Supercharging
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 12,861
Likes: 4,664
I'm still running that 232/236/113+ and the car runs tip top with the Novi 1500. With the restrictor plate in the car makes a nice amount of RWTQ under the curve. Peak power at the wheels 640/568.
I'm back in the 3.42's but I'm not a fan. Especially around town driving. The 4.10s are my all time favorite gear in the MN6. I ran 4.10s for two decades and 100k+ miles. I'm only on the fence with doing a big gear again because when I get heavy on the throttle I'm blowing through the 3.42s quick. I had to adjust my shift light to accomodate my middle aged reaction times. The 4.10s would likely have me on pins and needles these days.
I've also run 3.90s in another MN6 C5 I had. That car was mostly stock and I felt I should have gone 4.10. So maybe I'll do a 3.90 in the FI build.
I'm back in the 3.42's but I'm not a fan. Especially around town driving. The 4.10s are my all time favorite gear in the MN6. I ran 4.10s for two decades and 100k+ miles. I'm only on the fence with doing a big gear again because when I get heavy on the throttle I'm blowing through the 3.42s quick. I had to adjust my shift light to accomodate my middle aged reaction times. The 4.10s would likely have me on pins and needles these days.
I've also run 3.90s in another MN6 C5 I had. That car was mostly stock and I felt I should have gone 4.10. So maybe I'll do a 3.90 in the FI build.
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 12,861
Likes: 4,664
Thinking about supercharging anyone regret doing this .I’ll have to change a few things on my setup but pretty bored at the power level I’m at .I’d like to get close to 600 not sure but might have my heads ported while I take it apart probably change the cam to suit the blower
Melting Slicks
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,306
Likes: 747
I've been running a base A&A kit (~500whp) with 4.10s for a couple years now. I intended to swap valve springs and clutch at some point, but my perfectly stock clutch doesn't seem to want to give up the ghost quite yet.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 1,144
From: Sleepy Hollow- NJ
Safety Car
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,204
Likes: 1,075
From: South Florida
How can I make it any clearer than when I stated 500-600hp builds should be fine, but I'd not trust a 1,300hp build with SBE components???? It sounded as though you were condoning 1,300hp builds that were reliable with stock components. When stating that 1,300hp stock builds are good for hundreds of passes, it sure as Hell appears you feel the engines are good for that level!! If anyone wants to pursue 1,300hp on a SBE, by all means, your life, your car, go for it. Kingtalon says it'll be good for "hundreds of passes." I'd never do it......
I wouldn't put a nice rotator in a factory block. At 1200ish the oem crank/block/mains flex/wiggle. even with a nice forged crank you can see the mains are moving. So unless you want a 1200+hp setup, I stick with the factory parts. Guys are revving these things to 8400rpm and making 1400hp for multiple seasons when tuned correctly. Thats pretty impressive for a $300-500 long block IMO.
https://www.theturboforums.com/threa...2#post-2042556
Its hundreds or thousands of people using the engine this way. Why do we need to look at it? The same reason that engineers purposefully fail a beam before using that beam in any structure. They find the limitation mathematically, empirically, experimentally, whatever. Imagine everybody used the 4.8L engine for only 600rwhp and nobody ever went beyond that. How close are they to the edge? How close from failure? How much more will it tolerate? How can anybody find the answers to this question without actually trying it? And we benefit from that knowledge from the safety of our computers. We don't need to build the 1300hp engine. But we DO need to pay attention to those thousands of people using them at 1300hp to take note of the fact they do so reliably, effectively enough to be reproducible season to season, pass to pass, year to year, that we can safely assure ourselves with a meager 600 or 800rwhp that the engine will basically last forever.
Its evidence without which I would not bother trying or *wasting* my time
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 1,144
From: Sleepy Hollow- NJ
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 1,144
From: Sleepy Hollow- NJ
Bottom line for your project, a good blower, by A&A, ECS, etc., will net you 600hp, without getting inside the engine. Better pushrods wouldn't hurt, but you can hit 600hp without porting. I wish you well on your project, and your 600hp FI engine. If I had it to do over again, I'd put a blower on and be done with it. Yes, my cammed LS7 has a great sounding idle. But, how long can you sit and listen to an engine idle? Rough idles don't win races, foot to the floor does. I once saw a nasty sounding Chevelle at the strip, lined up against a Dodge Viper. Couldn't even hear the Viper! I would've bet $100, or more, that the Viper would've gotten his *** kicked. It was the other way around. But that Chevelle sounded great while losing. All I'm saying is a blower is a bit more $$$ up front in cost, but you'll probably save $$$ in the long run. Good luck.....
