what is wrapped up in these heads? 2000.00?
I remember buying a set of Pro Action 14 degree heads for my blown alcohol 400" SBC back in 1999. They had just hit the market then. The New Zealanders 'advertised' 400 cfm intake and 300 cfm exhaust. After waiting for 3 months, they showed up and went straight to the flow bench. Peak numbers on the intake were in the low 380 range and the exhaust went mid 270's. Yep, they were about 5000.00 with Ti valves. I would have never dreamed of installing them on a street car with low compression and a hydraulic roller, that is what I find so interesting with these L92's/LS3's/LS7's, etc.
These L92's look impressive, but aren't they limited to spring options (diameter/seat pressure) and then isn't the deck thickness pretty thin? I would just have to question them, from a dollar perspective, as a choice for a 'race' motor where a power adder may get used, at 2k plus the options start to open up out there. Not many classes out there these days run straight up motor any more. So I guess their 'fit' is in an application like this. As mentioned earlier, I am very interested to see the overall the result - peak numbers, under the curve numbers, and overall seat of the pants driving experience (throttle response and mid range power/torque). It looks like the FAST intake will help with some of that.
I am not sure I would consider it a 'cheap' build, but definitely a nice build. Sleeved block, CNC'd heads, etc., It is looking to be a very nice combination of parts.
I just can't help but be a little questionable/ on the fence about a head with so much runner volume and the performance down low. I think it will scream between 5000 -7500 RPM if the cam/valvetrain/intake will take you there. Don't get me wrong, I hope it is an all around performer. Pretty interested in this combo.
I really don't have any experience with these heads on these engines to speak from. Looking to learn something.
Thats Shafiroff for you , most good head porters get 420 cfm @ .850" or so out of the 'good' intake runner on early Dart 360's. Shafiroff is known to be just a little bit more than 'optimistic' in his advertising. Today, guys like Curtis Boggs at RFD are getting an honest 500 cfm, or close to it, out of a 'conventional' BBC head, Edelbrock Victor casting actually.
Is that what is wrapped up in these heads? 2000.00?
I remember buying a set of Pro Action 14 degree heads for my blown alcohol 400" SBC back in 1999. They had just hit the market then. The New Zealanders 'advertised' 400 cfm intake and 300 cfm exhaust. After waiting for 3 months, they showed up and went straight to the flow bench. Peak numbers on the intake were in the low 380 range and the exhaust went mid 270's. Yep, they were about 5000.00 with Ti valves. I would have never dreamed of installing them on a street car with low compression and a hydraulic roller, that is what I find so interesting with these L92's/LS3's/LS7's, etc.
These L92's look impressive, but aren't they limited to spring options (diameter/seat pressure) and then isn't the deck thickness pretty thin? I would just have to question them, from a dollar perspective, as a choice for a 'race' motor where a power adder may get used, at 2k plus the options start to open up out there. Not many classes out there these days run straight up motor any more. So I guess their 'fit' is in an application like this. As mentioned earlier, I am very interested to see the overall the result - peak numbers, under the curve numbers, and overall seat of the pants driving experience (throttle response and mid range power/torque). It looks like the FAST intake will help with some of that.
#794
7 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
Should be interesting to say the least when its all said and done with. This is really just what it looks like when you have someone who is passionate about their work and their work is building badass engines of any style. If you look at all the engines Shawn has built, you'll start to see a trend.
#795
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Kevin what kind of time frame are we looking at before we get to the knitty gritty? Baseline, and cam testing, intake testing etc etc.
Best wishes to you my friend. I know you have good people working on everything and a lot of thought was put into it so the results should kick ***.
Help me to understand the 380 cc runner. You aren't going to add compression, sticking with 11.5 to 1, and with the larger runner is the new larger bore going to be enough to compensate the additional flow capacity and maintain throttle response of the 403 ?
Just wondering, I'm sure you've discussed it with the guys so I thought I'd ask.
Can't wait !!!
Best wishes to you my friend. I know you have good people working on everything and a lot of thought was put into it so the results should kick ***.
Help me to understand the 380 cc runner. You aren't going to add compression, sticking with 11.5 to 1, and with the larger runner is the new larger bore going to be enough to compensate the additional flow capacity and maintain throttle response of the 403 ?
Just wondering, I'm sure you've discussed it with the guys so I thought I'd ask.
Can't wait !!!
#797
Should be interesting to say the least when its all said and done with. This is really just what it looks like when you have someone who is passionate about their work and their work is building badass engines of any style. If you look at all the engines Shawn has built, you'll start to see a trend.
Thanks for posting here. Looks like you're slumming a little here in the sub-600RWHP world. We've come a long way since you did the first H/C setup in my 346 and installed the 403. You're right about Shawn. I knew he was very good but my respect for his abilities has grown exponentially as he posts the machine work and details on my build. Toleranced down to .0001 is just nuts.
He even tells me he sees power in the FAST 102 with some work. I'm going to let him see what he can do with it.
I'll swing by when I get the car back and let you take it for a spin. It will seem very slow compared to your 2500RWHP beast but I'll be happy - for a while.
#798
Banned
iTrader: (10)
Kevin what kind of time frame are we looking at before we get to the knitty gritty? Baseline, and cam testing, intake testing etc etc.
Best wishes to you my friend. I know you have good people working on everything and a lot of thought was put into it so the results should kick ***.
Help me to understand the 380 cc runner. You aren't going to add compression, sticking with 11.5 to 1, and with the larger runner is the new larger bore going to be enough to compensate the additional flow capacity and maintain throttle response of the 403 ?
Just wondering, I'm sure you've discussed it with the guys so I thought I'd ask.
Can't wait !!!
Best wishes to you my friend. I know you have good people working on everything and a lot of thought was put into it so the results should kick ***.
Help me to understand the 380 cc runner. You aren't going to add compression, sticking with 11.5 to 1, and with the larger runner is the new larger bore going to be enough to compensate the additional flow capacity and maintain throttle response of the 403 ?
Just wondering, I'm sure you've discussed it with the guys so I thought I'd ask.
Can't wait !!!
I'll hit on this one Doug.
We're moving along pretty well on Kevin's project, and hope to have some engine dyno results very soon. That's all I can say on that.
As for the throttle response, well, as any tuner would tell you, "it's all in the tune" LOL
All joking aside, the big port heads don't really seem to loose anything in the low end torque/throttle response area. I do think alot of it is the intake manifold, cam selection, and of course tuning can make up for alot of it.
#799
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
I'll hit on this one Doug.
We're moving along pretty well on Kevin's project, and hope to have some engine dyno results very soon. That's all I can say on that.
As for the throttle response, well, as any tuner would tell you, "it's all in the tune" LOL
All joking aside, the big port heads don't really seem to loose anything in the low end torque/throttle response area. I do think alot of it is the intake manifold, cam selection, and of course tuning can make up for alot of it.
We're moving along pretty well on Kevin's project, and hope to have some engine dyno results very soon. That's all I can say on that.
As for the throttle response, well, as any tuner would tell you, "it's all in the tune" LOL
All joking aside, the big port heads don't really seem to loose anything in the low end torque/throttle response area. I do think alot of it is the intake manifold, cam selection, and of course tuning can make up for alot of it.