!["MAC"'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%237f3b59' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
Coyotah vs ls
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,128
Likes: 645
From: Winchester, VA
As i have said like a thousand times gmc knew in the 1930s that you blowers appropriately for the engines. Nothing new.....no reason not to.
If you truly want to see how much power the engine makes then you run it na......no power adder. No bullshit crying about a larger blower on a larger better flowing more powerful engine. But we seen how that went already did6we
Now tale your tears elsewhere cause give no ***** about your pissy *** 30p00 sized engines.
Troof
Using the same blower on 2 completely different engines would only have restricted the ls.......or blew the coyote up even earlier.
As i have said like a thousand times gmc knew in the 1930s that you blowers appropriately for the engines. Nothing new.....no reason not to.
If you truly want to see how much power the engine makes then you run it na......no power adder. No bullshit crying about a larger blower on a larger better flowing more powerful engine. But we seen how that went already did6we
Yea man......i get the chuckles out of furd guys crying in the yt comments. You shoulda seen all the furd guys posting about how the ls blew up in the live chat.......right before the coyotah took a huge ****......at far far less power.
Now tale your tears elsewhere cause give no ***** about your pissy *** 30p00 sized engines.
Using the same blower on 2 completely different engines would only have restricted the ls.......or blew the coyote up even earlier.
As i have said like a thousand times gmc knew in the 1930s that you blowers appropriately for the engines. Nothing new.....no reason not to.
If you truly want to see how much power the engine makes then you run it na......no power adder. No bullshit crying about a larger blower on a larger better flowing more powerful engine. But we seen how that went already did6we
Yea man......i get the chuckles out of furd guys crying in the yt comments. You shoulda seen all the furd guys posting about how the ls blew up in the live chat.......right before the coyotah took a huge ****......at far far less power.
Now tale your tears elsewhere cause give no ***** about your pissy *** 30p00 sized engines.
You don't want that to happen the DOHC is a superior design which allows for more flow. If both engines where 5.0L with the same bore and same stroke the coyote would win by a land slide. Just like the WS6store guy already said more rpm = more hp. The only reason why the LS is so great na vs coyote na is for the simple fact you can easily change the cubic inches resulting in more trq when that happens and you still turn the engine the same rpms you will get more hp. Trq and rpms are inversely related. Coyote takes advantage of this and a simple push rod design takes advantage of ci. Is there a superior way sure it's DOHC bc you can do more with less in a sense of ci.
I said more rpm = more power on the same engine not across platforms. I made sure to make that distinction.
Gm was working on a 5.0l ls engine in one of their le mans cars a while back. Idk if it was DI or OHC or just pushrod. Been a while. When you can make the same horsepower and more torque from less rpm OR have a much better useable midrange or entire rpm range, then why wouldn't you?
Youve seen the 5.0 dyno graphs just like I have with cammed 5.0s where they lose massive power under 5k.
The dohc vs pushrod is clearly the issue in price. You can see that with this build. LME basically bought a brand new engine in parts and made one. MPR got a used engine (i assume) especially for 1800 then rebuilt it but reused alot of parts and still had to cut the parts short for budget from my interpretation.
IF you build them on the same budget the way a 5.0 guy would like, the ls would still "decimate all". Its straight facts since 2011 basically. The excuses get old and hanging your hat on 1 or 2 fast builds in chassis cars etc doesnt mean much.
You can like what you like, both are great engines but with ALL the parts and pieces that supposedly make the mod motors better 4 cams and phasers etc. they really aren't vs LS or LT. That conclusion is deeply rooted in Dyno graphs and track times.
Gm was working on a 5.0l ls engine in one of their le mans cars a while back. Idk if it was DI or OHC or just pushrod. Been a while. When you can make the same horsepower and more torque from less rpm OR have a much better useable midrange or entire rpm range, then why wouldn't you?
Youve seen the 5.0 dyno graphs just like I have with cammed 5.0s where they lose massive power under 5k.
The dohc vs pushrod is clearly the issue in price. You can see that with this build. LME basically bought a brand new engine in parts and made one. MPR got a used engine (i assume) especially for 1800 then rebuilt it but reused alot of parts and still had to cut the parts short for budget from my interpretation.
IF you build them on the same budget the way a 5.0 guy would like, the ls would still "decimate all". Its straight facts since 2011 basically. The excuses get old and hanging your hat on 1 or 2 fast builds in chassis cars etc doesnt mean much.
You can like what you like, both are great engines but with ALL the parts and pieces that supposedly make the mod motors better 4 cams and phasers etc. they really aren't vs LS or LT. That conclusion is deeply rooted in Dyno graphs and track times.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Staging Lane
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 84
Likes: 42
From: Rent Free in Hio's Mind
Originally Posted by HioSSilver
TroofUsing the same blower on 2 completely different engines would only have restricted the ls.......or blew the coyote up even earlier.
As i have said like a thousand times gmc knew in the 1930s that you blowers appropriately for the engines. Nothing new.....no reason not to.
If you truly want to see how much power the engine makes then you run it na......no power adder. No bullshit crying about a larger blower on a larger better flowing more powerful engine. But we seen how that went already did6weYea man......i get the chuckles out of furd guys crying in the yt comments. You shoulda seen all the furd guys posting about how the ls blew up in the live chat.......right before the coyotah took a huge ****......at far far less power.
Now tale your tears elsewhere cause give no ***** about your pissy *** 30p00 sized engines.
