I need guidance for a 600 rwhp naturally aspirated lt1 383 running on premiu
04-18-2017, 12:16 PM
#23
62k mile car + basic bolt ons + 300 hit. it'll be reliable...and you can tell people it makes 600whp...until you get a twitchy finger.
In all reality man, heed the advice of many. All us veterans know, you can choose 2 of the following:
POWER
RELIABILITY
BUDGET
IMO, grab some nice bolt ons, maybe holler at LE for a nice street setup and convert the car to 24x(some will agree, some wont. this is my 2 cents).
From there enjoy the car and wait for the next stage of owning a project.......the next project.
In all reality man, heed the advice of many. All us veterans know, you can choose 2 of the following:
POWER
RELIABILITY
BUDGET
IMO, grab some nice bolt ons, maybe holler at LE for a nice street setup and convert the car to 24x(some will agree, some wont. this is my 2 cents).
From there enjoy the car and wait for the next stage of owning a project.......the next project.
04-18-2017, 12:24 PM
#24
I don't think you can make 600 tire with a streetcar lt1 NA, I ran 100 octane on my 396 on an engine dyno and didn't make more than 600 with a street cam. Cost a lot more than 10k for it.
04-18-2017, 12:30 PM
#25
Punch block to .030 over, reuse factory crank, new rods and forged pistons. Leave factory heads alone, and upgrade springs/valves. Big injectors, and a big fuel pump. Fab up a single turbo kit or buy one, run a 76mm turbo, and make all the HP you want.
Junkyard 4L80e with a full race shift kit and a quality billet torque converter
Roll the dice with a 10 bolt but know you will break it later.
Should make an easy 600whp and be done for 10k.
Junkyard 4L80e with a full race shift kit and a quality billet torque converter
Roll the dice with a 10 bolt but know you will break it later.
Should make an easy 600whp and be done for 10k.
I have a 6.0 LQ9 with a 4l80e, 76mm precision and billet converter in a 94 lt1 body, the converter cost the most besides the gold box.
04-18-2017, 02:58 PM
#30
600hp flywheel street car? Easy with boost, but unless you can do a lot of custom fab yourself it will be hard to do for 10k (and thats not including trans, rear, tune, etc).
Possible to do NA, but 10k wont cover it either and it won't be a street car. I built my motor with goals of ~625+ flywheel but once its done I know I wouldn't even think about driving it every day and its definitely over 10k for the motor.
So, basically you need to pick one or more sacrifices:
- increase your budget to make a rowdy NA build and realize it will not be a street car anymore
- increase your budget and boost it to easily reach your goals but still be streetable
- you can lower your 600hp goal and keep it within your budget for an NA street car(booooring)
- or just make a nice ~400rwhp street car build and hit it with a 150 shot when you want to play(which will be just about 600hp flywheel and can be done within your budget for the motor).
Best bet in a car you still want to enjoy on the street and not spend a **** ton of money is a nice 400-420rwhp hyd roller build and add a plate kit to it.
Possible to do NA, but 10k wont cover it either and it won't be a street car. I built my motor with goals of ~625+ flywheel but once its done I know I wouldn't even think about driving it every day and its definitely over 10k for the motor.
So, basically you need to pick one or more sacrifices:
- increase your budget to make a rowdy NA build and realize it will not be a street car anymore
- increase your budget and boost it to easily reach your goals but still be streetable
- you can lower your 600hp goal and keep it within your budget for an NA street car(booooring)
- or just make a nice ~400rwhp street car build and hit it with a 150 shot when you want to play(which will be just about 600hp flywheel and can be done within your budget for the motor).
Best bet in a car you still want to enjoy on the street and not spend a **** ton of money is a nice 400-420rwhp hyd roller build and add a plate kit to it.
04-18-2017, 04:10 PM
#31
Stroke it, go high compression (about 12:1) get some killer heads, a custom spec'ed cam (maybe even a solid roller cam), put a 58mm or monoblade TB in front of the engine and some 1 7/8" long tube headers behind it.
KW
04-18-2017, 07:43 PM
#32
As I said in the duplicate post, 396, CNC'd TFS's, custom cam. Boom, 600hp. If you want rwhp you're gonna need to mill the heads and get meth to still run pump gas.
Why do I get the feeling that "helped on a few motors" is slang for playing wrench monkey on a cam swap?
Why do I get the feeling that "helped on a few motors" is slang for playing wrench monkey on a cam swap?
