LQ4 Power

[Skinny Pedal]

One of the most popular swaps we see is LS.... I guess its the norm now, LOL. I have been toying with grinding a cam to fit the LQ4, LQ9 and LM7. Something to push the stock heads to the limit. After some parts gathering and way to much math, I found the end of the heads but made some nice power out of a CHEAP engine.

We started with a 125k mile LQ4 6.0. Checked it over and decided it was healthy enough to run. I have a stock dyno sheet shown for reference on what this engine should make stock. The other sheet has Pull 3 and Pull 5.

Pull 3
Stock LQ4
TBSS intake
36 lb injectors
92mm TB
LS2 yellow valve springs

Pull 5
Same as above
My baby cam, springs, push rods.

At the end of the day we ended up with an engine that was 460/460. Not bad for a 300 hp stock engine with no real major upgrades. The most awesome thing was the power this thing made in Pull 3 with little upgrades.

I did grind a larger cam for a ported cathedral port head engine and we did test it with non ported heads..... It fell under pull 5 until 5k then it ran out of air and fell flat. All the heads we ran were 317s and 243/799s. Even the slight compression bump wasn't an improvement worth noting.

http://photos.team208motorsports.com/2015/LQ4-Power/i-W5nkTPs/0/L/engine_performance-L.jpg

http://photos.team208motorsports.com/2015/LQ4-Power/i-9GgcpWf/0/L/IMG_0773-L.jpg

[Fast355]

One of the most popular swaps we see is LS.... I guess its the norm now, LOL. I have been toying with grinding a cam to fit the LQ4, LQ9 and LM7. Something to push the stock heads to the limit. After some parts gathering and way to much math, I found the end of the heads but made some nice power out of a CHEAP engine.

We started with a 125k mile LQ4 6.0. Checked it over and decided it was healthy enough to run. I have a stock dyno sheet shown for reference on what this engine should make stock. The other sheet has Pull 3 and Pull 5.

Pull 3
Stock LQ4
TBSS intake
36 lb injectors
92mm TB
LS2 yellow valve springs

Pull 5
Same as above
My baby cam, springs, push rods.

At the end of the day we ended up with an engine that was 460/460. Not bad for a 300 hp stock engine with no real major upgrades. The most awesome thing was the power this thing made in Pull 3 with little upgrades.

I did grind a larger cam for a ported cathedral port head engine and we did test it with non ported heads..... It fell under pull 5 until 5k then it ran out of air and fell flat. All the heads we ran were 317s and 243/799s. Even the slight compression bump wasn't an improvement worth noting.

http://photos.team208motorsports.com/2015/LQ4-Power/i-W5nkTPs/0/L/engine_performance-L.jpg

http://photos.team208motorsports.com/2015/LQ4-Power/i-9GgcpWf/0/L/IMG_0773-L.jpg


Definately reinforces why my cheap LQ9 build will end up in a car and when the 5.7 Vortec in my Express dies, will have a 383 in its place. Nice top-end HP, NO guts down low. Also CHEAP can't be understated enough. I picked up a LM7 longblock from an 02 Suburban for $100 and the engine itself is near immaculate after I stripped off a slightly charred intake manifold and coils.

[Skinny Pedal]

What do you mean no guts down low? Over 400 lb-ft under 3k..... If the graph would show it, it was over 350 at 1500 rpm. This is only 364 ci under 9.5 to 1. Shorter stroke than a stroker and stock heads.

[Fast355]

What do you mean no guts down low? Over 400 lb-ft under 3k..... If the graph would show it, it was over 350 at 1500 rpm. This is only 364 ci under 9.5 to 1. Shorter stroke than a stroker and stock heads.

I was putting those torque numbers to the TIRES through a 700r4 and 8.5" 10-bolt with a TPI 383 with vortec heads and a small cam!!

My VK56 put down 365 RWTQ on a Mustang dyno at just 2250 rpm.

I like the Gen3 and 4 engines but the Gen 1, 1E and Gen2s definately hold their own under 5,000 rpm!! I can pickup a marine 6.2/6.3 aka 377 or 383 and even get them reman and destroy the 6.0 from off-idle through 5,000 rpm.

[lionelhutz]

Those are impressive numbers, especially the change just the intake and associated parts makes as bolt-on pieces.

Last I checked, a Mercruiser 6.2L was something like 325hp so I find it hard to believe it's torque curve could beat the numbers you got for anything below 5000rpm. Might beat the stock LQ4 but I highly doubt it could outrun your modifications, even the before cam mods only. But then what do I know?

[Skinny Pedal]

Whats the cost in that? I'm less than 3k in this entire setup, including engine and dyno time.

So the point of this is for me to provide TRUE and HONEST numbers for MY cams. I'm not here to start a pissing match, which I'm sorry if I did by posting a stock LS setup....

[Skinny Pedal]

Those are impressive numbers, especially the change just the intake and associated parts makes as bolt-on pieces.

Thanks! I have always wanted to push these engines in stock form. I am glad I have to opportunity to. I am very excited to see the L92 cam I have designed in a 408 stroker.

[Fast355]

Whats the cost in that? I'm less than 3k in this entire setup, including engine and dyno time.

So the point of this is for me to provide TRUE and HONEST numbers for MY cams. I'm not here to start a pissing match, which I'm sorry if I did by posting a stock LS setup....

Not trying to get into a pissing match. I think you have a great build with great HP per $$$.

