How would an aftermarket LT1 intake with long runners effect the performance?!
10-14-2017, 10:46 AM
#101
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: altered state
Posts: 81,242
Received 3,043 Likes
on
2,602 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
Maybe you should pm with greggpenn he did a lot of research on this. What he built will pass ca smog in a hot second and gaurantee it would have the tq and manners youre looking for.
Where in Ca are you...you need to drive one youll be sold. I scoffed at that too stuck on the stupid 350 trying to make it something it would never be then did one...Im sold on bigger is better.
You will only get so much torque for a given size engine period
Next get on CL and drive a TPI 6 spd youll find real quick Tom is trying to push you away from the cliff. Youll see.
Youre at the point you cannot think yourself to any kind of decision without actually seeing the result first trust me.
I have a 383 but you wont want to drive it.
Where in Ca are you...you need to drive one youll be sold. I scoffed at that too stuck on the stupid 350 trying to make it something it would never be then did one...Im sold on bigger is better.
You will only get so much torque for a given size engine period
Next get on CL and drive a TPI 6 spd youll find real quick Tom is trying to push you away from the cliff. Youll see.
Youre at the point you cannot think yourself to any kind of decision without actually seeing the result first trust me.
I have a 383 but you wont want to drive it.
Last edited by cv67; 10-14-2017 at 01:48 PM.
10-14-2017, 01:03 PM
#102
Race Director
First off, thank you for your response. Second, I don't have a problem with my driving foot, that was when I had a 6-cylinder Firebird trying to show off for a lack of a powerful motor and I learned a lot by spinning out in traffic from loss of traction on the rear tires in that car. I got my V-8 and I soon gained a respect for the motor. After being an 18-wheeler truck driver, my driving has since tamed even more further. I have no desire to swap out rear gears when I am happy with the current acceleration of my car for the daily driving I encounter. With this said, I want more lower end torque without screwing with the gearing on my car too much and if anything, I would go higher in gear not lower, I would take better cruising performance over more acceleration at higher RPMs!
I took the time to read this website and I need to know if there is such a thing as having too small of a camshaft for a stroker kit.
http://www.hughesengines.com/TechArt...oosingacam.php
So, if I have a choice on what camshaft to use with a stroker kit, what problems do I get into by choosing a very mild camshaft as opposed to one that should be larger for the stroker kit? As per the website, quote, "Strokers increase the displacement of an engine which in turn makes the cam act smaller."
I am really having a bad feeling that the stroker kit is NOT what I am looking for.
I took the time to read this website and I need to know if there is such a thing as having too small of a camshaft for a stroker kit.
http://www.hughesengines.com/TechArt...oosingacam.php
So, if I have a choice on what camshaft to use with a stroker kit, what problems do I get into by choosing a very mild camshaft as opposed to one that should be larger for the stroker kit? As per the website, quote, "Strokers increase the displacement of an engine which in turn makes the cam act smaller."
I am really having a bad feeling that the stroker kit is NOT what I am looking for.
There's no question you seek displacement (for the torque) and lowering gearing (for the mpg). If that's not what you want, I think you are like a small child crying w/o knowing what he wants! (more of an analogy vs an insult ... to be clear)
The danger of choosing too small of a camshaft is exactly the same as choosing a TPI vs a shorter intake: The engine runs "out of breath" at a lower rpm than it's potential. You can run the stock cam with a stroker kit if you want. You'd be happier with a stroker kit than a customized TPI intake.
My cam is about the smallest you'd find in this forum (with a stroker). I bought it with the intent of refreshing (honing) a 50k mile 350. Later, I decided I should do the stroker and didn't "upgrade" my cam choice. (It has good lift though not a lot of duration -- which is exactly what you want for torque). Compared to a friends hotcam LT1, there was no comparison. I have the torque of a much, much bigger motor AND the same mileage. Of course, I spent more money to get there!
I customized and intake, bought AFR195 heads, AND built a stroker. It ended up being an $8k project. (The hidden "trick" is I can swap intakes/exhaust and get ANOTHER 70hp). Instead I opted for what you are describing.