04-19-2017, 09:13 AM
#33
Junkyard 5.3 liter ls, fab a turbo kit using any of the million build threads, 550-650rwhp daily driver reliable pump gas setup, 10k budget met. If you're okay with a 2 year timeline this is the way to go hands down. No high compression huge cam Rev to the moon which stresses internals.
04-19-2017, 09:36 AM
#34
High revs actually are the least harmful way to make power. The problem is, that doesn't lead to good power under the curve. So to make up the difference you need to bump compression, add timing, and do all the other tricks to make it even remotely streetable, which WILL go wrong, and when you snap a rod at 6k it does a lot more damage than it does at 3k
That aside, OP said he wants to keep it LT. I have my suspicions regarding the experience he claims with his lack of budget and desired power.
That aside, OP said he wants to keep it LT. I have my suspicions regarding the experience he claims with his lack of budget and desired power.
04-19-2017, 09:42 AM
#35
Junkyard 5.3 liter ls, fab a turbo kit using any of the million build threads, 550-650rwhp daily driver reliable pump gas setup, 10k budget met. If you're okay with a 2 year timeline this is the way to go hands down. No high compression huge cam Rev to the moon which stresses internals.
in addition, however, the cost to flip lt1 to ls1 will be 2-3K all in and that is being cheap. you will need (what I spent):
- used kmember/motor mounts $250
- power steering rack $50-250
- Wiring harness and ECU - 400-500
- Repin ECU - TIME
- HPTUNERS/EFILIVE 600+
- FEAD - 400-500
- Starter - 50
- Ls1/Ls6 intake and throttle body, injectors (can't fit a truck intake) -$500-600
- Corvette regulator $60
-used 4.8/5.3/6.0 - 500-1500.
plus what applies to both cars = 4l80e, plus rear + converter, etc.
Punch block to .030 over, reuse factory crank, new rods and forged pistons. Leave factory heads alone, and upgrade springs/valves. Big injectors, and a big fuel pump. Fab up a single turbo kit or buy one, run a 76mm turbo, and make all the HP you want.
Junkyard 4L80e with a full race shift kit and a quality billet torque converter
Roll the dice with a 10 bolt but know you will break it later.
Should make an easy 600whp and be done for 10k.
Junkyard 4L80e with a full race shift kit and a quality billet torque converter
Roll the dice with a 10 bolt but know you will break it later.
Should make an easy 600whp and be done for 10k.
04-19-2017, 12:48 PM
#39
100%. It's the stuff that people use with the high revs that makes it less reliable: high compression, boost, huge cams, etc.
A 2.0l engine that makes 200 horsepower at 8k will be far more reliable than a 6.0 that makes 600 at 8k. That 2.0l smaller engine won't be squeezing every last ounce of power out of it, so although it isn't making a crap ton of power, it is making a good amount for it's size, because it's not running crazy timing or insane amounts of compression. It's got a smaller stroke, a smaller bore, hence less rotating mass reciprocating at a slower rate. It's also only making ~130 ft lbs, which comes out to just over 65 per liter. The 6.0 is making about 395 lb ft, coming out again, to just over 65/l. With 3 times the mass.
The 6.0 will also have a far more ridiculous cam, because if you have a V8 that revs to 8 grand, who wants ONLY 600 horsepower, so now you're running more compression, which means if Sunoco skimped on their 93 this week and you redline it, you just blew out a piston and now pieces of material that were, until 2 seconds ago moving at over an average of 24.5 m/s, are now flying through your engine.
That 2.0 could be using the same compression as the original 6.0, yet the lighter pieces are only moving at 23 m/s. With almost 20mm less piston diameter, which is a LOT of material to be stopped and brought back into motion when you're covering half of a football field in under 2 seconds. But this hairy beast v8 we're using as a comparison piece is running more compression, more cam, and more of everything that is dangerous to an engine.
So yes, higher revs is a safer way to make power. However if something goes wrong at those higher speeds, there is far more damage caused due to momentum.
I'm standing by my original argument: if all you care about is dyno numbers and reliability, and don't give a damn about streetability or usable power, then revs are the way to go.
A 2.0l engine that makes 200 horsepower at 8k will be far more reliable than a 6.0 that makes 600 at 8k. That 2.0l smaller engine won't be squeezing every last ounce of power out of it, so although it isn't making a crap ton of power, it is making a good amount for it's size, because it's not running crazy timing or insane amounts of compression. It's got a smaller stroke, a smaller bore, hence less rotating mass reciprocating at a slower rate. It's also only making ~130 ft lbs, which comes out to just over 65 per liter. The 6.0 is making about 395 lb ft, coming out again, to just over 65/l. With 3 times the mass.
