LBO 16 SS goes 11.0@123
12-17-2016 | 03:10 PM
#762
Thank you, I appreciate that. I don't have much time to check in or post so I have to do the shot gun blasts when I have time. I will keep this updated as I figure things out. It just takes me a while to get to my own car.
12-17-2016 | 03:28 PM
#763
Keep reporting back! I'm interested in the 6G but didn't want to purchase a first model year of a GM product (for obvious reasons). So far they are putting up some pretty decent numbers with bolt ons. Curious to see some 10s
12-17-2016 | 05:25 PM
#764
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 577
Likes: 1
From: League City, Tx
Let me get my hands on a set of stock heads and I will see what I can do. I am just not sure there is a H/C market yet for these cars with the stinking labor cost to go that route. Might as well go FI. That is my plan and the heads would be free and I get the cam dirt cheap.
I have not read into the above heads at this point or any other but I am pretty sure that the VVT cams have to stay under .600 lift and most are in the .550 lift area. Some one please correct me if I am wrong. So we will need to focus all the air flow from .300 to .600. After that it just doesn't matter. This is a big *** runner from the factory as well. All the work will need to be in the valve seat, valve, and short turn. I highly doubt doing any real runner work will show much in that area.
I have done pretty will with all of my stock ported offerings in the past. I haven't really seen the aftermarket produce much better numbers for the build level I have been doing. My 272cc runner LS7 heads flow over 400cfm at .650 lift and have made 630rw. LS2/3's follow suit. If there seems to be a market for it maybe I will dive in and develop some ports.
I have not read into the above heads at this point or any other but I am pretty sure that the VVT cams have to stay under .600 lift and most are in the .550 lift area. Some one please correct me if I am wrong. So we will need to focus all the air flow from .300 to .600. After that it just doesn't matter. This is a big *** runner from the factory as well. All the work will need to be in the valve seat, valve, and short turn. I highly doubt doing any real runner work will show much in that area.
I have done pretty will with all of my stock ported offerings in the past. I haven't really seen the aftermarket produce much better numbers for the build level I have been doing. My 272cc runner LS7 heads flow over 400cfm at .650 lift and have made 630rw. LS2/3's follow suit. If there seems to be a market for it maybe I will dive in and develop some ports.
I was recently reading up on this myself...it seems the exhaust port is weak on the LT1/LT4 head. On the intake side, mid lift low is decent, comparable to an LS3/9 head but the flow stalls about .500" on a 4.060" bore. The exhaust ports seems to flow about 30-40 cfm less then an LS head.
Lingenfelter has some nice before/after flow charts on their website.
I'm kind of surprised by this, I would have thought with the power that cammed LT1s are making that the heads would be pretty good..apparently not...same thing goes for the LT1 intake manifold..
12-17-2016 | 07:14 PM
#765
I was recently reading up on this myself...it seems the exhaust port is weak on the LT1/LT4 head. On the intake side, mid lift low is decent, comparable to an LS3/9 head but the flow stalls about .500" on a 4.060" bore. The exhaust ports seems to flow about 30-40 cfm less then an LS head.
Lingenfelter has some nice before/after flow charts on their website.
I'm kind of surprised by this, I would have thought with the power that cammed LT1s are making that the heads would be pretty good..apparently not...same thing goes for the LT1 intake manifold..
Lingenfelter has some nice before/after flow charts on their website.
I'm kind of surprised by this, I would have thought with the power that cammed LT1s are making that the heads would be pretty good..apparently not...same thing goes for the LT1 intake manifold..
I wouldn't say the IM's are all that bad once they are ported. I currently have both the pump gas bolt on C7 record (I built, ported, tuned, and drove the car. It belonged to a friend though) and the bolt on Camaro records with my ported IM. Maybe they haven't updated the CF C7 list but I had it last I checked. I am going to try to max effort my stock IM as soon as I get a breather to see if there is anything left there.
BTW, I love your Z. That is the exact color scheme I would go with.