AFR195 Eliminator heads are unique in that they "act" like a bigger head. You can use less cam and get equal/better results than someone using one much bigger. OTOH, their 180 heads would be even better if you really won't rev it. And I have to say that quote on displacement/cams is about the dumbest thing I've ever read. Put a better way, they are saying you need more air with more displacement. No secret there UNLESS you don't care if it runs out of breath at 5k rpms! Sound familiar?
Even with stock heads and a stock cam, I'd pick a stroker (more displacement) over any other mod. ESPECIALLY with (your) goals that are similar to where I started. Read the next sentence carefully....
There isn't much difference in a TPI than a LT intake below 2k rpms. If I were gambling, I wouldn't bet much on a TPI winning if that was the limit of a race. 2k-3.5k rpms is where the TPI wins but it would be less fun than a stroker. That's because you'd feel the stroker right off idle with more TORQUE continuing through that mild midrange bump of a TPI.
Because of my extra displacement, my torque curve almost exactly matches the biggest/best big-block 427 in a 1968 Corvette. And, I'm talking about all the way to redline. Again, I barely lost any mileage AND it would pass smog in California. It wasn't so much the TPI that accomplished my goal. It was the combination of heads, cam, and a stroker kit.
The following users liked this post:
Phoenix'97 (10-14-2017)
10-14-2017, 03:58 PM
#104
10-14-2017, 04:06 PM
#105
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: altered state
Posts: 81,242
Received 3,043 Likes
on
2,602 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
The LT1 tract has some shape and taper to it that can help overcome sheer length say like a round or rectangular runner would
If you can find a junk runner off a FAST 102 take a close look at how its shaped, lots of volume and airspeed same with the LSx style heads.
hell the ones on my truck are 205cc on wimpy 5.3 it moves 5500 lbs around just fine. Lots of ways to slice bologna
If you can find a junk runner off a FAST 102 take a close look at how its shaped, lots of volume and airspeed same with the LSx style heads.
hell the ones on my truck are 205cc on wimpy 5.3 it moves 5500 lbs around just fine. Lots of ways to slice bologna
10-14-2017, 04:13 PM
#106
Melting Slicks
10-14-2017, 06:26 PM
#107
Team Owner
Pro Mechanic
Give this man a prize! We have a winner.
From post #1 & 2...
And now?....
Woooo....WEEE! Have fun with this one guys! 
I'm OUT! 
From post #1 & 2...
I do, however, want more low to mid-range torque that I can feel immediately and that gives me an enjoyable daily driver that is fun to launch from green lights or aggressively accelerate where safe to do so in the city....This is why I want every bit of low end to mid-range torque that I can get....I can have my fun at the green lights.
And now?....
I'm OUT!
10-14-2017, 06:31 PM
#108
Team Owner
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: altered state
Posts: 81,242
Received 3,043 Likes
on
2,602 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
Why not, a C6 will just depreciate too. Going up in value isnt a requirement to own why are guys so friggin hung up on this yet they get married and have kids the biggest lo$ing proposition on the planet (no offense lol)
10-14-2017, 07:11 PM
#109
I know what I am looking for, it is just a matter of how to achieve what I want. I have NO NEED for a high RPM power producing car with the level of dangerous city driving I am dealing with! People cut in front of you on the expressway only to bizarrely slam their brakes when no car was in front of them, and I even run into people who can't help but feel the need to drive 40 mph on an expressway where everyone is going 65 mph or MORE for lack of police speed enforcement! Then you have the "Dominic Toretto" wannabees who end up weaving in and out of lanes too fast and end up spinning out of control or slamming into a slower car they didn't see last second going well over 65 mph! Suffice it to say, I want a very mild motor that peaks in torque at 3000 RPM and slowly drops off afterwards. It serves as speed control for city driving and in the 1000 to 3000 RPM range, I can appreciate the up and go from a dead stop or slow roll.
I want to avoid blowing my motor. I want to keep it naturally aspirated.
I want to avoid blowing my motor. I want to keep it naturally aspirated.
Last edited by Phoenix'97; 10-14-2017 at 07:12 PM.
