I need a plan
06-03-2019, 09:38 PM
#81
Le Mans Master
right,
the idea of LS is the turbocharger AND reliability at 500+whp
If you take the turbo from the table, power falls back down to 300~ ranges OEM.
The next best thing is high compression 350hp versions of the 5.7 produced between 98-01 which combine some of the seal and bearing clearance updates of newer LS engines, but because they are older they are cheaper than LS engines.
The only thing is that is a very specific range of years, 95 96 ~97? 98 versions. All of which are known to be performance engines. Performance enthusiasts owned those engines, before you get it. So even if you go to machine it, there may be some deformation or issue with a performance(modification) related incident
Whereas, the Denali engine has never been used for performance purposes. 150k on the 5.7 vs 150k on the Denali 6.0/4l80e, I doubt the 5.7 is in better shape, you decide. Theres never been a manual trans so there is no uneven loading and unloading of the crankshaft and rear areas fwiw with an auto, they are known to be 'gentler'. A T-56/4l80e 6.0 from a truck wouldn't be so bad without a turbo? I don't see why 450-500hp naturally aspirated is out of the question using such an engine. Honestly personal preference I always opt for the lighter block though, So the 5.7 wins if I was doing non turbo I would take the less weight with less power, older and cheaper.
Power is meaningless when you add a typical manual transmission, especially six speed. The correct way to build a manual trans car is to balance the torque and rotating mass of the engine against the weight of the drivetrain and vehicle so that it is easy and fun to drive. Most of you know what I am saying but it should become obvious right here that Manual transmissions are not racing transmissions, the automatic is/canbe a 'race car' trans but any option which invites user error to any degree is considered unsuitable unless it is a rule in that particular venue. i.e. Never shift a 4l80e manually and go to great lengths not to ever need to
the idea of LS is the turbocharger AND reliability at 500+whp
If you take the turbo from the table, power falls back down to 300~ ranges OEM.
The next best thing is high compression 350hp versions of the 5.7 produced between 98-01 which combine some of the seal and bearing clearance updates of newer LS engines, but because they are older they are cheaper than LS engines.
The only thing is that is a very specific range of years, 95 96 ~97? 98 versions. All of which are known to be performance engines. Performance enthusiasts owned those engines, before you get it. So even if you go to machine it, there may be some deformation or issue with a performance(modification) related incident
Whereas, the Denali engine has never been used for performance purposes. 150k on the 5.7 vs 150k on the Denali 6.0/4l80e, I doubt the 5.7 is in better shape, you decide. Theres never been a manual trans so there is no uneven loading and unloading of the crankshaft and rear areas fwiw with an auto, they are known to be 'gentler'. A T-56/4l80e 6.0 from a truck wouldn't be so bad without a turbo? I don't see why 450-500hp naturally aspirated is out of the question using such an engine. Honestly personal preference I always opt for the lighter block though, So the 5.7 wins if I was doing non turbo I would take the less weight with less power, older and cheaper.
Power is meaningless when you add a typical manual transmission, especially six speed. The correct way to build a manual trans car is to balance the torque and rotating mass of the engine against the weight of the drivetrain and vehicle so that it is easy and fun to drive. Most of you know what I am saying but it should become obvious right here that Manual transmissions are not racing transmissions, the automatic is/canbe a 'race car' trans but any option which invites user error to any degree is considered unsuitable unless it is a rule in that particular venue. i.e. Never shift a 4l80e manually and go to great lengths not to ever need to
06-03-2019, 09:46 PM
#82
Drifting
Member Since: Jun 2018
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 1,397
Received 283 Likes
on
219 Posts
C4 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
Yeah I used rtv on mine too. I actully bought a Fel-Pro gasket but it was for the factory lid which is a different shape. From the picture it looked like your lid was still on but I guess it was just left over goop.
