Hi Richard. Thanks again for all you do. Looking for a turbo magnum v8 build and also a turbo 383 mopar (the factory big bore stroker and chrysler built 3M of them!). Learning lots about boost😄
The LS uses a square head bolt pattern, which isn't unique to the Windsor. It has the same firing order, of which there are only three possible for a dual plane V8, because GM found it's slightly kinder to the bearings. They "stole" the thrust bearing on cap #3 to fix rear main seals. The port orientation is the same, and is a result of the head bolts and pushrod location, like Richard says. Basically best practices for OHV engines at the time. The LT1 heads are based on the high value V6.
I agree . Has anyone considered that good ideas migrate ? Take a Ford FE. Many Y blocks in the modern age are evolutionary center because they are like in some way. That doesn’t mean it was stolen. The Y design there are so many ways to do it. The Mods use it, ya da, because it’s better related to warranty issues. The FE head is genius for it’s day. The cheap stuff can have an iron intake. Their racing stuff can lose 100 lbs off the nose just by making half the head aluminum. It is evolution.
@@richardholdener1727 in most cases it's the teachers that create the issue. College should be for education, but in a college math class we received an extended political diatribe. Sad thing is that it seems to happen a lot.
Can't wait for the 3800 and 4200 big bang test. Someone mentioned the 2jzed and comparison to the 4200, well just remember the Japanese always overengineer their automotive products. Even though the 2jzed has its limits too, I've heard that at round 1900hp they start to give up. The 2jzeds that you see making 2500hp are billet blocks.
The big problem seem to be that the marketing department is in control of a lot of stuff, and I guess the people that asks for all the wrong stuff and give them ideas. People that buy cams based on how loopy the idle is should be forced to run with blown head gaskets, if you ask me.
We have all seen that companies pay to have "testing" done that is skewed in their favor. It happens in all walks of sales. Yes there are some testing guys like you that do very fair tests and put the info out there for all of us. There are others that only care about money.
@@richardholdener1727 well my friend next time your at the scrap yard 2006- 2007 savanna 2500. Can't send pics. Google it Seen guys pass them off as TBSS intakes
I don't believe GM stole the ls design form Ford because they're center cam push rod engines. most Ford engines are overhead modular design. thank you for the work you do I have learned a lot
Six things. 1.Chevy moved uo from 9 inch deck to The 9.22 inch deck...as the Cleveland 351C and Essex 232. 2. Chev moved back to four bolt per bore head bolts, not Five. Just like Fords Cleveland. 3. Lifters moved up to 875 thou, JLF". (Just like Fords Cleveland). 4. The firing order moved to the Cleveland f/o JLF. 5. Chevy Moved back to wedge head...just like the Essex 90 232 and SVO 4.5 Cosworth~Brodix heads. 6. The port phasing is Windsor and Cleveland. Although it was Buicks Nail head and the alloy BOP 215 - Buick 300. But no conspiracy theory. Just co-incidence fellas. Ford guys get butt hurt when GM Powertrain make as much power as a quad cam Mod or Cleveland with less features.
@@dustinjackson8646 it's just not amazing. A 1994 suzuki gsx750f katana was 98 hp and at 0.750 liters with a built in 6 speed sequential gear box. And internal starter, alternator. Oh and it weighed less than 100 pounds... That my friend is amazing
Richard, I was having internet trouble and couldn’t respond in real time. The 1988 celica alltracs 3sgte engine is still in my garage taken apart. I bought everything I needed for a complete high boost build including pistons and rods but got discouraged when it came to the valve train design. The bucket and shim design is what stopped me from pursuing the build as I have heard there are issues when spinning the engine above 8k rpm. I’m starting to rethink my original plan of a K24 swap. I don’t know if I want to do all that fabrication. All I need for the 3sgte is cams for a complete build. I have been building a baja bug for the desert and have had just about enough fabrication for awhile. I installed an sr20det in it and am almost done with the airbag suspension. So trying to fab everything needed for a Kswap into the celica seems daunting.