10-14-2017, 07:21 PM
#110
There's no question you seek displacement (for the torque) and lowering gearing (for the mpg). If that's not what you want, I think you are like a small child crying w/o knowing what he wants! (more of an analogy vs an insult ... to be clear)
The danger of choosing too small of a camshaft is exactly the same as choosing a TPI vs a shorter intake: The engine runs "out of breath" at a lower rpm than it's potential. You can run the stock cam with a stroker kit if you want. You'd be happier with a stroker kit than a customized TPI intake.
My cam is about the smallest you'd find in this forum (with a stroker). I bought it with the intent of refreshing (honing) a 50k mile 350. Later, I decided I should do the stroker and didn't "upgrade" my cam choice. (It has good lift though not a lot of duration -- which is exactly what you want for torque). Compared to a friends hotcam LT1, there was no comparison. I have the torque of a much, much bigger motor AND the same mileage. Of course, I spent more money to get there!
I customized and intake, bought AFR195 heads, AND built a stroker. It ended up being an $8k project. (The hidden "trick" is I can swap intakes/exhaust and get ANOTHER 70hp). Instead I opted for what you are describing.
AFR195 Eliminator heads are unique in that they "act" like a bigger head. You can use less cam and get equal/better results than someone using one much bigger. OTOH, their 180 heads would be even better if you really won't rev it. And I have to say that quote on displacement/cams is about the dumbest thing I've ever read. Put a better way, they are saying you need more air with more displacement. No secret there UNLESS you don't care if it runs out of breath at 5k rpms! Sound familiar?
Even with stock heads and a stock cam, I'd pick a stroker (more displacement) over any other mod. ESPECIALLY with (your) goals that are similar to where I started. Read the next sentence carefully....
There isn't much difference in a TPI than a LT intake below 2k rpms. If I were gambling, I wouldn't bet much on a TPI winning if that was the limit of a race. 2k-3.5k rpms is where the TPI wins but it would be less fun than a stroker. That's because you'd feel the stroker right off idle with more TORQUE continuing through that mild midrange bump of a TPI.
Because of my extra displacement, my torque curve almost exactly matches the biggest/best big-block 427 in a 1968 Corvette. And, I'm talking about all the way to redline. Again, I barely lost any mileage AND it would pass smog in California. It wasn't so much the TPI that accomplished my goal. It was the combination of heads, cam, and a stroker kit.
The danger of choosing too small of a camshaft is exactly the same as choosing a TPI vs a shorter intake: The engine runs "out of breath" at a lower rpm than it's potential. You can run the stock cam with a stroker kit if you want. You'd be happier with a stroker kit than a customized TPI intake.
My cam is about the smallest you'd find in this forum (with a stroker). I bought it with the intent of refreshing (honing) a 50k mile 350. Later, I decided I should do the stroker and didn't "upgrade" my cam choice. (It has good lift though not a lot of duration -- which is exactly what you want for torque). Compared to a friends hotcam LT1, there was no comparison. I have the torque of a much, much bigger motor AND the same mileage. Of course, I spent more money to get there!
I customized and intake, bought AFR195 heads, AND built a stroker. It ended up being an $8k project. (The hidden "trick" is I can swap intakes/exhaust and get ANOTHER 70hp). Instead I opted for what you are describing.
AFR195 Eliminator heads are unique in that they "act" like a bigger head. You can use less cam and get equal/better results than someone using one much bigger. OTOH, their 180 heads would be even better if you really won't rev it. And I have to say that quote on displacement/cams is about the dumbest thing I've ever read. Put a better way, they are saying you need more air with more displacement. No secret there UNLESS you don't care if it runs out of breath at 5k rpms! Sound familiar?
Even with stock heads and a stock cam, I'd pick a stroker (more displacement) over any other mod. ESPECIALLY with (your) goals that are similar to where I started. Read the next sentence carefully....
There isn't much difference in a TPI than a LT intake below 2k rpms. If I were gambling, I wouldn't bet much on a TPI winning if that was the limit of a race. 2k-3.5k rpms is where the TPI wins but it would be less fun than a stroker. That's because you'd feel the stroker right off idle with more TORQUE continuing through that mild midrange bump of a TPI.