I am just mentioning the old Gen1s still have a place in my eyes in a heavy truck/SUV or Van that is going to tow or haul. I think it is interesting to watch someone pull a solid 350 or even 454 out of their ride and slap in a junkard LS and spend a ton of money on the conversion. I also know good LS deals are out there. I got my ready to assemble LQ9 short block for $550 and bought a good 2002 LM7 5.3 for $100. Its going to cost at a minimum $800-1000 to put a LS engine in place of a 350 or 454 and get it running. You can realistically say your 6.0L installed in say a 1998 K1500 and running would be $4,000.

The Marine 6.3 and HT 383 are the same thing with the 3.8" stroke and the Marine 6.2 is the same engine with a 3.75" stroke. All 3 are using a 4.00" bore, vortec heads and the tiny' 395 marine cam that is 196/206 @.050.

I have built a Gen1 TPI 383 with ported vortec heads for under $3,000 as well.

I saw this testing done on a HT383 and it is a monster.

http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/gm-ht383-crate-small-block-tune-up/

[Fast355]

Those are impressive numbers, especially the change just the intake and associated parts makes as bolt-on pieces.

Last I checked, a Mercruiser 6.2L was something like 325hp so I find it hard to believe it's torque curve could beat the numbers you got for anything below 5000rpm. Might beat the stock LQ4 but I highly doubt it could outrun your modifications, even the before cam mods only. But then what do I know?

That is the Marine NET rating, with a 4bbl car, headers and minimal accessories it put down 338 hp @ 4,400 and 444 tq @ 3,400. With roller rockers, an intake and carb change it put down 379 hp @ 4,600 and 474 tq @ 3,700. At only 2,500 rpm it made as much as 450 ft/lbs of torque. Like I said Gen1 Vortec, especially a 383 has the handle on low-midrange power and the LS is the top-end dyno queen. In my Express van the only time I am able to make use of power beyond 5,000 rpm is in 1st gear or breaking the speed limit and law in 2nd gear beyond 80 mph. Thanks to 4L80E and 3.73s. My normal driving is between 1,000 and 3,500 rpm with brief sprints to 5,500 in 1st gear getting on the highway.

[Roadknee]

I became an LS fan after purchasing our 2006 Yukon with a 5.3. Very smooth power delivery and excellent unloaded fuel economy. I was surprised though that when towing the economy isn't any different than my TBI truck, my dads old carbureted 350 truck, or the 454 powered 1-ton '79 GMC we just acquired.

I'm in the process of a complete resto on my '66 Nova. It had a fresh drivetrain, TBI 383 and a 4 speed, before I tore it down for paint and body work. Last year I found a great deal on a complete 5.3 with harness and computer so I bought it thinking this would be a good time for an LS conversion. Then I added up install costs - oil pan, radiator, motor mounts, headers, bell housing, flywheel, clutch, etc., etc., and decided the 383 will be just fine. The nova will see an LS someday, probably with a turbo or two...

[lionelhutz]

I guess everyone who is swapping an LS engine into their rides to go faster is doing it wrong...

The torque curve tells you how fast you accelerate when you have the drivetrain but the HP curve tells you how fast you could accelerate when you are picking the drivetrain. I guess if you insist on running a LS engine with a drivetrain optimized for a low HP low rpm small-block then you wouldn't see the gains the LS engine can give you.

I've really only seen curves where an older small-block had more torque below about 2500rpm but really fell off above 5k rpm where a similar LS engine held the torque until well over 6k rpm. Around 2.5-5k the torque curves are similar. I would attribute the difference to shorter intake and/or exhaust runners used on the LS engines. The LS engine is simply built to produce it's power at a higher rpm. If you insist on running <2.5k towing then the small-block could have an advantage. But, gear the LS vehicle to hold another 1000rpm or so at the same road speed and it would kill the small-block. You could also put a long runner intake and headers on the LS and it would likely match the small block power curve.

My parents take a trailer to Florida every year and their '06 5.3L LS truck used about a 1/3 less fuel than their old '90 TBI truck and pulls better too.

I'd put this LQ4 into my car over any small-block I've managed to build.

[Fast355]

I guess everyone who is swapping an LS engine into their rides to go faster is doing it wrong...

The torque curve tells you how fast you accelerate when you have the drivetrain but the HP curve tells you how fast you could accelerate when you are picking the drivetrain.

I've really only seen curves where an older small-block had more torque below 2500rpm but really fell off above 5k rpm where a similar LS engine held the torque until well over 6k rpm. Around 2.5-5k the torque curves are similar if not having the LS engine ahead a bit. I would attribute the difference to shorter intake and/or exhaust runners used on the LS engines. If you insist on running <2.5k towing then the small-block could have an advantage. But, gear the LS vehicle to hold another 1000rpm at the same speed and it would kill the small-block at all speeds. You could also put a long runner intake and headers on the LS and it would likely match the small block power curve.

My parents take a trailer to Florida every year and their '06 5.3L LS truck used about a 1/3 less fuel than their old '90 TBI truck and pulls better too.

I'd put this LQ4 into my car over any small-block I've managed to build.

The crossover point is higher up around 4,500 rpm. The reason for the elevated peak is port size and velocity. The LS head ports are HUGE compared to the older stuff. I have older Car Craft magazines with the 5.3 and the 330 hp 350 crate engine dyno's as well as a LS1 5.7 dyno. The stock crate engine cammed 350 made 377 hp and the LS1 made 400. With the hotcam the L31 + Hotcam made more power EVERYWHERE than the stock LS1 + Headers.

