bowtienut

iTrader: (1)

No, you dumbazz. If you're gonna deck the block, it makes more sense to target .010" in the hole and use a .026" gasket, which is BETTER than your thickazz gaskets.

cardo0

If you're gonna deck the block, it makes more sense to target .010" in the hole and use a .026" gasket, which is BETTER than your thickazz gaskets.

Says who? another of your BS "general consensus" fabrications. Oh, oh someone else here said that - right. Im waiting for your proof.
Y-TF do u think nearly every stock and performance gasket is over 0.035" compressed?? Yes u can buy thinner gaskets but as a short cut - not for reliability.

So where is you proof that raised deck thin gasket makes any more power than zero deck and thick gasket? As usual up yours i bet.

be careful OP, the ding-a-lings have united here,
cardo

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

cardo how does your car perform?

cardo0

With the stock head gasket my basically stock engine runs great. But what does that have to do with a dumb azz idea to use a thin head gasket when your shaving the block anyways??

NAFT, thats what. just more smelly poop from the crap manager,
cardo

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Many of us who actually have quick cars use thin gaskets. You have not once provided any indication that you have meaningful experience, you just come here and spout ignorance while arguing with actually knowledgeable individuals who have data to backup their experience.

Anyone with half a brain will ignore your arguments against bowtienut when you say your "stock engine runs great" when bowtienut has a stock shortblock Impala running as it does. He is extremely knowledgeable and can back it up.

noice

This is what I use, I didn't pick the thickness until I had put together the motor and rotating assembly and check to see what the total stackup is. It will vary for everyone.

http://www.jegs.com/i/Cometic-Gasket...ductId=2848863

4.040" Bore .027" thick.

You shoot for a combination that gets close, and then decide if the block has to be decked and/or proper gasket selected.

If you are using a stock crank, why not reuse the stock rods. there is nothing wrong with doing that, if you want to you can just upgrade with some ARP stock replacement bolts. Make sure the shop resizes the rods when you do that.

Ported stock heads, it is probably not worth the effort to find out if your local guy is good. Most are not. I can guarantee the guy will charge you a lot of money, I can't guarantee it will be worth it. I have had two sets of LT1 heads ported, one guy did well, the other sucked. Another thing you have to remember is most of the gains in porting are down in the the bowl and the valve job, however most porters will get nuts in the runners and other areas that don't help flow. Aftermarket heads will respond less to porting because they already have most of the easy stuff already done.

Shownomercy

iTrader: (1)

I run a big azz thick HG because **** quench, who needs that BS.

flame front is a internet myth.

pillarpod

They meet or exceed the status quo and have people coming back for more. How else are we suppose to respond about "joe blow in no mans land?" That's never been heard of besides locally?

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Far as local work, just seems to always be a gamble. You should see the train wrecks local reputable shops come up with, lower compression, heavier pistons with thick ring packs, valvejobs that vary .032" depth from one cylinder to the next, and they genuinely are the best around locally, and the folks who wont look any further honestly see them as the best they have ever used.

The good shops are local to someone so "local" doesn't mean bad but I do caution people on how they determine a shops reputation is good. If the guy down the road has a 13 second stroker LT1 and tells you it is the best shop ever is that really good input? Or does the neighbor just not know any better.

Or maybe a shop's reputation is based entirely on another platform which doesn't demonstrate knowledge of these castings.

"people coming back for more" means NOTHING we have vendors around here who are very nice and customers just keep thanking them for all the problems. Actual examples of guys having valvetrain chaos by 2-3000miles then swapping springs repeatedly with dyno tuning and then eventually taking a freeby cam to resolve the issues and having to absorb all those costs and re-tuning yet again. "saved" $300 up front and spent $1000+ easily trying to make it work and still will privately say "yeah I should have done it different" but publicly will still support the guy that screwed them over because he was NICE about it.

I am absolutely certain there are great shops scattered all over the country but REALITY is they are the exception and it can be hard to identify who is actually good vs. who just has a good reputation, it is not the same thing.

pillarpod

Totally disagree with you. If you own a business and you can't keep repeat customers, how do they plan to stay afloat?

cardo0

Many of us who actually have quick cars use thin gaskets. You have not once provided any indication that you have meaningful experience, you just come here and spout ignorance while arguing with actually knowledgeable individuals who have data to backup their experience.

Like i need a resume' to post here? Well i installed my first sbc heads on my 327" '62 impala back in 1971 which is more than likely before ye'r born. I do have enough experience to know a dumb azz idea when i read one and using a thin head gasket when u can just as easily use a thick gasket is a stupid as it gets.

So who are this "Many of us"? U find another sucker here?? The only reason to use a thinner gasket is when decking the block is not possible and is a short cut reducing reliability. Do u even have a clue why the car mfrs use thicker gaskets when they could use cheaper thin gaskets (which they do use when possible)??? Your continued claims of "Many of us", "the general consensus" and the like from u is somewhat scary. Going to the drag strip or track all one has to do is ask what anyone is using for head gaskets and quench height to find out "Many of us" is really no one let alone read from Lingenfelter, Vizard. In fact Lingenfelter even states a negative deck height hinders quench area "effectiveness" (p. 58) - negative meaning piston distance below block deck @ TDC.

You should seek professional help for your bogus claims of consensus and fictional information,
cardo

Shownomercy

iTrader: (1)

I can almost guarantee very LE setup runs .026 "impala" head gaskets vs the stock .051 gasket. Now, I value Lloyd Elliot's opinion on this a lot more than any other keyboard warrior. I know I ran that head gasket for a few years, never had any issue what so ever.