06-03-2019, 10:09 PM
#83
Le Mans Master
The following users liked this post:
GregMartin (06-03-2019)
06-03-2019, 10:51 PM
#84
Melting Slicks
Yea they said to use rtv... it made a mess... oh well. The lid is around somewhere too lol.
Last I checked factory bearing clearance spec on an LS was actually looser than the 350... and they stopped bore matching pistons on the LS tol which why most of them have piston slap. There is actually more longevity to be gained having a slightly looser bearing clearance to a point. Theres a loading vs gap chart for film strength. When I built the 383 I set it at the peak which is about the middle of the stock LS range.
Last I checked factory bearing clearance spec on an LS was actually looser than the 350... and they stopped bore matching pistons on the LS tol which why most of them have piston slap. There is actually more longevity to be gained having a slightly looser bearing clearance to a point. Theres a loading vs gap chart for film strength. When I built the 383 I set it at the peak which is about the middle of the stock LS range.
This is indisputable fact. It is allowing the use of thin engine oils which minimize drag and other qualities of lubrication events
Example from random google search first result:
“Today’s oils have more load-carrying capacity than older oils,” explains Speed. “You’re not concentrating the load in a smaller area; you’re spreading it out and actually reducing the amount of load per square inch. That combination actually frees up more horsepower than a looser clearance and heavy oil in the same engine. A lighter viscosity oil frees up drag on the pump and there’s less drag on the ring pack—all without compromising the bearings.”
I don't know where you heard looser is going to last longer. But that is not the direction of recent manufacturer practice. All new engines including racing environments are using tighter bearing clearances.
“There are specific classes that really go towards the tighter oil clearance and thinner oil,” says John Himley, engine builder at CNC Motorsports. “NASCAR and obviously Pro Stock, those guys nit-pick every tiny bit of horsepower they can out of that engine. That’s where you see the tighter oil clearances being used.”
that dynamic is one possible reason early hotrod and speed pioneers discovered that “loose is fast.” When racers started heavily modifying stock motors with more compression, boost and aggressive camshafts—and then running those motors at higher rpm than what they were originally designed—the old cast-iron crankshafts moved around too much. Thicker oils and more clearance helped solve some of those issues until stronger, forged-steel and billet crankshafts became standard equipment in race engines. And when those modern crankshafts were developed, they also featured ultra-smooth journal finishes.
06-04-2019, 06:22 AM
#85
Le Mans Master
All engines regardless of manufacturer are using tighter clearance as year increases.
This is indisputable fact. It is allowing the use of thin engine oils which minimize drag and other qualities of lubrication events
Example from random google search first result:
.
I don't know where you heard looser is going to last longer. But that is not the direction of recent manufacturer practice. All new engines including racing environments are using tighter bearing clearances.
https://www.enginelabs.com/engine-te...ng-clearances/
We no longer need to do things this way. Loose is no longer desirable or fast. The oil tech has caught up and engines use tighter clearances as year increases.
This is indisputable fact. It is allowing the use of thin engine oils which minimize drag and other qualities of lubrication events
Example from random google search first result:
.
I don't know where you heard looser is going to last longer. But that is not the direction of recent manufacturer practice. All new engines including racing environments are using tighter bearing clearances.
https://www.enginelabs.com/engine-te...ng-clearances/
We no longer need to do things this way. Loose is no longer desirable or fast. The oil tech has caught up and engines use tighter clearances as year increases.
06-04-2019, 10:42 AM
#86
Team Owner
Pro Mechanic
Kingtal0n....
What does any of your horse **** have to do with the OP and his ~300 hp goal?
Nothing. You should go take a dump elsewhere.
What does any of your horse **** have to do with the OP and his ~300 hp goal?
Nothing. You should go take a dump elsewhere.
The following users liked this post:
GregMartin (06-04-2019)
06-04-2019, 11:26 AM
#87
Drifting
I have an 84 with the infamous 84 Z51 package that makes it ride like a gocart.