[Fast355]

My 350 outguns this 6.0L everywhere under 5,000 rpm and if you count the fact it is just a stock vortec 5.7 shortblock with a cam, a good pair of aluminum heads, a relatively cheap marine intake, and a pair of thorley headers and a quiet exhaust it would be under $3000 to put the parts on a solid 5.7 shortblock.

I tow up to 8,500# behind my 6,200# Express van with a 4L80E and 3.73s. I run about 2,800 @ 65 mph in 3rd and knock on 12-14 mpg with that weight. Cruising empty I am 2,250 @ 70 and 2,800 @ 85 and get 17-19 mpg. If I had a 6.0L turning another 1,000 rpm, I would have the power but my MPG would be atrocious! Under WOT acceleration with Tow/Haul on, I shift at 4,900-5,000 rpm and lock the converter at 60-65 mph. The engine pulls strong, is pretty quiet and moves the weight just fine. I looked down one day with nearly 7,500# behind me and was running 80 mph with traffic uphill with ease.

[brian617]

One of the most popular swaps we see is LS.... I guess its the norm now, LOL. I have been toying with grinding a cam to fit the LQ4, LQ9 and LM7. Something to push the stock heads to the limit. After some parts gathering and way to much math, I found the end of the heads but made some nice power out of a CHEAP engine.

We started with a 125k mile LQ4 6.0. Checked it over and decided it was healthy enough to run. I have a stock dyno sheet shown for reference on what this engine should make stock. The other sheet has Pull 3 and Pull 5.

Pull 3
Stock LQ4
TBSS intake
36 lb injectors
92mm TB
LS2 yellow valve springs

Pull 5
Same as above
My baby cam, springs, push rods.

At the end of the day we ended up with an engine that was 460/460. Not bad for a 300 hp stock engine with no real major upgrades. The most awesome thing was the power this thing made in Pull 3 with little upgrades.

I did grind a larger cam for a ported cathedral port head engine and we did test it with non ported heads..... It fell under pull 5 until 5k then it ran out of air and fell flat. All the heads we ran were 317s and 243/799s. Even the slight compression bump wasn't an improvement worth noting.


"My Baby Cam" Specs? Top Secret?

[Skinny Pedal]

"My Baby Cam" Specs? Top Secret?

Until all testing is done and total development is over yes.

[Fast355]

And please don't get me wrong guys, I LOVE the LS and the modern "HEMI" engines in CARS. But I will keep the traditional, larger cubic inch "GRUNT" engines in my trucks.

[Skinny Pedal]

I guess I need to post more LS stuff, it really brings out the posts. LOL

I'm not biased, I'll make run what ever I am paid to. Right now these are very popular and cheaper to build for the END CUSTOMER.... I say that because everyone on this board is a DIY person and not a hands off end customer. You really have to compare costs that way.

[Skinny Pedal]

And please don't get me wrong guys, I LOVE the LS and the modern "HEMI" engines in CARS. But I will keep the traditional, larger cubic inch "GRUNT" engines in my trucks.

No doubt. I just sold my roller 383 I have had in my 73 pickup for 7 years. I cried a little.....

[Fast355]

I guess I need to post more LS stuff, it really brings out the posts. LOL

I'm not biased, I'll make run what ever I am paid to. Right now these are very popular and cheaper to build for the END CUSTOMER.... I say that because everyone on this board is a DIY person and not a hands off end customer. You really have to compare costs that way.

Exactly, I had two different Titans because I work for a Nissan dealership. I was amazed at the power I was able to get out of the stock engine with only intake/exhaust/tuning. There are MANY good running engines on the market these days but cracking open a few HotRod magazines from 1968-1970 the other day, some of those old cars would really run with a few tweaks and changes too. Like a ~500 hp NA 340 Mopar.

[lionelhutz]

My 350 outguns this 6.0L everywhere under 5,000 rpm....

Towing 8500lbs behind a full size van and getting 13mpg while running 2800rpm @ 65mph? I find that hard to believe. A "cheap" 350 built for towing that can make over 425ft-lbs of torque at 3k rpm and over 460 ft-lbs of torque at 4.5k rpm? I find that ridiculously hard to believe.

[Fast355]

Towing 8500lbs behind a full size van and getting 13mpg while running 2800rpm @ 65mph? I find that hard to believe. A "cheap" 350 built for towing that can make over 425ft-lbs of torque at 3k rpm and over 460 ft-lbs of torque at 4.5k rpm? I find that ridiculously hard to believe.

I put down 370 RWHP on a Mustang dyno through a 4L80E and GM 9.5" 14-bolt. I put down 340 RWTQ at only 3,000 rpm with a locked converter and peaked about 370 RWTQ at 4,500 rpm. At only 2,400 rpm it was already putting down 330 RWTQ. A 355 TPI engine with production vortecs and a 210/220 cam put down 490 ft/lbs at peak and over 400 from 2,600 and beyond.

As for the MPG, thats what it gets towing on flat land with no winds and I have pulled down 18+ running empty Do not run EGR either.