All those cams won’t fit my stock head. They only fit the gen 2 and newer. So I also bought another long block from an mr2 turbo. My build is actually a stroker using the 5s crank from a non turbo mr2 or Camry. Pistons are semi custom units from CP. The crank will have to be turned to accept the 3sgte rods which are off the shelf units. I could go on and on. How much time do you have?
Always wanted to ask if you ever tuned or know someone that ever messed with nitromethane and Hydrazine and what makes it so illegal for drag racing applications?
I have a 6.0 gmc motor and I just had a stage 2 sloppy cam put in..the guy got new pushrods..manleys 7.450 -7.500..when I picked it up he said that 2 of the new pushrod didn't fit...so he used 2 of the old ones...?? I am kinda nervous about this...should I be ????? He measured them he said..I dont want any weak spots....thank you.
THEY SHOULD ALL BE THE SAME UNLESS THE INSTALLED HEIGHT OF THE VALVES ARE DIFFERENT OR MOUNTING HEIGHT OF THE ROCKER (DOUBT CAM LOBES WOULD BE OFF THAT MUCH)
@@richardholdener1727 thanks...I hurd stock ones were weak to begin with and didn't want the 2 old ones to be a weak link..especially since I just spend 1500 on it I don't have...is this a normal thing ? Should I have someone look at it...I dont know...a ford guy did the cam..great guy,..but I hate to do all this work restoring my 68 chevy truck get the engine it and have any problems.........ugggg... thank you......
@@mikeh5168 @Mike H @Mike H hey Mike sorry for your troubles regarding the pushrods... although none of that adds up....or the person that installed the cam either misspoke, perhaps making crap up? For the clearance to be off that significantly would mean there is some sort of anomaly as in damage to bores etc. If the rods were damaged maybe during shipping or what have you, obviously they should have been returned/replaced. Can't just go and stuff in the old one's.... depending on type of cam _ roller or flat tappet peace
Would, could anyone tell me the pros and cons of a destroked 400 small block Chevy compared to a stroked 350. I built a 377 destroked 400 long time ago and it was one of the best running engines I have ever built. I never built a stroked 350... Thus my question and desire to know pros and cons of both..... Thanks!!!!!
@@richardholdener1727 Thanks Richard!!! I owned an automotive machine shop back in the 80's and built a lot of engines. That 377 was a high winding stout running machine!!!!!! I would like to build another one with some modern technology like heads, fuel injection, and good cam...
Would like to see the different bore to stroke configurations of the same CID put to rest once and for all. Of course it would need to be a fair test so if you use a sbc 400 block with a sbc 307 crank and a sbc 307 with a sbc 400 crank, lastly a sbc 305 with a 4" stroke crank. Use a sbc 350 for the standard numbers. Again so its fair, use sbc 305 Vortec heads all with the same static compression ratio so the smallest bore engine has a chance against the larger bore engines. Maybe a couple different cam shafts in the mix and if you're up to it throw some boost in the mix? Make sure the same cams are used in all of them when comparing results.
I've heard that conspiracy theory about GM stealing the cylinder head design from Ford. It's not true. They just got away from the siamesed intake and exhaust ports for better air distribution. They definitely didn't take the raised runner and 15 degree valve angle idea from Ford. They took that idea from their race program. The bowtie heads were 18 degrees and they saw that thise engines ran more efficiently and didn't need as much spark advance of the SBC. And you could run more lift with less piston-to-valve clearance issues. The LS and Gen 5 engines are the best thing since sliced bread! Hence the reason I converted from the good ole SBC to the LS...
@@richardholdener1727 It's one of those myths I don't believe. Or dropping a Windsor head gasket on an LS block would show if locating dowels and water holes don't line up.
Sometimes the science drives things toward a logical design. Ever noticed all the SUV's look the same. All the sedans look like drips. I suppose they could make a modern adaptation of the Edsel so as not to copy the roller skates and drips.
So many variations of gm v8s out there going back to 1917 there is absolutely no reason to copy a sbf.....and if the ls was a copy of a windsor it would be a turd like a windsor.