Because of my extra displacement, my torque curve almost exactly matches the biggest/best big-block 427 in a 1968 Corvette. And, I'm talking about all the way to redline. Again, I barely lost any mileage AND it would pass smog in California. It wasn't so much the TPI that accomplished my goal. It was the combination of heads, cam, and a stroker kit.
One of two things are going to end up happening, either I come to the decision that the TPI style intake with an "RV/Tow/Mileage" camshaft and other decided modifications will yield the performance I seek, or figuring out a set-up for this stroker kit that negates the need for the TPI intake that I have my heart set on. This is why I am doing the research now.
10-14-2017, 07:30 PM
#111
I love the style of my LT1 Trans Am too much to let it go. Now, if I could come across the money, I would probably want to stuff the up-and-coming next generation Corvette LT5 into my bird. However, even with my mild set-up, I LOVE my LT1 growl from my Magnaflow cat-back.
Now, if GM/Chevrolet could bring back the F-body to look just as good as their flag model Corvette, AND adopt the Firebird by making it a cosmetic option for purchase since the Camaro shares the same body and interior anways, this new "Chevy Firebird" in Trans Am package might tempt me to upgrade. I just need a low tech option that doesn't involve a computer screen display in the dashboard. This would be a winning move by GM, and it would be really cool too! However, it would be competition for the Corvette!
POST EDIT: There had better be an option for T-tops if you are not buying a package with a frame twisting GM motor, AND these F-bodies had better come with next-generation streamlined pop-up headlights, which are an additional option. The Camaro should be allowed to fit this option if the buyer so wishes. These headlights should be featured on the next-gen Corvette.
Now, if GM/Chevrolet could bring back the F-body to look just as good as their flag model Corvette, AND adopt the Firebird by making it a cosmetic option for purchase since the Camaro shares the same body and interior anways, this new "Chevy Firebird" in Trans Am package might tempt me to upgrade. I just need a low tech option that doesn't involve a computer screen display in the dashboard. This would be a winning move by GM, and it would be really cool too! However, it would be competition for the Corvette!
POST EDIT: There had better be an option for T-tops if you are not buying a package with a frame twisting GM motor, AND these F-bodies had better come with next-generation streamlined pop-up headlights, which are an additional option. The Camaro should be allowed to fit this option if the buyer so wishes. These headlights should be featured on the next-gen Corvette.
Last edited by Phoenix'97; 10-14-2017 at 09:07 PM.
10-14-2017, 07:33 PM
#112
The LT1 tract has some shape and taper to it that can help overcome sheer length say like a round or rectangular runner would
If you can find a junk runner off a FAST 102 take a close look at how its shaped, lots of volume and airspeed same with the LSx style heads.
hell the ones on my truck are 205cc on wimpy 5.3 it moves 5500 lbs around just fine. Lots of ways to slice bologna
If you can find a junk runner off a FAST 102 take a close look at how its shaped, lots of volume and airspeed same with the LSx style heads.
hell the ones on my truck are 205cc on wimpy 5.3 it moves 5500 lbs around just fine. Lots of ways to slice bologna
10-14-2017, 07:40 PM
#113
I read a forum post by a guy who actually wanted an LS style intake for the LT1. It certainly gets you thinking and it is on par with my idea for the TPI intake for the LT1, since it is a "poor version" of the LS intake which offers the best of both worlds in my opinion. There is something to long runners but the challenge is making them work right for the application. It will be expensive but I think it would be worth it!
I'll bite. Post #7 I said maybe have an LS style fabricated.
This is great mind stimulation
10-14-2017, 08:52 PM
#114
Well, since the general consensus is that the TPI style intake is a horrible choice and I never even thought about an LS style intake, which does have long runners AND would be more compact to fit in an F-body engine bay, it seems like the next "dream" proposal.
Last edited by Phoenix'97; 10-14-2017 at 08:53 PM.
10-15-2017, 01:01 AM
#115
Race Director
I love the style of my LT1 Trans Am too much to let it go. Now, if I could come across the money, I would probably want to stuff the up-and-coming next generation Corvette LT5 into my bird. However, even with my mild set-up, I LOVE my LT1 growl from my Magnaflow cat-back.