I love the car, 2.0 rack with a go-cart like suspension is a ton of fun!
I also broke out the ol credit card a few years ago and went to town.
Aftermarket heads, mild camshaft, renegade intake, long tube headers & a wild exhaust system (melrose with FM40's and a second x-pipe), areomotive fuel pressure regulator with vac ref, later fuel pump, parallel plumbed the throttle bodies, 80lb injectors, and an ebl flash ecm to control everything.
I run it at about 22psi fuel pressure at wot...
I built up the trans (700r4), and i have a 3200rpm 9.5in converter (iirc), i have it setup to stick shift...
It's a riot to drive, i can spin the tires at will, and it shifts very quickly at wot.
My advice would be to port the stock manifold, don't touch anything else for now.
Too drastic of a change and you will need to start tuning...you should be safe starting with porting of the stock intake.
Mine ran fine with the stock computer/program, but mid rpm had a bad lag that required some reprogramming.
That's where the fun with the ebl flash came in...
I love the car, 2.0 rack with a go-cart like suspension is a ton of fun!
I also broke out the ol credit card a few years ago and went to town.
Aftermarket heads, mild camshaft, renegade intake, long tube headers & a wild exhaust system (melrose with FM40's and a second x-pipe), areomotive fuel pressure regulator with vac ref, later fuel pump, parallel plumbed the throttle bodies, 80lb injectors, and an ebl flash ecm to control everything.
I run it at about 22psi fuel pressure at wot...
I built up the trans (700r4), and i have a 3200rpm 9.5in converter (iirc), i have it setup to stick shift...
It's a riot to drive, i can spin the tires at will, and it shifts very quickly at wot.
My advice would be to port the stock manifold, don't touch anything else for now.
Too drastic of a change and you will need to start tuning...you should be safe starting with porting of the stock intake.
Mine ran fine with the stock computer/program, but mid rpm had a bad lag that required some reprogramming.
That's where the fun with the ebl flash came in...
The following users liked this post:
GregMartin (06-04-2019)
06-04-2019, 11:30 AM
#88
Drifting
Also, funny...
Car wizard, i have my stock intake sold to him..
I just need to work out the details.
Car wizard, i have my stock intake sold to him..
I just need to work out the details.
06-04-2019, 01:52 PM
#89
Racer
I have an 84 with the infamous 84 Z51 package that makes it ride like a gocart.
I love the car, 2.0 rack with a go-cart like suspension is a ton of fun!
I also broke out the ol credit card a few years ago and went to town.
Aftermarket heads, mild camshaft, renegade intake, long tube headers & a wild exhaust system (melrose with FM40's and a second x-pipe), areomotive fuel pressure regulator with vac ref, later fuel pump, parallel plumbed the throttle bodies, 80lb injectors, and an ebl flash ecm to control everything.
I run it at about 22psi fuel pressure at wot...
I built up the trans (700r4), and i have a 3200rpm 9.5in converter (iirc), i have it setup to stick shift...
It's a riot to drive, i can spin the tires at will, and it shifts very quickly at wot.
My advice would be to port the stock manifold, don't touch anything else for now.
Too drastic of a change and you will need to start tuning...you should be safe starting with porting of the stock intake.
Mine ran fine with the stock computer/program, but mid rpm had a bad lag that required some reprogramming.
That's where the fun with the ebl flash came in...
I love the car, 2.0 rack with a go-cart like suspension is a ton of fun!
I also broke out the ol credit card a few years ago and went to town.
Aftermarket heads, mild camshaft, renegade intake, long tube headers & a wild exhaust system (melrose with FM40's and a second x-pipe), areomotive fuel pressure regulator with vac ref, later fuel pump, parallel plumbed the throttle bodies, 80lb injectors, and an ebl flash ecm to control everything.
I run it at about 22psi fuel pressure at wot...
I built up the trans (700r4), and i have a 3200rpm 9.5in converter (iirc), i have it setup to stick shift...