Interesting coincidence...one of my brothers has a big cam straight piped '65 Chevelle. It sounds AMAZING and pulls the front tires an inch off the ground. My younger brother has a lightly modified 97 RT Viper. They ran best out of three and the Viper put it to bed the first 2.
My vette destroys them both.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2021
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 4,324
From: Florida
2025 Corvette of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2024 C5 of the Year Winner- Unmodified
2022 C5 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 12,861
Likes: 4,664
Lol thats no my quote - I would not quote myself.
quoted by "forcefed86"
https://www.theturboforums.com/threa...2#post-2042556
Its hundreds or thousands of people using the engine this way. Why do we need to look at it? The same reason that engineers purposefully fail a beam before using that beam in any structure. They find the limitation mathematically, empirically, experimentally, whatever. Imagine everybody used the 4.8L engine for only 600rwhp and nobody ever went beyond that. How close are they to the edge? How close from failure? How much more will it tolerate? How can anybody find the answers to this question without actually trying it? And we benefit from that knowledge from the safety of our computers. We don't need to build the 1300hp engine. But we DO need to pay attention to those thousands of people using them at 1300hp to take note of the fact they do so reliably, effectively enough to be reproducible season to season, pass to pass, year to year, that we can safely assure ourselves with a meager 600 or 800rwhp that the engine will basically last forever.
Its evidence without which I would not bother trying or *wasting* my time
quoted by "forcefed86"
https://www.theturboforums.com/threa...2#post-2042556
Its hundreds or thousands of people using the engine this way. Why do we need to look at it? The same reason that engineers purposefully fail a beam before using that beam in any structure. They find the limitation mathematically, empirically, experimentally, whatever. Imagine everybody used the 4.8L engine for only 600rwhp and nobody ever went beyond that. How close are they to the edge? How close from failure? How much more will it tolerate? How can anybody find the answers to this question without actually trying it? And we benefit from that knowledge from the safety of our computers. We don't need to build the 1300hp engine. But we DO need to pay attention to those thousands of people using them at 1300hp to take note of the fact they do so reliably, effectively enough to be reproducible season to season, pass to pass, year to year, that we can safely assure ourselves with a meager 600 or 800rwhp that the engine will basically last forever.
Its evidence without which I would not bother trying or *wasting* my time
Last edited by grinder11; Dec 28, 2022 at 06:22 PM.
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 12,861
Likes: 4,664
Interesting coincidence...one of my brothers has a big cam straight piped '65 Chevelle. It sounds AMAZING and pulls the front tires an inch off the ground. My younger brother has a lightly modified 97 RT Viper. They ran best out of three and the Viper put it to bed the first 2.
My vette destroys them both.
My vette destroys them both.
Race Director
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,060
Likes: 291
From: Pasco WA
Ooo nice try. Actually I am a cancer researcher by day, auto enthusiast by night. I work with mRNA almost everyday and model cancer behaviors by gene products based on mRNA using PCR which is a basic diagnostic tool that all researchers have now. We could design and implemented an mRNA based vaccine when we have the ability to perform clinical trials to bridge the gap between data and results, if (anybody) needed to for some reason. To whit- I would never inject myself or anybody else with mRNA of any kind unless I was absolutely sure, as in 100% (impossible cough*) certain that the intended affect or influence of said mRNA would result with expected self interactions, variant catalysis and downstream products. It is during my Doctor & mechanical engineering that I learned how to utilize statistics and evidence to back my research and which claims will hold water under close Inspection.