Now, if GM/Chevrolet could bring back the F-body to look just as good as their flag model Corvette, AND adopt the Firebird by making it a cosmetic option for purchase since the Camaro shares the same body and interior anways, this new "Chevy Firebird" in Trans Am package might tempt me to upgrade. I just need a low tech option that doesn't involve a computer screen display in the dashboard. This would be a winning move by GM, and it would be really cool too! However, it would be competition for the Corvette!
POST EDIT: There had better be an option for T-tops if you are not buying a package with a frame twisting GM motor, AND these F-bodies had better come with next-generation streamlined pop-up headlights, which are an additional option. The Camaro should be allowed to fit this option if the buyer so wishes. These headlights should be featured on the next-gen Corvette.
Now, if GM/Chevrolet could bring back the F-body to look just as good as their flag model Corvette, AND adopt the Firebird by making it a cosmetic option for purchase since the Camaro shares the same body and interior anways, this new "Chevy Firebird" in Trans Am package might tempt me to upgrade. I just need a low tech option that doesn't involve a computer screen display in the dashboard. This would be a winning move by GM, and it would be really cool too! However, it would be competition for the Corvette!
POST EDIT: There had better be an option for T-tops if you are not buying a package with a frame twisting GM motor, AND these F-bodies had better come with next-generation streamlined pop-up headlights, which are an additional option. The Camaro should be allowed to fit this option if the buyer so wishes. These headlights should be featured on the next-gen Corvette.
http://autoweek.com/article/sema-sho...vives-trans-am
10-15-2017, 01:48 AM
#116
Race Director
Stupid question from a crying baby not knowing what it wants (joke), can I stick in an "RV/Tow/Mileage" cam into this very mild stroker kit that you have so kindly brought to my attention? I am testing the waters of absurdity to find out how far I can go and what is actually possible for my "dream".
206/206 .552/.552 lift single-pattern cam (installed 4-deg advanced)
383 (or 396, or 406) stroker kit with 5.7" rods and thin rings
Have Ken cutdown and make your custom LTx FIRST intake
1 5/8" longtube headers
AFR180 eliminator heads
The cam would be single-pattern, high-lift, shorter duration. It would have the same manners as your current motor and be California legal. You'd have at least 15% more lift with more actual "under-the-curve" duration for your cam. It's about the most air you could feed in the sub 5k rpm range.
AFR180 heads would maximize airspeed into the chamber at the lowest rpms. 195's aren't really going to get you more torque in the super-low rpm range you crave.
Combined with high-velocity heads and about the most lift you can get in a sub 210 duration cam, you'll have the best air potential for low rpm torque. The FIRST give you the longest tubes and the largest tubes. Even in it's stock form, the FIRST will easily feed a stroker in the sub 5k rpm range. Even if runners are cut (bisected and rewelded) to lower height, the difference will be less than 200rpms peak resonance frequency.
Keeping exhaust duration low will increase valve closed events for maximum cylinder pressure. Pick a mid LSA (like 110-112) to lean on maximum overlap to lower peak rpm performance.
Actually, your stock heads would probably be fine...especially with minor work to insure smooth pathways. FWIW, I've always wanted to see what AFR195's would do on a stock motor WITHOUT changing anything else. I think people might be surprised...considering dynamic flow with smaller cams.
The no substitute for cubic inches when you're looking for responsiveness and torque in the lowest rpm ranges. The reason they build racecars with smaller pistons is the lighter-weight rotating assembly can withstand high rpms more easily. The reverse is true, bigger motors WERE used to maximize torque without the ability to rev particularly high. If you could build a Chevy 502 with a longtube intake and small cam, you'd be in hog-heaven.
I don't remember the exact config but Chevy DID built some 400+ ci truck motor with our stock intake. Maybe it was a 455? I don't remember but it probably peaked at 1500 rpms with 500 ft/lbs of torque (LOL). I'm sure SOMEONE could spout that motor's config?
The REAL bump of a longtube TPI is in the 2500-3500 rpm range. For what you actually describe, you actually want instant torque EVEN BELOW those rpms. With the right cam and a supercharger, you could probably exceed 500rwtq by 2k rpms. I don't know. It's kind of absurd. No...It's really absurd.