Its a stock 1-ton GM crate 350 shortblock
Edelbrock Etec 170cc heads
271/276 @.006, 215/220 @ .050, .534/.547" lift, 114* LSA Comp cam installed at 110* ICL. Crane Gold 1.6:1 SA roller rockers
Ported L31 Marine intake with an 85mm LS1 TB and 85mm maf into a stock Express airbox
0411 PCM running HP Tuners MAF Enhanced operating system
Doug Thorley Tri-y headers into 3" Thorley headpipes, reduced to 2.75" mandrel bent piping into 2.5" Thunderbolt cats and a dual in/single out Walker Dynomax bus muffler with a 3" mandrel bent tail pipe
454 radiator with factory oil cooler, duramax fan on a trailblazer ss fan clutch, Napa 200a AD-244 alternator, Racetronix fuel pump hotwire, March 4490 Underdrive pulleys. Runs a 4L80E with a B82 factory high stall converter and a 3.73 geared 9.5" 14-bolt out of a 6-lug 2500 Express.

[Roadknee]

I am very excited to see the L92 cam I have designed in a 408 stroker.

When you design a lobe, do you run all the math by hand to come up with your lift curve, velocity and acceleration rates, or do you use computer software? Have you ever tested your designs on a Spintron to verify stability? Who develops your masters and does your cam grinding?

[Roadknee]

A 355 TPI engine with production vortecs and a 210/220 cam put down 490 ft/lbs at peak and over 400 from 2,600 and beyond.

Your results again are very impressive. Regardless of the combination of parts, a 355 making 490 ft/lbs at the flywheel will require volumetric efficiency approaching 120 percent. And you accomplished that with production heads and a small street cam. Professionals building state of the art race engines strive to achieve results like these. Great work indeed!

[Fast355]

Your results again are very impressive. Regardless of the combination of parts, a 355 making 490 ft/lbs at the flywheel will require volumetric efficiency approaching 120 percent. And you accomplished that with production heads and a small street cam. Professionals building state of the art race engines strive to achieve results like these. Great work indeed!

That one was not mine, check out Something New Something Old by GM High Tech. I had a very similarly built 383 TPI in my 1983 G20 that put down 430 RWTQ.

[lionelhutz]

Yes, that's making unbelievable power for sure. It took Super Chevy 28 build combinations in their danger mouse series to come up with very similar power as this LS engine and it required 40 thou more lift and 20 degrees more duration in their cam choice compared to yours. But, they also did it with the E-tec 170 heads which definitely are a really good head choice. Their torque started dropping like a rock below 3k rpm and was below 350 ft-lbs at the crank by 2600 rpm. If their torque continued to drop like the graph was showing then their engine certainly wouldn't be any better in the low end compared to the LS engine in this thread.

So, it's really impressive you came up with a combo that makes what, another 60-80 ft-lbs at 2400rpmthan SC managed and also beats their build all the way to 5k all while using a more tow friendly smaller cam.

In other words, your engine outgunning this LS engine all the way to 5k is still rather unbelievable.Your smaller cam should help the torque below 3k rpm but no way are you beating this LS engines torque all the way to 5k rpm.

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/project-cars/sucp-0412-chevy-small-block-part-28/

As for the TPI engine - full block work align honed, decked etc lighter pistons with 6" rods, ported heads, ported intake, ported runners, larger throttle body. Someone who knew what they were doing worked over the heads to get the flow numbers they got. You casually write the numbers as if it was a off the shelf Vortec and TPI build, but it was really an all-out build with very few expenses spared.

[Skinny Pedal]

I love how this turned into a total apples and oranges debate. These engines being compared aren't even in the same ball park with budget or parts. Again, this is not a built engine. This is a JUNK YARD engine.

You are telling me you could take a PRODUCTION TPI 350 with 125k plus miles on it, put a cam in it, and destroy this engine? No way. Look at the length of the parts list and COST to make it beat this. Not to mention the 0411 ECM and other LS parts used... LOL

Considering this is Gearhead.... We all have a pretty good idea on the cost associated with making power like that in a SBC. Its WELL over 3k. Without dyno time I'm in this 2.4k. Then look at what it did without the new cam.... Subtract estimated value of cam kit. That puts a 419hp 444lb-ft engine at well under 2k.

[Skinny Pedal]

When you design a lobe, do you run all the math by hand to come up with your lift curve, velocity and acceleration rates, or do you use computer software? Have you ever tested your designs on a Spintron to verify stability? Who develops your masters and does your cam grinding?

Math is by hand based on theoretical flow and actual head flow, followed by a double check from a good friend. Lopes are designed with velocity in mind first, followed by valve acceleration and cyl pressure. For grinding and masters I hand over the math and ideas to someone much more advanced than me. :) Would rather not name. Needless to say he has been around.

[Fast355]

I love how this turned into a total apples and oranges debate. These engines being compared aren't even in the same ball park with budget or parts. Again, this is not a built engine. This is a JUNK YARD engine.

You are telling me you could take a PRODUCTION TPI 350 with 125k plus miles on it, put a cam in it, and destroy this engine? No way. Look at the length of the parts list and COST to make it beat this. Not to mention the 0411 ECM and other LS parts used... LOL

Considering this is Gearhead.... We all have a pretty good idea on the cost associated with making power like that in a SBC. Its WELL over 3k. Without dyno time I'm in this 2.4k. Then look at what it did without the new cam.... Subtract estimated value of cam kit. That puts a 419hp 444lb-ft engine at well under 2k.