Statistics does NOT Need to include engine builders, that is my point. You avoid the machine shop and downtime associated with building an expensive engine and eliminate the millions of potential issues by avoiding a rebuilt engine of any kind. I said already multiple times that I do not condone 1300hp I am not sure why you keep bringing that up. My point is that the engine supports 1300hp for hundreds of passes so it must be good for 700rwhp for example in a daily driving application, which it is, and you agree, and this is extremely useful information. You seem to agree but don't repeat the facts very often. It would be nice if you say exactly what you meant by repeating it to clear up any confusion for the novices. Many modern engines are in fact good to 600-700rwhp from all kinds of sources. For example 1995 Toyota 3L Inline 6 cylinders from the 90's I tuned over 20 years ago 600 to 800rwhp still running today in customer cars after two decades and 200,000 miles. We didn't know back then but the engine block is the deciding factor not the internals. When I saw the similar design strategy enacted in modern 02+ chevrolet V8 engines I realized that they simply copied the Toyota and Nissan designs, the modern 4.8L is simply a replica of the original inline 4 and 6 cylinder engines from Nissan and Toyota of the 90's. All of them from 3L to 6L support an easily 700rwhp daily driver applications and 1200bhp for indeterminable length of time. The failure rates associated with poor tuning and poor engine setup are equal between forged 'built' engines and stock engines, e.g. a stock engine with a bad tune is just as likely to fail as a forged piston engine with a bad tune. The forged piston allows for a couple of decent mistakes in the learning curve but overall the difference between them in a repeated high RPM tuning mishap is negligible.
After thinking for a minute, Actually if we consider internal forces those forged pistons will withstand far more abuse and higher forces, meaning when the engine fails it will be able to launch parts much farther and faster. The stock internals acting like a fuse, blowing apart really easily before real force may be applied. It doesn't seem safer having forged internals abused which fly apart, more likely to launch parts with higher energy input. They also give a false sense of security and less feedback from poor tuning and poor setup, since they withstand more abuse, leading to much more abusive situations and being pressed much harder than they should be. A forged piston should have the same force applied to it as a stock piston in performance applications, the act of forging does not increase or improve the engine's output potential, the block controls that. Forged only allows for the one-off chance mistake which can be noticed and corrected for, assuming we are comparing equal fuel quality and proper methodology for setup conditions.
Statistics does NOT Need to include engine builders, that is my point. You avoid the machine shop and downtime associated with building an expensive engine and eliminate the millions of potential issues by avoiding a rebuilt engine of any kind. I said already multiple times that I do not condone 1300hp I am not sure why you keep bringing that up. My point is that the engine supports 1300hp for hundreds of passes so it must be good for 700rwhp for example in a daily driving application, which it is, and you agree, and this is extremely useful information. You seem to agree but don't repeat the facts very often. It would be nice if you say exactly what you meant by repeating it to clear up any confusion for the novices. Many modern engines are in fact good to 600-700rwhp from all kinds of sources. For example 1995 Toyota 3L Inline 6 cylinders from the 90's I tuned over 20 years ago 600 to 800rwhp still running today in customer cars after two decades and 200,000 miles. We didn't know back then but the engine block is the deciding factor not the internals. When I saw the similar design strategy enacted in modern 02+ chevrolet V8 engines I realized that they simply copied the Toyota and Nissan designs, the modern 4.8L is simply a replica of the original inline 4 and 6 cylinder engines from Nissan and Toyota of the 90's. All of them from 3L to 6L support an easily 700rwhp daily driver applications and 1200bhp for indeterminable length of time. The failure rates associated with poor tuning and poor engine setup are equal between forged 'built' engines and stock engines, e.g. a stock engine with a bad tune is just as likely to fail as a forged piston engine with a bad tune. The forged piston allows for a couple of decent mistakes in the learning curve but overall the difference between them in a repeated high RPM tuning mishap is negligible.
After thinking for a minute, Actually if we consider internal forces those forged pistons will withstand far more abuse and higher forces, meaning when the engine fails it will be able to launch parts much farther and faster. The stock internals acting like a fuse, blowing apart really easily before real force may be applied. It doesn't seem safer having forged internals abused which fly apart, more likely to launch parts with higher energy input. They also give a false sense of security and less feedback from poor tuning and poor setup, since they withstand more abuse, leading to much more abusive situations and being pressed much harder than they should be. A forged piston should have the same force applied to it as a stock piston in performance applications, the act of forging does not increase or improve the engine's output potential, the block controls that. Forged only allows for the one-off chance mistake which can be noticed and corrected for, assuming we are comparing equal fuel quality and proper methodology for setup conditions.
I read blah, blah,blah,etc. ad nauseum. Ain't nobody here that'll read that ****.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 1,144
From: Sleepy Hollow- NJ
What I surmised from my reading...KingTalon suggests putting 700 to 800 HP through stock internals so you can daily drive your car slowly on the street. As long as you do that your engine will last hundreds of thousands of miles.
In summary...Own a fast car you have to drive slow.
Makes perfect sense.
Last edited by Johnny Hardcore; Dec 28, 2022 at 08:32 PM.