It's a riot to drive, i can spin the tires at will, and it shifts very quickly at wot.
My advice would be to port the stock manifold, don't touch anything else for now.
Too drastic of a change and you will need to start tuning...you should be safe starting with porting of the stock intake.
Mine ran fine with the stock computer/program, but mid rpm had a bad lag that required some reprogramming.
That's where the fun with the ebl flash came in...
06-04-2019, 01:59 PM
#90
Drifting
I have never had it tested...
Fueling math suggests right around 4, but i think it's more likely 300-350.
One day I'll put it on a dyno, it needs some high rpm tuning also.
Too hard to do a wb learn on the freeway since it brings me over 100mph...
Fueling math suggests right around 4, but i think it's more likely 300-350.
One day I'll put it on a dyno, it needs some high rpm tuning also.
Too hard to do a wb learn on the freeway since it brings me over 100mph...
The following users liked this post:
GregMartin (06-04-2019)
06-04-2019, 02:12 PM
#91
Racer
Wow, that is a significant increase. Almost double the power.
The following users liked this post:
GregMartin (06-04-2019)
06-04-2019, 02:25 PM
#92
Drifting
The car was completely transformed.
It gets moving very quickly, i even managed to beat a turbo wrx, and a turbo vw gulf thing (freeway onramp).
Early in the tune i struggled with a turbo wrx, but where it topped out, i was just getting into the power band.
The higher stall of the current converter made a huge difference, as did some changes i made to the timing, and injector drivers.
Pretty much i stopped wide band wot tuning on public roads... it's close enough for now.
It gets moving very quickly, i even managed to beat a turbo wrx, and a turbo vw gulf thing (freeway onramp).
Early in the tune i struggled with a turbo wrx, but where it topped out, i was just getting into the power band.
The higher stall of the current converter made a huge difference, as did some changes i made to the timing, and injector drivers.
Pretty much i stopped wide band wot tuning on public roads... it's close enough for now.
The following users liked this post:
GregMartin (06-04-2019)
06-04-2019, 03:15 PM
#93
Drifting
My 96 SBC gets 27-28mpg, puts 384hp to the wheels in a non-high RPM motor, and does not leak oil (Yet). Yes, with a Procharger and 6PIS So, what is your point, in almost 25 years that is all the further we have been able to come? What do you think that old SBC is going to make with long tubes and a Cam set up for a blower once tuned? 425-435 to the wheels is my guess, with factory internals from 1996.
Anything can get good MPG with a deep overdrive.
Comparing new engines to engines from 1980 is at best, ludicrous. Its been 40 years! The engines of the 80s choked with smog equipment and all were much more reliable and maintenance free than engines from the 40s. Some people still like Flat Head V8s for their hot rod projects. Some people still like adjusting carbs and points.
The points you are trying to make don't even belong on this thread. The OP wants to make more power out of his 84 C4. Swapping engine architecture and electronics create a lot of head aches and if done right, cost a lot more than what gets advertised. Done right is not defined by its ability to start and run. It is it's ability to still have all functions, gages, and creature comforts functioning as well. I think you got lost here and are in the wrong area of the forum.
I agree, the OP still needs to post a budget and goal to really get at the heart of this. Lots of valuable (and worthless chatter) have been offered up. If budget truly is no issue. Then there is no reason and 84 block can't be used to make north of 1000hp. Just needs a lot of expensive parts and some work.
Engines leak oil, who knew
Last edited by KyleF; 06-04-2019 at 03:21 PM.
The following 2 users liked this post by KyleF:
GregMartin (06-04-2019),
Steves LS6 (06-04-2019)
06-04-2019, 06:41 PM
#94
Drifting
Member Since: Jun 2018
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 1,397
Received 283 Likes
on
219 Posts
C4 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
I have an 84 with the infamous 84 Z51 package that makes it ride like a gocart.
I love the car, 2.0 rack with a go-cart like suspension is a ton of fun!