I feel there is anti Mopar Small Block Conspiracy. The 360 with modified EngineQuest iron heads can flow 295 cfm. Suerly there is Ford Cleveland and LS power for a 6 liter combination with similar to FoMoCo and GM Powertrain head flow. The Wedge LA is not being focused on. Just my opinion. And the Cleveland 366 NASCAR tri power gave the 340 Six Pack its carbs. I really would like to see the 340 Six beat the Boss 351s 383 hp rating on the dyno. Can anyone see why the Mopar Small block 1966 to 1990 has been consipred against...the Magnum and Hemi are different and improved, but Mopar probably could have done More with Less like the LS. Thoughts?
CONSPIRED AGAINST? PLEASE SEE THE HEMI VIDS ON THE CHANNEL THAT NO ONE WATCHED-ALSO I AM LOOKING TO TEST THE MAGNUM 360 AND HAVE SAID TIME AND AGIN THAT I WANT TO TEST A REPLICA OF THE 6-PACK 340 (BUT YES-IT'S A CONSPIRACY!)
Because it's not. The original one was collaboratively designed by Isuzu, and it is manufactured in a joint venture plant, but the new L5P design was developed entirely at GM Powertrain.
@@andyharman3022 iwas at gm training on that engine before it was released Isuzu designed engine With updated enhancements by gm power train Guess you coughed up for one of those junks
Co2 spray bar on the intercooler and also the killerchiller uses the AC system through the intercooler. Both work amazing. The co2 is cheap but needs refilled
Back in the 80's, I was the Q-jet tuning king!!! I loved that I could make a Q-jet outperform a Holley!!!!! I don't even know what a Q-jet looks like now!!!!! lol!!!
Lol! Im a ford guy & I will somtimes joke about it but its a chevy engine. It shares some traits with ford but those traits are not exclusive with ford. It has the deep skirt block, ford & Chrysler have had engines that shared that trait. It was a good design. The LS has 10 bolt heads, ford used 10 bolt heads for yrs. It proved to be just fine but was looked down on by chevy guys forever. Now there hero engine uses 10 bolt heads. Ok, were over it. Bore spacing is very close to the ford small block. But if im not mistaken its not exact. I believe about .020 difference. Close enuf to use ford torque plates if boring. The LS has heads that flow rediculas amounts of air, fords clevlands heads flowed rediculas amounts of air. So chevy made a modern engine that is proving to be a excellent engine. It shares some good quality from other engines of the past that were on some fords. Its not a copy,, its not stolen. Its just a good engine like some of the fords were good engines.
Speaking of John Lingenfelter. I have a SBC Mercruiser tunnel ram port injected with appears to have a BBC Mercruiser top with a twin blade throttle blade throttle body that I got from John. I'm wondering if what it would be good for. I would like to send you pictures of it. Thanks for all the hard work on your videos.
Enough hydrogen in bore to point little fuel is needed. Fuel that is condensed and atamized before mixed with hydrogen, something along those lines... Lots of story's out there
There is a mix of real product claims and false claims. If you are willing to search it out, today you can find information to gauge what claims are real and which are not. Many claims include fine print with the truth included. I find it easier to state the "problem" I am trying to solve and then finding the solution so, the advertising really doesn't impact me, but given my background, I also see advertising for what it is. I figure by about this time 2 years from now Richard will have posted enough testing that everything 95% of us need to know will be available. Please keep it up.