Safety Car
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,204
Likes: 1,075
From: South Florida
Oh no...unfortunately I read it. It was like driving past a bad accident involving a truck and a motorcycle intensly staring...even though you expect to see a dead body lying on the street.
What I surmised from my reading...KingTalon suggests putting 700 to 800 HP through stock internals so you can daily drive your car slowly on the street. As long as you do that your engine will last hundreds of thousands of miles.
In summary...Own a fast car you have to drive slow.
Makes perfect sense.
What I surmised from my reading...KingTalon suggests putting 700 to 800 HP through stock internals so you can daily drive your car slowly on the street. As long as you do that your engine will last hundreds of thousands of miles.
In summary...Own a fast car you have to drive slow.
Makes perfect sense.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,373
Likes: 1,128
From: cold & windy
first off: it seems "klingon-atari" (nice touch above) willfully chooses to ignore the fact that turbos (while sharing compressor characteristics) operate COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY than superchargers with regard to airflow capabilities/characteristics. despite this, he incessantly comes into every supercharger thread he can find and starts talking about "turbo example this" and "turbo theory that" - often based on learned experiences from primarily working on small japanese engines that don't translate well to GM v8s.
that said:
if someone doesn't know what he's doing, he either learns (typically polling for others' experiences or by trial & error) or he pays someone who knows what he's doing. either case will show thousands of reliable boosted LS engines over the last two decades running 10:1 compression or higher (mine being one of them)... and yes, i run it hard on pump gas.
wrong again - see above & below.
this is akin to saying, "kingtal0n has a doctorate, so he's no different than my primary care provider." i sure as heck wouldn't come to you with a supercharger question (turbo... maybe) let alone a medical health emergency because you chose to focus your studies in a completely different field.
a turbo is free to move however much air it wants in a variety of engine operating speeds; a supercharger is not. it moves a set amount of air proportional to engine RPM. that in and of itself is enough of a game changer to significantly alter the course of engine airflow capacity modification discussions.
i never mentioned boost in that example, did i?
take a stock engine at 300hp and boost it to make 500hp using blower A. if a modified engine makes 400hp, it only requires an add'l 100hp worth of net gain from a power adder to hit the same goal. if you ran blower A in the same configuration & pulley on a modified engine and a stock engine, the modified engine will surpass the stock in power.
i also learned to use matchbot when specing out turbo options for the compound setup on my truck... and also when previously providing you with graphical examples of why some of your turbo discussions/examples didn't apply to the superchargers or engines that guys were asking about in other threads here.
why yes, almost eunuchs of sorts until their turbos kick in & do all the heavy lifting. that's where lower compression comes in handy because you're having to cram so much air into the cylinder that the lower temperature of boost pressure outweighs the higher temperature of physical compression. but what happens at part-throttle when you ain't got all the boost... how much peppiness does it respond respond with? oh that's right... the peppiness of a stock 80s iron 350 despite being a modern sports car.
for reference, this thread has a ton of dyno sheets (mostly superchargers): https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...ower-club.html
you'll notice all the stock engines are at the bottom of the list, and if you go in & read most of these guys' builds, you'll see that only a few of them lowered their compression ratios (while many raised it). interesting point is that since my initial entry on that list, i've upgraded my heads/cam & opened up my supercharger manifold. running at the same boost pressure (after increasing my pulley drive ratio), i'm somehow making almost 150hp & tq higher than before... how's that happen if improving airflow efficiency is as worthless as you claim? i'm fairly certain the engine would've blown had i simply pulleyed the blower down (or i would've had to pull so much timing as to be a net loss).
a 97-98 at 600hp... that's sketchy. later years would be less concerning.
i road course my TVS and have driven it across the country multiple times - but if road racing's your primary intent, you're better off with heads/cam/exhaust & no boost. until you get real good & have lots of matching upgrades, it'll be a while before you could out-drive that power level.
dang... y'all got full-on race builds or something?
because ain't nobody ever blown a hole in a piston or snapped a rod & left the block relatively unscathed. you're killin' me, Smalls!
clearly, you ain't never boosted an early-build LS1. sure, the iron blocks & Gen4 rotating assemblies you're preaching about are much stouter, but them ain't what the OP's using.
that's his MO - deflect with a dissertation, often with irrelevant info.
this actually has to be one of the smartest and most-agreeable things i've ever seen you write.
that said:
...
the answer is simple: do not raise the compression unless you know what you are doing and getting into. Reiterate, if the engine already has a too-high compression at perhaps 10:1 being originally N/A so there is no way no how you will want to raise that regardless of benefits. To review this concept we should look at OEM forced induction engines. The average compression ratio of forced induction 2L and 3L range engines is roughly 8.5:1 compression. Those power vehicles with 25-30mpg (Silvia, Skyline, Supra) that do fine at 2L to 3L OEM forced induction 300-600rwhp applications with stock engines. If somebody will think a novice will need higher than 8.5:1 compression with two or three times the displacement to make roughly the same power to weight ratio is an idiopathic or spontaneous response.