The 6.0 will also have a far more ridiculous cam, because if you have a V8 that revs to 8 grand, who wants ONLY 600 horsepower, so now you're running more compression, which means if Sunoco skimped on their 93 this week and you redline it, you just blew out a piston and now pieces of material that were, until 2 seconds ago moving at over an average of 24.5 m/s, are now flying through your engine.
That 2.0 could be using the same compression as the original 6.0, yet the lighter pieces are only moving at 23 m/s. With almost 20mm less piston diameter, which is a LOT of material to be stopped and brought back into motion when you're covering half of a football field in under 2 seconds. But this hairy beast v8 we're using as a comparison piece is running more compression, more cam, and more of everything that is dangerous to an engine.
So yes, higher revs is a safer way to make power. However if something goes wrong at those higher speeds, there is far more damage caused due to momentum.
I'm standing by my original argument: if all you care about is dyno numbers and reliability, and don't give a damn about streetability or usable power, then revs are the way to go.
Last edited by PyroguyFTW; 04-19-2017 at 12:54 PM.
04-19-2017, 02:10 PM
#40
100%. It's the stuff that people use with the high revs that makes it less reliable: high compression, boost, huge cams, etc.
A 2.0l engine that makes 200 horsepower at 8k will be far more reliable than a 6.0 that makes 600 at 8k. That 2.0l smaller engine won't be squeezing every last ounce of power out of it, so although it isn't making a crap ton of power, it is making a good amount for it's size, because it's not running crazy timing or insane amounts of compression. It's got a smaller stroke, a smaller bore, hence less rotating mass reciprocating at a slower rate. It's also only making ~130 ft lbs, which comes out to just over 65 per liter. The 6.0 is making about 395 lb ft, coming out again, to just over 65/l. With 3 times the mass.
The 6.0 will also have a far more ridiculous cam, because if you have a V8 that revs to 8 grand, who wants ONLY 600 horsepower, so now you're running more compression, which means if Sunoco skimped on their 93 this week and you redline it, you just blew out a piston and now pieces of material that were, until 2 seconds ago moving at over an average of 24.5 m/s, are now flying through your engine.
That 2.0 could be using the same compression as the original 6.0, yet the lighter pieces are only moving at 23 m/s. With almost 20mm less piston diameter, which is a LOT of material to be stopped and brought back into motion when you're covering half of a football field in under 2 seconds. But this hairy beast v8 we're using as a comparison piece is running more compression, more cam, and more of everything that is dangerous to an engine.
So yes, higher revs is a safer way to make power. However if something goes wrong at those higher speeds, there is far more damage caused due to momentum.
I'm standing by my original argument: if all you care about is dyno numbers and reliability, and don't give a damn about streetability or usable power, then revs are the way to go.
A 2.0l engine that makes 200 horsepower at 8k will be far more reliable than a 6.0 that makes 600 at 8k. That 2.0l smaller engine won't be squeezing every last ounce of power out of it, so although it isn't making a crap ton of power, it is making a good amount for it's size, because it's not running crazy timing or insane amounts of compression. It's got a smaller stroke, a smaller bore, hence less rotating mass reciprocating at a slower rate. It's also only making ~130 ft lbs, which comes out to just over 65 per liter. The 6.0 is making about 395 lb ft, coming out again, to just over 65/l. With 3 times the mass.
The 6.0 will also have a far more ridiculous cam, because if you have a V8 that revs to 8 grand, who wants ONLY 600 horsepower, so now you're running more compression, which means if Sunoco skimped on their 93 this week and you redline it, you just blew out a piston and now pieces of material that were, until 2 seconds ago moving at over an average of 24.5 m/s, are now flying through your engine.
That 2.0 could be using the same compression as the original 6.0, yet the lighter pieces are only moving at 23 m/s. With almost 20mm less piston diameter, which is a LOT of material to be stopped and brought back into motion when you're covering half of a football field in under 2 seconds. But this hairy beast v8 we're using as a comparison piece is running more compression, more cam, and more of everything that is dangerous to an engine.
So yes, higher revs is a safer way to make power. However if something goes wrong at those higher speeds, there is far more damage caused due to momentum.
I'm standing by my original argument: if all you care about is dyno numbers and reliability, and don't give a damn about streetability or usable power, then revs are the way to go.