From what I found, the original basis of the head was designed by Robert Yates for the Ford NASCAR team. Yates was forced to share the data of his new head with all the teams involved in NASCAR and that is the basis for the LS head and piston. If you read the documentation of the development of the Yates head, it sounds like an exact description of the early LS head. Obviously some things were changed and refined prior to release. "When Yates first introduced his cylinder head in 1991, it created a sudden jump in horsepower for his Fords and soon, the other Ford engine builders who gained access to it through the Special Vehicle Operations. Yates himself reluctantly shared his concept, but had little choice because NASCAR mandated for 1992 an “out of the box” cylinder head for each manufacturer to help cut costs by not allowing any modifications. If Yates wanted to continue using his own head, he would have to share it as the cylinder head designated for use by all Ford teams. Preston Miller, the chief field engineer for SVO at the time, nominated the Yates head for NASCAR’s new “out of the box” rule versus those of Roush, Junior Johnson or Ernie Elliott. The Yates cylinder head was radically different. It had smaller valves and a smaller cylinder chamber which used flat pistons versus the domed versions. The key concept was getting the air and fuel mixture to combine and ignite more efficiently." Quote from Robert Yates: "I was chasing the idea of how to make an engine work efficiently with a flat-top piston, because it just took forever to make a domed piston. We didn’t have CNC machinery back then, and you had to do everything by hand. It was just aggravating because it took up so much time. We had a flat-top piston and were working on the cylinder head to work with it. I was working on the flow bench one night and the intake port was going right where the pushrod needed to be, so I ran a tube through the port for the pushrod to go through, which was common to do back then. I noticed that it was causing the air and fuel to separate right there were it hits the tube. I thought, “I’ve got to get rid of that.” So I made a set of heads with straight walls and nothing in the way. I ended up putting an engine with the new heads on the dyno about 11 o’clock one night and made a pull. And just listening to it I thought something was wrong, my dyno is messed up. I’m making 700 horsepower and back then 650 or 660 was the average." The 351W and the LS share a lot of geometry. Does that mean something was "stolen"? Doesn't seem so to me, but Ford guys like to cry about it and use it as a reason to forcefully take claim to one of the greatest pushrod V8's ever made.
Also along the lines of the German V8 they always seem to be all forged internals I have a 99 E430 Mercedes and I run 150 shot of nitrous has 200k on it and it's pretty badass would love to see one of those Motors running boost with some ring Gap😳
RIP John Lingenfelter. Master of the TPI The SuperRam was one of the best TPI intakes for the street, IMO. The StealthRam was better IMO, even though getting it set up right was a pain (I had one). The MiniRam was the better intake for higher RPM. MiniRam accepts the 1206 and 1207 intake gasket, IIRC. The StealthRam only accepted the 1205 intake gasket unless you ported matched it to a 1206.
If Gale Banks says it’s true...he would provide the data and damn near probably do a 12 part series to show the proof and have the patent to go with it. I trust: Mama Gale Banks Jesus John Elway
Damn I’m sitting there watching your SBF videos and missed the live stream. Do a side by side cam test on a SBF 347!! See what the differences really are!!!
The 5.0 was Cleveland based on the Big Block Lincoln Mercury Truck Flathead 317 of 1951, the Rivolia Y block of 1953, and Ford had that 4.375 transfer line dimension locked in by 1951. Chev copied Ford in 1955. The 62 Fairlane 221 just removed another 150 pounds of Deap Skirt Y block to become the Short Skirt SBF. Who stole what from whom First. Its a Fred Flintstone Multicolored chockolate heist Pebbles, they took it from somewhere Barney. Oooh, Here Ford...have some of mine. Gee thanks Barney.
I’ve been told it was common for engine design/development engineers To work for different companies they’ll do a project for mopar finish then go knock one out for Ford then move to Chevy couple of year after..... So it’s easy to see certain design kews from one engine to another
You can rest assured that it's true. I worked at GM Powertrain, and I knew engineers and designers there that had worked for Ford and Chrysler. If you spend a 30 year career in the auto industry, you get around. I also worked at Eaton Corp before GM, and I did projects with GM, Ford, and Chrysler. There is a lot that suppliers bring to the party that effects the products that car manufacturers sell. Also, every manufacturer has a competitive benchmarking operation, so everybody knows what everybody else is making. They even test other manufacturers' engines, and know how they perform.