Its still going to cost you a grand to swap that into a car and get it running. Not to mention to put down that kind of power and hold it you are going to need most of my parts list anyway. Cooling system, headers, cats, exhaust piping, muffler. My exhaust 2.75" mandrel bends are literally pieces of cut up GM truck tailpipes.

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff172/Fast355_album/20141230_135017_zpsahbptb8c.jpg (http://s243.photobucket.com/user/Fast355_album/media/20141230_135017_zpsahbptb8c.jpg.html)

350 TPI Vortec with a cam and Acell runners will run this 6.0L all day long from idle to ~5k.

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/0611gm-tpi-355ci-small-block/viewall.html

0411 PCM was $50 at the junkyard and cost me $100 to license and $100 to convert to real time tuning capable operating system. LS engine is going to require tuning as well.

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff172/Fast355_album/20150520_220121_zps9lqzlzm2.jpg (http://s243.photobucket.com/user/Fast355_album/media/20150520_220121_zps9lqzlzm2.jpg.html)

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff172/Fast355_album/20150208_121422_zpsvbluvf43.jpg (http://s243.photobucket.com/user/Fast355_album/media/20150208_121422_zpsvbluvf43.jpg.html)

[Skinny Pedal]

Apples and oranges, I'm sorry I tried to vary the tech here. It won't happen again.

[lionelhutz]

Apples and oranges, I'm sorry I tried to vary the tech here. It won't happen again.

Maybe next time bring a no expense spared LS engine to the party? I bet there was $2-3K spent on machining and porting that TPI engine's top-end alone. But it beats a junkyard pulled LQ4 with a cam and intake swap....

[1project2many]

Apples and oranges, I'm sorry I tried to vary the tech here. It won't happen again.

I appreciated the information on the new cam and the dyno results. LS swaps are super common these days but 20 years ago the SBC used to get the same abuse. There were always people around then arguing that their favorite engine , something other than a Chevy, made just as much power. Maybe... some guys do seem to do amazing things with an engine. But time marches on and the SBC is likely to continue to decrease in popularity while more and more LS family engines are available cheap in the wrecking yards. Cheap + available is what drives the "engine swap" market. So with that in mind, if you've found a way to make cheap + available more attractive, then I love to hear about it.

[hammered94]

Apples and oranges, I'm sorry I tried to vary the tech here. It won't happen again.

I thought this was some good tech info, I could read these kind of threads all day(minus the bs of course).

[Fast355]

I guess these old 350s are just garbage and don't work in their intended environment or work efficiently LMAO!!

My brother and I drove from Fort Worth to San Antonio, TX today to pickup a Jeep Cherokee and a stranded cousin. He blew a radiator hose and the headgasket or cracked the head. I had to stop for fuel in Austin which is about 80 miles north of where I was headed. Cruised those 80 miles at about the 80-85 mph speed limit. Went and picked up a U-haul and the Jeep near downtown San Antonio. Then we all drove back home. ~ 270miles loaded with the A/C blasting and running 65-70 mph in 3rd gear turning 2,600-3,000 rpm. Drove 372 miles on 25.8 gallons, 270 of those miles pulling 6,500+ lbs and a trailer whose surge brakes did not seem to like to fully release for a couple of miles after bumping them. Picture was take right befor I let alot of air out of the Jeeps tires and strapped the suspension down with 15K ratcheting tie down straps. The 350 actually pulls the flats in 4th gear but pulling that kind of weight with a 3.73 gear it is a bit lugged for the cam in it. If I had 4.10s and or a 383 or both I would tow all over in overdrive. I did not nail it from a dead stop with the load, but I did kick it down to first gear a few times accelerating from the frontage road onto the on-ramp to better meet the 80 mph traffic. Pulls like a damn freight train from 2,500-5,200 rpm Tow/Haul shift points.

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff172/Fast355_album/20150703_130908_zpsd1sc65fq.jpeg (http://s243.photobucket.com/user/Fast355_album/media/20150703_130908_zpsd1sc65fq.jpeg.html)

[Skinny Pedal]

What would make your van better is no windows, so when you abduct small children they cant see out. They would only hear the awesome sound your engine makes.

I thought maybe you could appreciate something someone did on their own time and design. Nope, I was wrong. I thought maybe you'd like to see something different. Nope, I was wrong. I thought maybe you'd like to see something that wasn't built by a magazine first with a recipe for you to copy and built an engine to a T.. Nope, I was WAY wrong. I thought maybe you could provide your own home home grown tech that meant something and contributed to something further than what everyone else has done. Nope, wrong again. I'll just quit thinking cuz DAMN if I won't be wrong every time. Maybe just maybe, one day if I wish real hard I will have a penis the size of yours. Dang, probably won't...

I feel I have been overly polite in dealing with this. Dick measuring on the internet is retarded, it means nothing. Its a total waste of time and resources. What may have it taken away, the 1 in 1,000,000,000 people that might have found anything useful. Now they sift through a second build of 355 awesomeness. Can we just re-title the thread to "I'm better than you, Na Na Nah Boo Boo"

Edit

I would totally use this paint scheme.
9229

[Fast355]

What would make your van better is no windows, so when you abduct small children they cant see out. They would only hear the awesome sound your engine makes.