...
the answer is simple: do not raise the compression unless you know what you are doing and getting into. Reiterate, if the engine already has a too-high compression at perhaps 10:1 being originally N/A so there is no way no how you will want to raise that regardless of benefits. To review this concept we should look at OEM forced induction engines. The average compression ratio of forced induction 2L and 3L range engines is roughly 8.5:1 compression. Those power vehicles with 25-30mpg (Silvia, Skyline, Supra) that do fine at 2L to 3L OEM forced induction 300-600rwhp applications with stock engines. If somebody will think a novice will need higher than 8.5:1 compression with two or three times the displacement to make roughly the same power to weight ratio is an idiopathic or spontaneous response.
...
...
There is nothing to gain. It has never happened and will never happen and you cannot prove it has ever happened no matter what you post or think because thermodynamics is quite clear about the rules of mass in must equal mass out and the turbo or supercharger is a pump which is pumping some particular mass and whatever mass is pumped in must also exit the engine exhaust no matter what you've done to the engine will not change that fact.
...
There is nothing to gain. It has never happened and will never happen and you cannot prove it has ever happened no matter what you post or think because thermodynamics is quite clear about the rules of mass in must equal mass out and the turbo or supercharger is a pump which is pumping some particular mass and whatever mass is pumped in must also exit the engine exhaust no matter what you've done to the engine will not change that fact.
...
...
Superchargers do the same thing as turbochargers. This is showing your inexperience and making me sad. I had higher regard for you than this. I am not picking on you but what did you actually think a turbo was if not a supercharger attached to an exhaust stream? They are both the same devices.
...
Superchargers do the same thing as turbochargers. This is showing your inexperience and making me sad. I had higher regard for you than this. I am not picking on you but what did you actually think a turbo was if not a supercharger attached to an exhaust stream? They are both the same devices.
...
a turbo is free to move however much air it wants in a variety of engine operating speeds; a supercharger is not. it moves a set amount of air proportional to engine RPM. that in and of itself is enough of a game changer to significantly alter the course of engine airflow capacity modification discussions.
...
You have it backwards. If we modify the engine, boost will be lower at a specific output, but that does not mean you need a smaller blower. The size of the blower "big" and "small" has nothing to do with boost. Your statement reveals a distinct weakness in knowledge how blowers function and all I can say is please read more,
Also, matchbot provides some useful exercise in establishing rules of larger vs smaller compressors, I think if you play with matchbot for a couple hours you will have a deeper understanding
https://www.borgwarner.com/matchbot/
...
You have it backwards. If we modify the engine, boost will be lower at a specific output, but that does not mean you need a smaller blower. The size of the blower "big" and "small" has nothing to do with boost. Your statement reveals a distinct weakness in knowledge how blowers function and all I can say is please read more,
Also, matchbot provides some useful exercise in establishing rules of larger vs smaller compressors, I think if you play with matchbot for a couple hours you will have a deeper understanding
https://www.borgwarner.com/matchbot/
...
take a stock engine at 300hp and boost it to make 500hp using blower A. if a modified engine makes 400hp, it only requires an add'l 100hp worth of net gain from a power adder to hit the same goal. if you ran blower A in the same configuration & pulley on a modified engine and a stock engine, the modified engine will surpass the stock in power.
i also learned to use matchbot when specing out turbo options for the compound setup on my truck... and also when previously providing you with graphical examples of why some of your turbo discussions/examples didn't apply to the superchargers or engines that guys were asking about in other threads here.
for reference, this thread has a ton of dyno sheets (mostly superchargers): https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...ower-club.html
you'll notice all the stock engines are at the bottom of the list, and if you go in & read most of these guys' builds, you'll see that only a few of them lowered their compression ratios (while many raised it). interesting point is that since my initial entry on that list, i've upgraded my heads/cam & opened up my supercharger manifold. running at the same boost pressure (after increasing my pulley drive ratio), i'm somehow making almost 150hp & tq higher than before... how's that happen if improving airflow efficiency is as worthless as you claim? i'm fairly certain the engine would've blown had i simply pulleyed the blower down (or i would've had to pull so much timing as to be a net loss).