Large head gasket has always come up as a band aid to either poor CR or poor choice in part selection IMO.

noice

Nope dude, I can answer this. Most shops screw you over the first time you use them because they figure thats the only time they get a straight shot at your *******.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

I didn't say a business should aim to never have a repeat customer. What I said was that just because people keep going back doesn't mean the product is good. It can just as easily mean the customers don't know any better.


cardo keep quoting decades old books, the rest of us have applicable EXPERIENCE from this century.
Another Lingenfelter quote has to do with the LT1 intake should not work well but does. Basically reality doesn't always agree with theory.

Far as OEM gasket thickness the Impala gasket was .029 stock. Far as what OEMs do they put the piston down .020+ on the LT1 and used .029 or .049 gaskets, none of that is right by your arguments.

Also powerful LT1 builds have been known to crack the deck leaving more meat up there strengthens things. I agree with bowtienut deck the block to -.005 to -.010 and then run a .026-.029 gasket The Mr. gasket is .026, the Impala gasket .029, Cometic has a .027 then Felpro has .039 which is the high end of proper quench.

Zero deck and a .035 gasket might be "perfect" in a perfect world but I don't know of any readily available LT1 gaskets in that thickness

criticalx

the guy at shop told me he do valve job, shave head, port bowl and do flow number before and after work for $350.. say he can get 15 to 25 cfm of that. sound right?

noice

Should be better than that in stock porting. 2cfm/hp is my rough guide for porting. I may have some flow sheets on what he should be able to do.

criticalx

he normal does ls1 stuff.. guy who told me that he does good work,, has a turbo ls1.

cardo0

cardo keep quoting decades old books, the rest of us have applicable EXPERIENCE from this century.

Lingenfelter (may he rest in peace) was on the forefront of LT1 developments. And his company stills supports ported LT1 heads. Up until 2 years ago we could buy complete Lingenfelter built LT1 long blocks. U want others to believe your imaginations are new developments is proof of your mental fantasies.

Another Lingenfelter quote has to do with the LT1 intake should not work well but does. Basically reality doesn't always agree with theory.

I got Johns book in front of me now and your quote is far from accurate. He actually recommends the LT1 intake for high rpm manual trans combinations.

Far as OEM gasket thickness the Impala gasket was .029 stock. Far as what OEMs do they put the piston down .020+ on the LT1 and used .029 or .049 gaskets, none of that is right by your arguments.

Ah no again. I gave the OP a recommended range and didnt bother to do his shopping for him. BTW the LT1 head gasket sizes are 0.028" (#12553160) and 0.050" (#10168457) - but whose counting 1 thou inches? I guess thats something else for u to discredit someone with - too bad its yourself this time.

Also powerful LT1 builds have been known to crack the deck leaving more meat up there strengthens things. I agree with bowtienut deck the block to -.005 to -.010 and then run a .026-.029 gasket The Mr. gasket is .026, the Impala gasket .029, Cometic has a .027 then Felpro has .039 which is the high end of proper quench.

Read the first post. This is for an 11 second effort. U want to worry cracking the block deck for that?? What a BS exaggeration. What a desperate attempt to legitimatize your stupid advise to use a thinner head gasket. And your post reads like u dont even know the effective for range for effective quench - get book and read for yourself as that info is way more than 20 years old.

Zero deck and a .035 gasket might be "perfect" in a perfect world but I don't know of any readily available LT1 gaskets in that thickness.

U admit it, your clueless.
cardo

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

The quote I have seen has Lingenfelter not understanding why the LT1 intake works as well as it does because theoretically based on the short runners and such it shouldn't. I was not saying he claimed it was bad, I was saying he found it to be good despite what theory had to say about it.

Far as gasket thickness, I used the most commonly quotes numbers, I am aware they are sometimes quotes as being .001 different in thickness. Could easily be a spec change over the years not a big deal.

I understand this is an 11 second build but most of us find it prudent to leave some room to remachine a block down the road in case something goes wrong or we endup wanting more later. Some LT1 blocks will take a .060 overbore but few people go beyond .030 for the first over bore because it leaves room for later cleanup of the block, same with the deck.

Far as effective range for quench for the LT1 assembly most consider .032-.040 to be appropriate. Materials and rpm involved must be considered. There isn't an exact number for ideal quench a higher rpm engine should consider staying a little wide to account for some stretch in parts, you get goofy with something like aluminum rods an those will extend more with heat and again you need more clearance, there are variables. Some circle track guys will go tighter than .030 but the engines are rebuilt often and they will take the risk of the piston grazing the head.

cardo0

Far as effective range for quench for the LT1 assembly most consider .032-.040 to be appropriate. Materials and rpm involved must be considered. There isn't an exact number for ideal quench a higher rpm engine should consider staying a little wide to account for some stretch in parts, you get goofy with something like aluminum rods an those will extend more with heat and again you need more clearance, there are variables.

Well that is just a guess. Your using another "most consider" assumption again. U cant even purchase a cheap $20 book and read what the true professional have proven on their own dyno testing. Yes 0.032 - 0.040 is in the range but the effective range is much larger than that and is effected by comp ratio, cubic inches, and of course negative deck height.

Somehow its ok for u make errors like 0.001" but not others. For some reason its ok for u to make assumptions and not only promote rumors but start them. U continue to use assumptions as fact and using a thinner head gasket with greater negative deck height is a clear example of your methods. If it wasnt for challenging your fabrications i would make very few posts here. But u are to stubborn to admit when u are wrong. U become malicious with new members for even using outdated terminology as an opportunity to discredit them rather than welcome to our diminishing 4th gen group and assist them. U really need help with your assumptions like "many of us", "general consensus is", "most consider". I dont read any of those used from Lingenfelter, Vizard, Baechtel, or in the Chevy Power Manual. None of them recommend decking for a thin head gasket either - only u and your sour bowtie comrade that uses the same type car and heads.

cardo