As i have said like a thousand times gmc knew in the 1930s that you blowers appropriately for the engines. Nothing new.....no reason not to.
If you truly want to see how much power the engine makes then you run it na......no power adder. No bullshit crying about a larger blower on a larger better flowing more powerful engine. But we seen how that went already did6weYea man......i get the chuckles out of furd guys crying in the yt comments. You shoulda seen all the furd guys posting about how the ls blew up in the live chat.......right before the coyotah took a huge ****......at far far less power.
Now tale your tears elsewhere cause give no ***** about your pissy *** 30p00 sized engines.
DOHC 4.6 built bottom end
Ported blower
swapped in a notchback
and you run ******* 11.5s
It still hurts your anus that it will always take more CI for a GM to win, even back when Fords used pushrod motors in Mustangs as well. Don't be mad at the truth
Definitely not ohc engines simply lack the trq that's why Ford moved back to a push rod gas engine for their f250. The only time a ohc engine can make trq for trucks is when they are turboed or big ci like the old big block ohc engine of the 60s. Why do you think the coyote makes less trq than the ecopoop for the f150?
Other great examples for my point being made is formula 1 cars they are 1.6L v6 making upwards of 850hp (Mercedes) they spin 12k rpms to 15k rpms. There is always down sides to every engine regardless. If you're complaining about not seeing power under 5k rpms with cammed coyotes then that's stupid. The vast majority of the race will be above that rpm. Hell I've personally seen a cammed coyote launch at 7k rpms and hook and go. Like I said trq and rpms are inversely related this goes for all engines. This can been seen easily by looking at a stock big block it made tons of trq yet was slow and didn't turn that much rpms. A small block turns more rpms has less trq and the power band is moved to the right vs the big block.
Ecoboost is turbod so thats not a comparison. The 3.5 EcoBoost also has a failry large bore size nearly the same as the 5.0 so that also helps tq. Still not even a comparison.
Trying to bring any other engine into this conversation is ridiculous especially adding in a formula one engine.
This is coyote vs ls. Broader would be mod motor vs ls. Thats it. No straight race thoroughbreds.
Ford made a 5.8l. They could have left it NA and made better power vs the 5.0. They haven't yet. Since you're basically stuck around 5.0l for the coyote besides maybe a stroker setup? (Havent checked) then the only way to fix the lack of torque is with compression ratio and cams designed for it.
But that would really be working backwards as to what ford is doing.
The individual phaser has so much potential and the small ports help also. You get to change both icl and lsa and yet cant muster better power, something is way wrong. The engine and engineering is what limits itself. Especially the bore spacing. Not the fact that it is ohc/dohc alone. It lacks cubic inch. Kinda like a 5.3l. The 5.8l in 5.0 trim with higher cr etc would make much more impressive na power. But its not, so moot point.
As far as the pushrod for the trucks, its a very large engine which would make torque either way, but im guessing ford needed it to be economical for fleet use etc and pushrods are much much more economical than och/dohc. And they could use a lower CR on a pushrod and still make great power.
Trying to bring any other engine into this conversation is ridiculous especially adding in a formula one engine.
This is coyote vs ls. Broader would be mod motor vs ls. Thats it. No straight race thoroughbreds.
Ford made a 5.8l. They could have left it NA and made better power vs the 5.0. They haven't yet. Since you're basically stuck around 5.0l for the coyote besides maybe a stroker setup? (Havent checked) then the only way to fix the lack of torque is with compression ratio and cams designed for it.
But that would really be working backwards as to what ford is doing.
The individual phaser has so much potential and the small ports help also. You get to change both icl and lsa and yet cant muster better power, something is way wrong. The engine and engineering is what limits itself. Especially the bore spacing. Not the fact that it is ohc/dohc alone. It lacks cubic inch. Kinda like a 5.3l. The 5.8l in 5.0 trim with higher cr etc would make much more impressive na power. But its not, so moot point.
As far as the pushrod for the trucks, its a very large engine which would make torque either way, but im guessing ford needed it to be economical for fleet use etc and pushrods are much much more economical than och/dohc. And they could use a lower CR on a pushrod and still make great power.
You are the last person in the world who is any authority on boost
DOHC 4.6 built bottom end
Ported blower
swapped in a notchback
and you run ******* 11.5s
It still hurts your anus that it will always take more CI for a GM to win, even back when Fords used pushrod motors in Mustangs as well. Don't be mad at the truth
DOHC 4.6 built bottom end
Ported blower
swapped in a notchback
and you run ******* 11.5s
It still hurts your anus that it will always take more CI for a GM to win, even back when Fords used pushrod motors in Mustangs as well. Don't be mad at the truth
And that engine did exactly what it was designed to do. Win offshore boat racing. Where was ford for that?
Dont be mad you cant build cubic inch in a Mod you have to force the air into it to make anything of it.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 528
Likes: 15
From: huntsville Al
placing an arbitrary blower drive requirement knowing it wont allow the smaller engine to push it is as expected by a chevy rag.
use the same blower. build the engine using a SME, not a chevy *******. turn the coyote 10,000+ rpms. cam it for 10,000+.
oh, and use nascar spec aftermarket heads for the chevy vs ported stock heads for the coyote. as expected.
the little engine will always make less torque vs 100 more cubic inches. as expected.
you want to see what a coyote can do? get mihovetz to build it. you want a chevy circle jerk... as usual do the same all over again.