Would a magnacgarger or A&A kit be reliable on a basically stock engine, headers, 3.73 gears, and 3200 converter. Is it safe to road course a magnacharger or A&A kit, or heads and cam kit better for a road course. I have an A4 trans. Probably fine with 450-475 at the wheels. I want to take my C5 across the country. Would you take your blown c5 or heads and cam C5 across country?
i road course my TVS and have driven it across the country multiple times - but if road racing's your primary intent, you're better off with heads/cam/exhaust & no boost. until you get real good & have lots of matching upgrades, it'll be a while before you could out-drive that power level.
because ain't nobody ever blown a hole in a piston or snapped a rod & left the block relatively unscathed. you're killin' me, Smalls!clearly, you ain't never boosted an early-build LS1. sure, the iron blocks & Gen4 rotating assemblies you're preaching about are much stouter, but them ain't what the OP's using.
Could have just said that instead of deflecting. No need to respond with another journal....
I work with mRNA almost everyday and model cancer behaviors by gene products based on mRNA using PCR which is a basic diagnostic tool that all researchers have now. We could design and implemented an mRNA based vaccine when we have the ability to perform clinical trials to bridge the gap between data and results, if (anybody) needed to for some reason. To whit- I would never inject myself or anybody else with mRNA of any kind unless I was absolutely sure, as in 100% (impossible cough*) certain that the intended affect or influence of said mRNA would result with expected self interactions, variant catalysis and downstream products.
...
I work with mRNA almost everyday and model cancer behaviors by gene products based on mRNA using PCR which is a basic diagnostic tool that all researchers have now. We could design and implemented an mRNA based vaccine when we have the ability to perform clinical trials to bridge the gap between data and results, if (anybody) needed to for some reason. To whit- I would never inject myself or anybody else with mRNA of any kind unless I was absolutely sure, as in 100% (impossible cough*) certain that the intended affect or influence of said mRNA would result with expected self interactions, variant catalysis and downstream products.
...
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 1,144
From: Sleepy Hollow- NJ
I was given a free 5.3L 2002 Tahoe engine with 200,000 miles in 2017. Since then I've put 750bhp through it for 50,000 miles using gasoline fuels. Everything is documented in the sig. If you are making less than 750hp and your engine costs more than $0 you are doing it wrong.
Soooo...unless someone gives me a free 5.3 engine I'm "doing it wrong"? Yeah that makes sense. Note to self...unless I'm a charity case I'm doing it wrong.
You were preaching about the advice you give people so "they can learn from you". Which started out with advising those new to boost to purchase a $500 5.3 from a junkyard and boost it for big power. If it blows up just get another one and start over because it's cheap. This approach works for so few people seeing that R&R of an engine every couple of months or years isn't a basic DIY for most. So your advice is don't spend the money on doing it right or having a reputable pro shop build you a solid engine. Take your chances on junkyard engines and spend your money paying a guy to R&R said doner engines for you instead?
You also missed the forrest from the trees on your perspective of starting with big NA power. The more power you start out with NA the more power to be amplified by the power adder is a simple fact. Not only has this been proven by many of us in real time for ourselves...Richard Holdner does a few good comparison videos proving this to be the case. Specifically boosting 5.3 and 4.8 LS engines on back to back dyno comparisons.
Your perspective on forged vs OEM components is also suspect. Just about every factory boosted performance car of today comes with forged internals to sustain heat and pressure on hyper conservative factory tunes. Upgrading the internals is not just for upcharging buyers. It's to keep the engine together under prolonged high RPMs. (vast majority of these buyers will NEVER see a race track with these cars). Which contradicts much of what you've written above. Particularly your comment on the "block being the weakest link not the parts".
https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/17...-built-engine/
I'm not debating that a 5.3 or 4.8 LS isn't good for big power under boost on the cheap. (Forum member @Tusc opened my eyes to this). It's been proven repeatedly to be consistently confirmed. But longevity under repeated abuse is still a big TBD. You can't use the few guys you know and your own car to make that blanket statement.
For those that fall back on "statistically speaking" I remind them of gamblers fallacy. Statistically speaking Magic Johnson should have died in the 90's. But he didn't and I still wouldn't want him as a blood donor.