12-21-2016 | 04:43 PM
#769
They don't seem to like the stock MSD. I haven't ported on yet but I don't think it is going to help much. Check this out.
http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=477735
My next step is going to be rear cat delete and dual 3" cut outs pre AFM valves. I will see what that does. Then I am going to throw some Kooks headers and cats on.
http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=477735
My next step is going to be rear cat delete and dual 3" cut outs pre AFM valves. I will see what that does. Then I am going to throw some Kooks headers and cats on.
12-21-2016 | 05:34 PM
#773
A couple pages in I post up a graph from a cam car. The MSD still lost but everywhere this time. That car needs to be gone though in all fairness. I think the cam was ground wrong or is a tooth off retarded.
12-21-2016 | 08:14 PM
#775
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 528
Likes: 15
From: huntsville Al
I'm not telling you anything but the port volume is deceptive considering the length of the port from the opening to the valve head.
The cross section is the secret to these heads. IMO most anything done will be at the cost of low lift flow and torque.
The temptation is to turn those heads into LS clones. Let us know where the velocity choke point is. You know 2 degrees of taper is ideal for the beat flow coefficient.
You know there is an old way to improve flow without getting into the runner is scratching across the short side deeply to slow down the airflow and keeping it laminar.
The cross section is the secret to these heads. IMO most anything done will be at the cost of low lift flow and torque.
The temptation is to turn those heads into LS clones. Let us know where the velocity choke point is. You know 2 degrees of taper is ideal for the beat flow coefficient.
You know there is an old way to improve flow without getting into the runner is scratching across the short side deeply to slow down the airflow and keeping it laminar.
12-21-2016 | 08:22 PM
#776
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 528
Likes: 15
From: huntsville Al
Rpm is the issue man. The port's airflow stacks up. More duration is going to ruin torque. Everything that focuses on rpm will fail with stock heads.
It's going to take getting rid of the port choke point to do that.
The engine design is literally perfect. I stick with the engine need a first order harmonic tunnel ram. I bet my life the engine would pick up 50 lb-ft with on designed for the perfect rpm max torque point. Other Bolton's will simply pick up more than that.
Pop the heads, port them correctly, the mill them to raise the CR to use only E85.
It's going to take getting rid of the port choke point to do that.
The engine design is literally perfect. I stick with the engine need a first order harmonic tunnel ram. I bet my life the engine would pick up 50 lb-ft with on designed for the perfect rpm max torque point. Other Bolton's will simply pick up more than that.
Pop the heads, port them correctly, the mill them to raise the CR to use only E85.
12-22-2016 | 05:14 AM
#777
I don't plan on touching the runner. My plan is valve back cut angles, valve seat angles and margins, bowl, valve guide, and short turn shape and width. Same for the exhaust but I think the exhaust will need some "short" wall work for sure.
That is a good point on cross section vs. length. I know the port is 1.580" wide or so. I can't remember the height off the top of my head. I have all the stock cross sections in my note book.
That is a good point on cross section vs. length. I know the port is 1.580" wide or so. I can't remember the height off the top of my head. I have all the stock cross sections in my note book.
12-22-2016 | 05:18 AM
#778
Rpm is the issue man. The port's airflow stacks up. More duration is going to ruin torque. Everything that focuses on rpm will fail with stock heads.
It's going to take getting rid of the port choke point to do that.
The engine design is literally perfect. I stick with the engine need a first order harmonic tunnel ram. I bet my life the engine would pick up 50 lb-ft with on designed for the perfect rpm max torque point. Other Bolton's will simply pick up more than that.
Pop the heads, port them correctly, the mill them to raise the CR to use only E85.
It's going to take getting rid of the port choke point to do that.
The engine design is literally perfect. I stick with the engine need a first order harmonic tunnel ram. I bet my life the engine would pick up 50 lb-ft with on designed for the perfect rpm max torque point. Other Bolton's will simply pick up more than that.
Pop the heads, port them correctly, the mill them to raise the CR to use only E85.