I thought maybe you could appreciate something someone did on their own time and design. Nope, I was wrong. I thought maybe you'd like to see something different. Nope, I was wrong. I thought maybe you'd like to see something that wasn't built by a magazine first with a recipe for you to copy and built an engine to a T.. Nope, I was WAY wrong. I thought maybe you could provide your own home home grown tech that meant something and contributed to something further than what everyone else has done. Nope, wrong again. I'll just quit thinking cuz DAMN if I won't be wrong every time. Maybe just maybe, one day if I wish real hard I will have a penis the size of yours. Dang, probably won't...

I feel I have been overly polite in dealing with this. Dick measuring on the internet is retarded, it means nothing. Its a total waste of time and resources. What may have it taken away, the 1 in 1,000,000,000 people that might have found anything useful. Now they sift through a second build of 355 awesomeness. Can we just re-title the thread to "I'm better than you, Na Na Nah Boo Boo"

Edit

I would totally use this paint scheme.
9229

Actually not about that at all! Just said I will keep my old engines in my trucks and build fast cars with the new ones and YOU challenged me to it. I am actually building 2 of your favorite 6L engines as we speak and both are destined for light cars.

You are the one being the dick about it.

[lionelhutz]

I guess these old 350s are just garbage and don't work in their intended environment or work efficiently LMAO!!

Yes, obviously the engineers at GM are complete retards because they set back their engine development by 80 years when they abandoned the more powerful and better on fuel small block for their LS engines. Everyone else who's swapping them must be retards too.

Sorry, but a bunch of your claims are BS. You're not taking a $2600 budget and putting together a small block and running circles around this engine below 5k rpm with a 215* duration cam. If you put together the right combo then you could approach the same power with that size of cam, but that's about it. You're probably also one of the people that claim the 90's LT1's had more torque and was faster than the LS1 too....

Skinny Pedal showed a very potent engine you can build on a budget. I give him a big thumbs-up for that and an even bigger one once the cam info is available so others can duplicate what he did.

[Skinny Pedal]

Actually not about that at all! Just said I will keep my old engines in my trucks and build fast cars with the new ones and YOU challenged me to it. I am actually building 2 of your favorite 6L engines as we speak and both are destined for light cars.

You are the one being the dick about it.

Bwahahahah, your ignorance is epic. I knew the response would be great.

In a paragraph is there more than one sentence or just the sentence you see? I'm guessing you only pick out and retain select things without comprehending the overall idea.

Example 1 - Take your statements in the last response and find the EXACT words I used. Please do and share them in an unedited quote.

1 - Is a 6L my FAVORITE engine.
2 - Find the EXACT challenge.

Please post up what you find. I have a feeling its very different than the way you perceived.

I'm not look for kudos or a pat on the back. I was just sharing what I thought an EFI and TUNIG site might have thought was useful. Dang me thinking again.

[Skinny Pedal]

Skinny Pedal showed a very potent engine you can build on a budget. I give him a big thumbs-up for that and an even bigger one once the cam info is available so others can duplicate what he did.

Thanks. We are working on putting the cam kits together. The cam has less then 215 on the intake and a little more than 215 on the exhaust.... Lift is relevant to cathedral port head. LSA is very tame, between 114-116 depending on displacement.

As far as 2600 goes thats whats in the engine. Not the exhaust, tuning, tuning software, my underwear and on and on..... I tune for a living so all my tuning equipment is very paid for. I am not a vendor on here, so I have no intention of pushing services or product. I do post up rigs/projects here and there I think some of you may find cool. If people think I am boasting, its not my intention. I'm always open to constructive feed back, not crap or total disrespect for no reason.

Also a fun note. Stock truck exhaust manifolds flow plenty of air for this kind of power, PLENTY.

[Fast355]

Thanks. We are working on putting the cam kits together. The cam has less then 215 on the intake and a little more than 215 on the exhaust.... Lift is relevant to cathedral port head. LSA is very tame, between 114-116 depending on displacement.

As far as 2600 goes thats whats in the engine. Not the exhaust, tuning, tuning software, my underwear and on and on..... I tune for a living so all my tuning equipment is very paid for. I am not a vendor on here, so I have no intention of pushing services or product. I do post up rigs/projects here and there I think some of you may find cool. If people think I am boasting, its not my intention. I'm always open to constructive feed back, not crap or total disrespect for no reason.

Also a fun note. Stock truck exhaust manifolds flow plenty of air for this kind of power, PLENTY.

If they flow "plenty" of air then why do these engines gain 20-30 HP from long tubes???

[Fast355]

Yes, obviously the engineers at GM are complete retards because they set back their engine development by 80 years when they abandoned the more powerful and better on fuel small block for their LS engines. Everyone else who's swapping them must be retards too.

Sorry, but a bunch of your claims are BS. You're not taking a $2600 budget and putting together a small block and running circles around this engine below 5k rpm with a 215* duration cam. If you put together the right combo then you could approach the same power with that size of cam, but that's about it. You're probably also one of the people that claim the 90's LT1's had more torque and was faster than the LS1 too....

Skinny Pedal showed a very potent engine you can build on a budget. I give him a big thumbs-up for that and an even bigger one once the cam info is available so others can duplicate what he did.

Actually I am and doing it with a stock 12cc dished piston shortblock and ~9.5:1 compression ratio. The old Gen1 engines INCLUDING LT1 make more low-end and midrange grunt than stock LS engines.

215/220 cam is more like a 218/224 with the 1.6s.

[Skinny Pedal]

If they flow "plenty" of air then why do these engines gain 20-30 HP from long tubes???