Running Guns & Moonshine
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,575
Likes: 7,253
From: CT
'Can vs should' seems to be the topic. We can go a long way making power on factory engines today which is pretty cool. We are living in the second muscle car era and it is winding down in 2023 with the government's foolish and inept concept of electric cars being better for the environment... Which they absolutely are not. If we can boost it and it survives a few seasons at 600 wheel? Awesome. Counter to that, there is no way in heck I'd try that on the pistons which came in the 90s LT1/4 engines prior to the LS. They shatter into powder the first time you make a mistake. Under the 'should' category... We start to enter the realm where experience impacts us all. That can be collective experience (forums, common concepts) or personal. Specializing in a specific engine, build, etc is a core of hot rodding. Tinkering for performance. There would be no boostie bois turbo LSs as thick as they are without Matt Happel. Some, sure. But not three at every car show bootstrapped and booger welded into a beater that will destroy most pricy toys. I respect all sides. And to that, I enjoy seeing the sponsoring of discussions and sharing opposing ideas. So much better than FB and politics. I can read car stuff all day. Especially when neither side in a discussion is wrong. It tends to lead to new knowledge through expansion of accepted fact or proving a prior rule.
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 12,861
Likes: 4,664
Soooo...unless someone gives me a free 5.3 engine I'm "doing it wrong"? Yeah that makes sense. Note to self...unless I'm a charity case I'm doing it wrong.
You were preaching about the advice you give people so "they can learn from you". Which started out with advising those new to boost to purchase a $500 5.3 from a junkyard and boost it for big power. If it blows up just get another one and start over because it's cheap. This approach works for so few people seeing that R&R of an engine every couple of months or years isn't a basic DIY for most. So your advice is don't spend the money on doing it right or having a reputable pro shop build you a solid engine. Take your chances on junkyard engines and spend your money paying a guy to R&R said doner engines for you instead?
You also missed the forrest from the trees on your perspective of starting with big NA power. The more power you start out with NA the more power to be amplified by the power adder is a simple fact. Not only has this been proven by many of us in real time for ourselves...Richard Holdner does a few good comparison videos proving this to be the case. Specifically boosting 5.3 and 4.8 LS engines on back to back dyno comparisons.
https://youtu.be/v_LNr7oZR9Q
Your perspective on forged vs OEM components is also suspect. Just about every factory boosted performance car of today comes with forged internals to sustain heat and pressure on hyper conservative factory tunes. Upgrading the internals is not just for upcharging buyers. It's to keep the engine together under prolonged high RPMs. (vast majority of these buyers will NEVER see a race track with these cars). Which contradicts much of what you've written above. Particularly your comment on the "block being the weakest link not the parts".
https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/17...-built-engine/
I'm not debating that a 5.3 or 4.8 LS isn't good for big power under boost on the cheap. (Forum member @Tusc opened my eyes to this). It's been proven repeatedly to be consistently confirmed. But longevity under repeated abuse is still a big TBD. You can't use the few guys you know and your own car to make that blanket statement.
For those that fall back on "statistically speaking" I remind them of gamblers fallacy. Statistically speaking Magic Johnson should have died in the 90's. But he didn't and I still wouldn't want him as a blood donor.
You were preaching about the advice you give people so "they can learn from you". Which started out with advising those new to boost to purchase a $500 5.3 from a junkyard and boost it for big power. If it blows up just get another one and start over because it's cheap. This approach works for so few people seeing that R&R of an engine every couple of months or years isn't a basic DIY for most. So your advice is don't spend the money on doing it right or having a reputable pro shop build you a solid engine. Take your chances on junkyard engines and spend your money paying a guy to R&R said doner engines for you instead?
You also missed the forrest from the trees on your perspective of starting with big NA power. The more power you start out with NA the more power to be amplified by the power adder is a simple fact. Not only has this been proven by many of us in real time for ourselves...Richard Holdner does a few good comparison videos proving this to be the case. Specifically boosting 5.3 and 4.8 LS engines on back to back dyno comparisons.
https://youtu.be/v_LNr7oZR9Q
Your perspective on forged vs OEM components is also suspect. Just about every factory boosted performance car of today comes with forged internals to sustain heat and pressure on hyper conservative factory tunes. Upgrading the internals is not just for upcharging buyers. It's to keep the engine together under prolonged high RPMs. (vast majority of these buyers will NEVER see a race track with these cars). Which contradicts much of what you've written above. Particularly your comment on the "block being the weakest link not the parts".
https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/17...-built-engine/
I'm not debating that a 5.3 or 4.8 LS isn't good for big power under boost on the cheap. (Forum member @Tusc opened my eyes to this). It's been proven repeatedly to be consistently confirmed. But longevity under repeated abuse is still a big TBD. You can't use the few guys you know and your own car to make that blanket statement.