That's because if/when you "put your foot into it", you're NOT going to want to stop the adrenaline rush after 2000 rpms. You just won't after spending lots of your hard-earned money, spending time to convert it, and wanting to brag about the results.
I seriously do NOT believe anyone seriously wants maximum torque, best mpg unless their mom/wife is looking over their shoulder when you are trying to justify the expenditure.
Like I said, there aren't many with as small a cam, good heads, and a stroker in this forum. I WILL admit there is satisfaction in having so much on-demand torque that I never really have to down-shift TWO gears to get into the powerband. With the config of a stick, it really is easier to shift from 5th to 4th...or 4th to 3rd...or 3rd to 2nd VERSUS shifting two gears. Going from 5th to 3rd (for example) increase the odds of accidently hitting 1st. Or...from 6th to 4th, you might hit 2nd on the hwy... And, it's NOT a matter of being a poor shifter. People just miss a gear once in a while. Having said all this, I have still developed the need/curiosity to swap from a longtube to an LS length intake (HSR) and free up my exhaust. Like I said 70rwhp potential.
When you are talking about saving fuel by NOT having the motor fire as many times per revolution, remember the MORE you fire cylinders (higher rpms), the more leverage and power you achieve. That's why higher rpms get more horsepower. Work is being performed more quickly.
Despite having 427 torque levels out of fewer cubes, there still are times I wonder how hard (yes torque) it would pull on the hwy in 3rd gear from 50-80mph. I'm here to tell you that you need HP to accomplish that. Having a massive 400-450rwtq in 4th gear is nothing to scoff at, but having more hp AND the multiplication of a lower gear in 3rd would form a bigger smile.
You NEED to shut-out whatever voice, relative, or sense of reason makes you THINK you only NEED torque in the sub 3k rpm range. YOUR SPEED EGO IS BIGGER THAN YOU THINK!!!
This thread isn't about designing/finding some new option that future LT1 owners will flock to -- because they won't. They want horsepower....and there's a reason for that!
You do too...but you won't even lie down on the couch for therapy.
The following users liked this post:
Phoenix'97 (10-15-2017)
10-15-2017, 10:09 AM
#117
I seriously do NOT believe anyone seriously wants maximum torque, best mpg unless their mom/wife is looking over their shoulder when you are trying to justify the expenditure.
Like I said, there aren't many with as small a cam, good heads, and a stroker in this forum. I WILL admit there is satisfaction in having so much on-demand torque that I never really have to down-shift TWO gears to get into the powerband. With the config of a stick, it really is easier to shift from 5th to 4th...or 4th to 3rd...or 3rd to 2nd VERSUS shifting two gears. Going from 5th to 3rd (for example) increase the odds of accidently hitting 1st. Or...from 6th to 4th, you might hit 2nd on the hwy... And, it's NOT a matter of being a poor shifter. People just miss a gear once in a while. Having said all this, I have still developed the need/curiosity to swap from a longtube to an LS length intake (HSR) and free up my exhaust. Like I said 70rwhp potential.
When you are talking about saving fuel by NOT having the motor fire as many times per revolution, remember the MORE you fire cylinders (higher rpms), the more leverage and power you achieve. That's why higher rpms get more horsepower. Work is being performed more quickly.
Despite having 427 torque levels out of fewer cubes, there still are times I wonder how hard (yes torque) it would pull on the hwy in 3rd gear from 50-80mph. I'm here to tell you that you need HP to accomplish that. Having a massive 400-450rwtq in 4th gear is nothing to scoff at, but having more hp AND the multiplication of a lower gear in 3rd would form a bigger smile.
You NEED to shut-out whatever voice, relative, or sense of reason makes you THINK you only NEED torque in the sub 3k rpm range. YOUR SPEED EGO IS BIGGER THAN YOU THINK!!!
This thread isn't about designing/finding some new option that future LT1 owners will flock to -- because they won't. They want horsepower....and there's a reason for that!
You do too...but you won't even lie down on the couch for therapy.