Your tune needs work, maybe? All long tube manufacturers advertise those numbers.

Hey, buy my headers. You will also need an engine tune...... WOW 30hp after headers aaaannnnnnddddd a tune.

Its a tuning site, we know what happens when you move the O2s further down stream with long tubes. Well, what needs to happen anyway.

[lionelhutz]

The old Gen1 engines INCLUDING LT1 make more low-end and midrange grunt than stock LS engines.

Yup, I knew that you'd even have to argue that one. The stock LT1 torque curve is lower than the LS1 torque curve through the whole rpm range. You are completely delusional.

Oh wait, you're probably comparing a stock LS1 vs a built LT1....

[Fast355]

Yup, I knew that you'd even have to argue that one. The stock LT1 torque curve is lower than the LS1 torque curve through the whole rpm range. You are completely delusional.

Oh wait, you're probably comparing a stock LS1 vs a built LT1....

You are mistaking on the LT1 vs LS thing atleast LT1 Vette vs LS1 Vette. The LT1s put down a better 60' because they make peak torque at a lower RPM.

[Fast355]

Your tune needs work, maybe? All long tube manufacturers advertise those numbers.

Hey, buy my headers. You will also need an engine tune...... WOW 30hp after headers aaaannnnnnddddd a tune.

Its a tuning site, we know what happens when you move the O2s further down stream with long tubes. Well, what needs to happen anyway.

Honestly in open loop or PE not much at all happens from the o2 placement. My tune is just fine and my part-throttle air/fuel ratios are right where they should be. I have been tuning long enough I know how to fix the tune and adjust the transient delays for the 02 sensors as well as the proportional gains and durations.

I guess I should mention I got a 6.0L with a bent crank snout and a broken compressor mounting boss cheap today for those that think I am anti-LS. It is destine for a lightweight sports car where its potential can be realized.

I think it was funny that someone complained about my L31 using the 0411 PCM. Its alot better than the LT1 era PCM that my engine started with and it alone was responsible for a noticeable fuel economy and driveability gain over the black box. I am about to dip further into LS components and install the EFI Connection 24x kit on the old L31 and possibly drive by wire if I feel like digging that far into the harness.

You may also notice where GM did not have the US emissions laws to contend with they kept the TBI engines well into the OBD2 era and kept the old L31 well into the GMT800 trucks. You can buy 2004 GMT Silverados in Mexico that have the 5.7 L31 from the factory. Its definately not a bad engine and certainly cheaper for GM just couldn't pass our newer emissions standards.

[Skinny Pedal]

I'm done. Circles are round and this one will keep that shape. An inevitable loop of awesomeness is sure to ensue. I think I have a better chance at hitting 200% NA VE than making headway in my own thread.

Edit

I have to ask. Do you have some type of impairment? It would really explain a lot and make me feel somewhat bad if you do. Its just that the way you are replying and the way you word things has me thinking something has to be up. I understand we all get fixed on some things but not to this extent.

[Roadknee]

Its a tuning site, we know what happens when you move the O2s further down stream with long tubes. Well, what needs to happen anyway.

I think only a handful of people truly understand this and I've yet to find folks willing to share their knowledge. Perhaps you could visit Barry's "Idle BLM" thread under "GM EFI Systems." Several of us are running the 7427 ECM and could use some help understanding what changes are needed to eliminate surging when running headers and larger cams.

[1project2many]

I have to ask. Do you have some type of impairment?

Gentlemen...

A disagreement of opinion is fine but please keep it civil.

Thank you.

[Skinny Pedal]

Gentlemen...

A disagreement of opinion is fine but please keep it civil.

Thank you.

You can not pull that out of context. When you pull the single question without the rest of why, it forms the problem of civility.

[fastacton]

Just my 2 cents, but I think it's time to close this thread, nothing good is happening here anymore. Skinny Pedal and Fast355, you guys should probably refrain from commenting on each others posts for a while. This site is here to help people with EFI tuning and I've seen both of you make good contributions to that end, but that's not what's happening here. Agree to disagree and call it a day. Just my opinion.

[Skinny Pedal]

I agree. I wanted to start a tech thread that quickly turned to an inadequacy thread.

I have piles of data here from everything we tested that I was going to share. Airflows, airflow math, cams/combos that didn't work................ But why at this point.

[lionelhutz]

I guess I should mention I got a 6.0L with a bent crank snout and a broken compressor mounting boss cheap today for those that think I am anti-LS. It is destine for a lightweight sports car where its potential can be realized.

This makes no sense. With your BS claims about easily annihilating the torque of a LS engine below 5k using a cheap small-block build, why would you want to run a LS engine for any street use???

Dyno queens aren't that fast on the street and often not that fast on a track either.

[Fast355]

This makes no sense. With your BS claims about easily annihilating the torque of a LS engine below 5k using a cheap small-block build, why would you want to run a LS engine for any street use???

Dyno queens aren't that fast on the street and often not that fast on a track either.

Who said it was going to be a street car???? Its getting a TH400 with a ~4,000 stall and 4.56 geared 12-bolt with a big Holley on top in a ~3,000 lbs car.

[Roadknee]

I have piles of data here from everything we tested that I was going to share. Airflows, airflow math, cams/combos that didn't work................ But why at this point.

Because I along with others that will be heading down the LS path can learn from your experience and would appreciate you.

[Skinny Pedal]

Because I along with others that will be heading down the LS path can learn from your experience and would appreciate you.