For those that fall back on "statistically speaking" I remind them of gamblers fallacy. Statistically speaking Magic Johnson should have died in the 90's. But he didn't and I still wouldn't want him as a blood donor.
I admit it-I thought I was pretty competent, mechanically. I also thought that, as a large group of enthusiasts and professionals, many of us were pretty sharp on a lot of this stuff. I also thought I could offer some decent advice. Sadly, I now realize none of us knows what the Hell we are doing, except..........Consequently, I'm now going to have to block everyone, and recommend you block me. Just dont block the only guy worth listening to......APRIL FOOL@New Years!!!!!
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 1,144
From: Sleepy Hollow- NJ
I believe I'm seeing a pattern here, Johnny (and the rest of us!)...........Now we know why he's been banned from LS1 Tech............ I admit it-I thought I was pretty competent, mechanically. I also thought that, as a large group of enthusiasts and professionals, many of us were pretty sharp on a lot of this stuff. I also thought I could offer some decent advice. Sadly, I now realize none of us knows what the Hell we are doing, except..........Consequently, I'm now going to have to block everyone, and recommend you block me. Just dont block the only guy worth listening to......APRIL FOOL@New Years!!!!!
I admit it-I thought I was pretty competent, mechanically. I also thought that, as a large group of enthusiasts and professionals, many of us were pretty sharp on a lot of this stuff. I also thought I could offer some decent advice. Sadly, I now realize none of us knows what the Hell we are doing, except..........Consequently, I'm now going to have to block everyone, and recommend you block me. Just dont block the only guy worth listening to......APRIL FOOL@New Years!!!!!
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 1,144
From: Sleepy Hollow- NJ
I just laughed so hard I scared my dog.
'Can vs should' seems to be the topic. We can go a long way making power on factory engines today which is pretty cool. We are living in the second muscle car era and it is winding down in 2023 with the government's foolish and inept concept of electric cars being better for the environment... Which they absolutely are not. If we can boost it and it survives a few seasons at 600 wheel? Awesome. Counter to that, there is no way in heck I'd try that on the pistons which came in the 90s LT1/4 engines prior to the LS. They shatter into powder the first time you make a mistake. Under the 'should' category... We start to enter the realm where experience impacts us all. That can be collective experience (forums, common concepts) or personal. Specializing in a specific engine, build, etc is a core of hot rodding. Tinkering for performance. There would be no boostie bois turbo LSs as thick as they are without Matt Happel. Some, sure. But not three at every car show bootstrapped and booger welded into a beater that will destroy most pricy toys. I respect all sides. And to that, I enjoy seeing the sponsoring of discussions and sharing opposing ideas. So much better than FB and politics. I can read car stuff all day. Especially when neither side in a discussion is wrong. It tends to lead to new knowledge through expansion of accepted fact or proving a prior rule.
'Can vs should' seems to be the topic. We can go a long way making power on factory engines today which is pretty cool. We are living in the second muscle car era and it is winding down in 2023 with the government's foolish and inept concept of electric cars being better for the environment... Which they absolutely are not. If we can boost it and it survives a few seasons at 600 wheel? Awesome. Counter to that, there is no way in heck I'd try that on the pistons which came in the 90s LT1/4 engines prior to the LS. They shatter into powder the first time you make a mistake. Under the 'should' category... We start to enter the realm where experience impacts us all. That can be collective experience (forums, common concepts) or personal. Specializing in a specific engine, build, etc is a core of hot rodding. Tinkering for performance. There would be no boostie bois turbo LSs as thick as they are without Matt Happel. Some, sure. But not three at every car show bootstrapped and booger welded into a beater that will destroy most pricy toys. I respect all sides. And to that, I enjoy seeing the sponsoring of discussions and sharing opposing ideas. So much better than FB and politics. I can read car stuff all day. Especially when neither side in a discussion is wrong. It tends to lead to new knowledge through expansion of accepted fact or proving a prior rule.
Again, there you go summing it up perfectly. And no one needed to take a Xanax or smoke a bowl to interpret or gain good perspective.