Like I said, there aren't many with as small a cam, good heads, and a stroker in this forum. I WILL admit there is satisfaction in having so much on-demand torque that I never really have to down-shift TWO gears to get into the powerband. With the config of a stick, it really is easier to shift from 5th to 4th...or 4th to 3rd...or 3rd to 2nd VERSUS shifting two gears. Going from 5th to 3rd (for example) increase the odds of accidently hitting 1st. Or...from 6th to 4th, you might hit 2nd on the hwy... And, it's NOT a matter of being a poor shifter. People just miss a gear once in a while. Having said all this, I have still developed the need/curiosity to swap from a longtube to an LS length intake (HSR) and free up my exhaust. Like I said 70rwhp potential.
When you are talking about saving fuel by NOT having the motor fire as many times per revolution, remember the MORE you fire cylinders (higher rpms), the more leverage and power you achieve. That's why higher rpms get more horsepower. Work is being performed more quickly.
Despite having 427 torque levels out of fewer cubes, there still are times I wonder how hard (yes torque) it would pull on the hwy in 3rd gear from 50-80mph. I'm here to tell you that you need HP to accomplish that. Having a massive 400-450rwtq in 4th gear is nothing to scoff at, but having more hp AND the multiplication of a lower gear in 3rd would form a bigger smile.
You NEED to shut-out whatever voice, relative, or sense of reason makes you THINK you only NEED torque in the sub 3k rpm range. YOUR SPEED EGO IS BIGGER THAN YOU THINK!!!
This thread isn't about designing/finding some new option that future LT1 owners will flock to -- because they won't. They want horsepower....and there's a reason for that!
You do too...but you won't even lie down on the couch for therapy.
So, if I have to save my LT1 motor, how do I improve the motor to make it more enjoyable, to give me my seat of the pants launches from lights without destroying my average fuel economy and to be safe to drive during the winter requiring a feather foot and literally having an experience of becoming "one" with the car and feeling everything that it feels and knowing when to slow down or when you are losing traction, just like my truck driving days! Greg, thank you again!
10-15-2017, 10:14 AM
#118
..... THIS ^^^^^ attitude concerns me coming from this Forum ! The OP ASKED for advice/opinions ... all of you who responded did so freely but somehow felt that the OP was OBLIGATED to embrace your ideas ... now here is an implication that because he resists your suggestions that he is not mentally competent and , even WORSE , is the implication that you think that y'all are capable of "curing" him via this forum and the interwebs ... Now , while your advice is and has been sound since the beginning of this thread ... HE HAS THE RIGHT TO REFUSE TO ACCEPT IT ! ... So , give your advice and please move on ... bullying won't work ... Thinking outside the box can sometimes lead to surprising results ! while being a follower only takes you down someone else's path .....
10-15-2017, 11:12 AM
#119
Le Mans Master
As posted earlier Super Ram. LPE was big into the Super Ram and did develop one for the gen 4 f body it's 5/8" lower than the regular version. Will not gain horsepower only torque though 4k. Unfortunately most of the information has fallen off the internet. The plenum base was height reduced. You could contact LPE maybe they can give you information.
10-15-2017, 11:30 AM
#120
Race Director
Thank you many times over for essentially laying the groundwork to mention these components to the engine builder and custom shop in the not too distant future. I said before, I plan to finance this as if it were a car loan and essentially this is an attempt to recreate the 1997 LT1 Trans Am WS6 into a new car. I plan to hold on to this car for as long as I can as my daily driver and as such it will be built for this purpose. Yeah, the projected amount for the engine build is hefty and considering what Ken at FIRST will ultimately create for me, if he can manage an LS style intake that bolts on to the LT1, and then working in emissions device locations, MAP sensor and the PCV valve location, which I could have it moved to a valve cover like on the L98. I am just saying, I have looked into swapping the 2014 LT1 or even the 2015 LT5 into my car and the combined cost for the turn-key motor, the necessary transmission, the ECM to run the motor, the electronic throttle kit, and other goodies I need to swap this motor into my F-body and the necessary work to get it all to fit with the wiring required to get it to work with my factory gauge cluster, this engine build with custom intake will end up costing less!