I totally get that. I just meant in this thread or another. I have a feeling any other one started would get cluttered with useless info not related to the thread's intention.

[Roadknee]

Agreed, but that happens on every message board I've ever visited. There is always at least one individual that uses these forums to boost their own ego at the expense of others and detriment of the topic. There has been more than once I've resisted the urge to ask a member if they sustained any injuries knocking themselves down patting themselves on the back so hard. Responding only further poisons the thread. If you let it go they'll typically get bored and go find someone else to haunt.

If you have another Board you post LS tuning info could you PM me a link? Like I mentioned, I am looking to get into the LS realm.

[Skinny Pedal]

Agreed, but that happens on every message board I've ever visited. There is always at least one individual that uses these forums to boost their own ego at the expense of others and detriment of the topic. There has been more than once I've resisted the urge to ask a member if they sustained any injuries knocking themselves down patting themselves on the back so hard. Responding only further poisons the thread. If you let it go they'll typically get bored and go find someone else to haunt.

If you have another Board you post LS tuning info could you PM me a link? Like I mentioned, I am looking to get into the LS realm.

PM sent

[Skinny Pedal]

New combo........ Needless to say its pretty impressive for less than 3500lbs to yank 12k worth of dead drop.

https://www.facebook.com/Team208MotorSports/videos/vb.270788173108277/444013775785715/?type=2&theater

[Fast355]

New combo........ Needless to say its pretty impressive for less than 3500lbs to yank 12k worth of dead drop.

https://www.facebook.com/Team208MotorSports/videos/vb.270788173108277/444013775785715/?type=2&theater

Sounds great!!!

My new engine has cathederal port heads but is not LS. Cannot wait to see how it pulls. I will be moving 12K GCVW often.

[hammered94]

Nice!
I scrolled down your Facebook and saw the 76 dually/8.1l swap, You have any more pics/vids of that project? or maybe a build thread?



New combo........ Needless to say its pretty impressive for less than 3500lbs to yank 12k worth of dead drop.

https://www.facebook.com/Team208MotorSports/videos/vb.270788173108277/444013775785715/?type=2&theater

[Skinny Pedal]

Nice!
I scrolled down your Facebook and saw the 76 dually/8.1l swap, You have any more pics/vids of that project? or maybe a build thread?

There is a gallery up on FB. I was going to get all finished pics and videos but I was out of town when it got picked up. It has to come back in for a checkup and to have the electric to mechanical speedo drive box replaced. You have any questions? Feel free to fire away.

[Skinny Pedal]

Well, the engine has attracted some attention... LOL. Going to run it this weekend at a year end mud drag then make a few pulls on a chassis dyno. Once we have numbers the heads come off for cleaning so we can take a mold of our hand port. After that we are going to see about a CNC file for it, if possible. That way we can bring the cost down. Like I said very early on, we are about velocity when keeping the stock displacement. I know there are CNC'd heads out there already but most of those only focus on gross volume. If this was a stroker it would be a different story. I'll get some shots up of the heads once we pull them and tare them down. This combo on the engine dyno made 475/465 at 12.5 under 6k with stock un ported heads and ran out of air fast. Once we ported the heads and put it in the mud truck it needed 27% more fuel in load to get back to 12.5. Not bad for an engine with 120k on the clock.

[Skinny Pedal]

Played with the Big Baby Cam a little more today.


Click for Video (https://www.facebook.com/Team208MotorSports/videos/vb.270788173108277/445421338978292/?type=2&theater)

[Skinny Pedal]

Guess its time to update as more applications are being tested.

Finished up a the Sema Crawl Mag rig. They race this rig in a stock mod class of Ultra 4.

Specs are
2004 Jeep Wrangler LJ
2004 LQ4 110kish
1 meg ecm converted to DBC
Baby Cam
TBSS Intake
Basically the package we ran on the engine dyno minus the rocker arms
4L80E stock converter
Atlas 2 Transfercase
HP 60 axles
37" Tires
Put 305hp and 335lbft to the ground

3/4 throttle fun
https://www.facebook.com/Team208MotorSports/videos/vb.270788173108277/454975078022918/?type=2&theater

Dyno Pull
https://www.facebook.com/Team208MotorSports/videos/454743031379456/?theater (https://www.facebook.com/Team208MotorSports/videos/454743031379456/?theater)


I have a bunch more shots of what we did pump module wise. Gotta wait and see what all goes to print net month before I can share.

Basically did a dual 255 walbro pump module to draw from front or back of the tank. Then just used the ECM signal and switch to choose the pump. Photo is vague and mock up, hence the zip ties.
10026

I already have reports of them pre running this thing on the lake bed at over 120mph. LOL. The old 4.0 maxed out at 82 on the lake bed. Tuned for full manual 1st and 2nd gear. It will start in second gear if selected. 3 and drive remain full auto.

[Skinny Pedal]

Another cute little pump gas LS we did.... 680 hp at 6500 620 lbft at 5100. Avg TQ from 3-6.5 was 580.https://photos.smugmug.com/2016/Tuning-Wiring/i-7KJC4fS/0/L/2016112517571891-65230584-2B20-4E7C-ACC1-B267D6AACE26-L.jpg

[Skinny Pedal]

Little sister to that engine..... http://photos.team208motorsports.com/2016/Tuning-Wiring/i-FNF3JDV/A