I also broke out the ol credit card a few years ago and went to town.
Aftermarket heads, mild camshaft, renegade intake, long tube headers & a wild exhaust system (melrose with FM40's and a second x-pipe), areomotive fuel pressure regulator with vac ref, later fuel pump, parallel plumbed the throttle bodies, 80lb injectors, and an ebl flash ecm to control everything.
I run it at about 22psi fuel pressure at wot...
I built up the trans (700r4), and i have a 3200rpm 9.5in converter (iirc), i have it setup to stick shift...
It's a riot to drive, i can spin the tires at will, and it shifts very quickly at wot.
My advice would be to port the stock manifold, don't touch anything else for now.
Too drastic of a change and you will need to start tuning...you should be safe starting with porting of the stock intake.
Mine ran fine with the stock computer/program, but mid rpm had a bad lag that required some reprogramming.
That's where the fun with the ebl flash came in...
I love the car, 2.0 rack with a go-cart like suspension is a ton of fun!
I also broke out the ol credit card a few years ago and went to town.
Aftermarket heads, mild camshaft, renegade intake, long tube headers & a wild exhaust system (melrose with FM40's and a second x-pipe), areomotive fuel pressure regulator with vac ref, later fuel pump, parallel plumbed the throttle bodies, 80lb injectors, and an ebl flash ecm to control everything.
I run it at about 22psi fuel pressure at wot...
I built up the trans (700r4), and i have a 3200rpm 9.5in converter (iirc), i have it setup to stick shift...
It's a riot to drive, i can spin the tires at will, and it shifts very quickly at wot.
My advice would be to port the stock manifold, don't touch anything else for now.
Too drastic of a change and you will need to start tuning...you should be safe starting with porting of the stock intake.
Mine ran fine with the stock computer/program, but mid rpm had a bad lag that required some reprogramming.
That's where the fun with the ebl flash came in...
These cars are designed around handling not brute horse power so they are fun to drive with the original asthmatic engine. But it’s easy to bump that up to 300-350hp with heads cam and intake. The OP said budget wasn’t an issue and I might be wrong but I got the impression that he was looking for 350ish HP. So I would probably go for a renegade rather than porting the original intake, because everything fits and the performance is there. Modern alloy heads mild cam and that little L83 comes alive.
06-05-2019, 01:31 AM
#95
Melting Slicks
Show me where...
My 96 SBC gets 27-28mpg, puts 384hp to the wheels in a non-high RPM motor, and does not leak oil (Yet). Yes, with a Procharger and 6PIS So, what is your point, in almost 25 years that is all the further we have been able to come? What do you think that old SBC is going to make with long tubes and a Cam set up for a blower once tuned? 425-435 to the wheels is my guess, with factory internals from 1996.
Anything can get good MPG with a deep overdrive.
My 96 SBC gets 27-28mpg, puts 384hp to the wheels in a non-high RPM motor, and does not leak oil (Yet). Yes, with a Procharger and 6PIS So, what is your point, in almost 25 years that is all the further we have been able to come? What do you think that old SBC is going to make with long tubes and a Cam set up for a blower once tuned? 425-435 to the wheels is my guess, with factory internals from 1996.
Anything can get good MPG with a deep overdrive.
This may be surprising but in 1992 Japan Nissan produced 2.0L 4-cylinder, Aluminum RWD 5-speed (4.11 rear gear usually) 30mpg cruising 2500-3200rpm
The factory engine will support 400rwhp with OEM internals since 1992 its been done (common knowledge) the car is called "Silvia".
So what I am getting at is this. If 2.0L from 1992~era can do 400rwhp and 30mpg with a reasonably priced engine (its a Nissan...)
Then it doesn't matter what car we are discussing, really. If you are going to throw displacement on top of that and reduce MPG, and start limiting engine RPM with numerically lower ratios, you had better be over 400rwhp more like 500+