So, if I have to save my LT1 motor, how do I improve the motor to make it more enjoyable, to give me my seat of the pants launches from lights without destroying my average fuel economy and to be safe to drive during the winter requiring a feather foot and literally having an experience of becoming "one" with the car and feeling everything that it feels and knowing when to slow down or when you are losing traction, just like my truck driving days! Greg, thank you again!
So, if I have to save my LT1 motor, how do I improve the motor to make it more enjoyable, to give me my seat of the pants launches from lights without destroying my average fuel economy and to be safe to drive during the winter requiring a feather foot and literally having an experience of becoming "one" with the car and feeling everything that it feels and knowing when to slow down or when you are losing traction, just like my truck driving days! Greg, thank you again!
What I suggested for a build is the smallest Bullet cam (10-deg less total duration int/exh) than my cam...yet it has the same lift. My cranking compression has room to be higher so I know you COULD go smaller than me and gain more torque. I'm also sure you could gain torque from 1 5/8" headers vs 1 3/4"... especially if you were going to reuse the stock heads vs going aftermarket. I don't know the stock orientation of an LT1 cam...but if not mechanically advanced, you could shift it that direction. There was a member here who installed 1.7 rockers on an LT1 engine with good success. So....
The budget was of approaching this build is to install 1.7 rockers, keep your stock cam/heads and shove a stroker kit (as many suggested) underneath. To be honest, the bang-for-the-buck return on a custom intake probably isn't worth it (though I'm one of the first people that notices the sub-5k-rpm advantage of a longtube intake over a miniram/LT-intake). And, by advantage, I'm talking about if you rarely plan to exceed that level of rpms.
FWIW, my setup (which has a 214/214 .555/.555 112LSA cam, custom longtube intake, 383 w 1 3/4" headers and AFR 195 heads) fits your description). It can idle at stock rpms and it's more gas friendly than my 4x4 SUV that averages 15mpg city/hwy. It has 3.33 gears and doesn't NEED any more torque. My suggestion for AFR180 heads, smaller headers, and smaller cam come from knowing there IS room to get even MORE torque/responsiveness from a 383 setup. Of course NO ONE does that because they realize their "need" to build also includes the need for horsepower.
If you built EXACTLY the config I run (AFR195's/cam/383) and kept your stock LT1 intake, you would not be disappointed in the torque. There is night/day difference between my motor and an LT1. Again, I observed direct comparison between my config and a hotcammed LT1. My feels like a 427 by comparison. Having a Miniram (LT) intake on top would not take all of that away...not even half. And, having an LT intake saves you LOTS of money while retaining the much easier access to injectors.
Going back to what EVERYONE said, a stroker kit is the best option for you. With 1.7 rockers and a mechanically advanced cam (4-deg), you'd be where you want in terms of maximum driveability/mileage/emissions. You wouldn't have to deal with visual changes for California inspections because they wouldn't SEE anything. It would all be internal.
You can feel the effect of a stroker kit in all rpms making it much more beneficial than a custom intake AND a custom intake isn't going to make you drool nearly as much. It's likely to make you think "Why did I spend all this money?". That doesn't mean it won't help in the lower rpm ranges just that the percentage bump will be subtle versus overt. When you spend $1000 on a mod, subtle is disappointing.
Find a builder that KNOWS what he is doing and build a 396 shortblock for your LT1 engine. Convert it to 1.7 rockers and call it good. For the rpms you want, you'll be ecstatic. For California, you'll have zero issues with inspections. The reason I suggest 396 vs 383 is a good builder won't sacrifice ANY longevity to get even a bit more from the mod AND at little additional expense. I would take a 396 too. There is no replacement for displacement...especially in a street car.
There is a lot you can learn from smallest details of a build: How to build a block for maximum quench, considerations of cam overlap and how it can add power in lower/higher rpms, why 5.7" rods create more torque but 6" rods sacrifice little for less side-loading, etc... If you enlist a good builder (and there are a couple even in THIS forum), you don't need to know all that. All you SHOULD know is that a stroker kit is the answer to what you are looking for.
See you in two years!
The following users liked this post:
Phoenix'97 (10-15-2017)