The whole Canted Valve 385, 335 and Boss 302 and 429 team, Stirret, Macara, were ex Chevrolet. The four engines were Chevy headed Polyspheric Chrysler LAs in concept, with Mark IV Mystery Motor port spacings...a L Polyspheric that slepts with a Hemi. What was different was hiw Ford spun the intake and exhaust ports to short side the runners, and how they flattened the valve angle...almost Heron headed for the 385, 335, Boss 302. The 4th, the Boss 429, was really unique. GM Powetrain used 40 years of advanced tech and staff payed for in retainer. Its the best co-operative design ever. The knock sensors, tappet chest and intake porting with the wedge head...a marvel of great committee work. The proprietry rules werent broken...GM Powertrain opened its wallet and used race technicians, 3D imageing and team work to make the LS a wonder if our time. Props to them.A Ford guy said that...Me!
Naa on stealing it from Ford. The LS was stolen from or copied the big Cadillac V8's. Just look at the valve cover, early closed chamber 472/500 heads, same. Same amount of head bolts. This is common knowledge within us from the engine rebuilding industry! FFS the alternator tensioner bolt is the exact same. The LS is just a modernized mini 500 Cad..... OK just to be clear, this is total sarcasm just to be clear. But the rounded valve cover shape is similar. More likely Ford copied the LS with their new pushrod V8 truck engine....lol
LS fox swaps are sex! LMAO! Back in my Ford days before I converted to SBC, I loved the Fox body Stangs! My dad had an 83 Mustang 5.0 GL (basically an LX). He gave it to me in 1993 and I promptly blew it up, lol! I wish I kept that car. An LS would be in it now. Super light and HP/TQ = FAST CAR! LOL
Can you imagine what he would be accomplishing now. Big cam cores, faster ecu's, tall deck raised cam blocks. Plastic intakes for the lt1 and gen1 sbc stuff.
@@richardholdener1727 im building a stroker 351 /393 with a high ram intake and sniper EFI with twin 88 mm turbos im thinking it should be a decent combo but will see once its up n running thanks for your imput
really hate to correct you because all your videos and your data it's always awesome but at 24:30 you're wrong gillbanks actually slowed the speed of the blower down and it gained a lot of power he did not speed it up when he slowed it down there is less parasitic loss from turning the blower and the Turbo was supplying all of the air the supercharger basically was just getting in the way. Hate to correct you that hurt a little laugh out loud but just never want you to put out false information
yeah it was kind of fun 😜 it's just an all your videos that's the only time I ever thought oh my goodness he could possibly be wrong. So now I only believe 99.98% of what you said lol....
The dude was convicted of felony fraud in 1996 after failure to prove his engine worked.. local state courts do not do that to the little guy unless he swindle the investors and made fraudulent claims to entice them to invest.. check your facts bro.
@@b.c4066 were can I find that info. This is news to me. What state,county. He did prove the engine worked. He raised money for the kit to convert any engine to water. He also got patents from countries around the world. Which he had to prove worked. I bet you dont know the city or state or have any links. It would be very helpful if you did.
I did find the law suite, I as amazed to see that. There were many many many lawsuits that were brought up against him. His car was reached by 3 separate "specialist", this is very interesting to me. I will research more. Lol.
@@b.c4066 Meyer showed off his brand new hydrogen powered car and made demonstrations around the United States. Some of the people who saw his advanced contraption were Professor Michael Laughton, who was the Dean of Engineering at Mary College in London, Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin who was a former controller of the British Navy, and Dr Keith Hindley, a UK research chemist. Everyone who saw the car were amazed at how innovative and revolutionary the entire concept was. They all agreed that Meyer’s fuel cell could turn water into hydrogen fuel with electrolysis, and turns out, produced far more hydrogen than estimated calculations. Meyer claimed that his invention did what the board of sciences thought was absolutely impossible, turning casual tap water into hydrogen fuel and drive his hydrogen powered car cross country with only 75 liters of water. If you look at who the "experts" were, you will find they were some of the smartest people in their field. They all agreed, it did what Stan said. So why the lawsuit? Big oil? Big auto makers? Global disruption of the economy? Arab influences? Hmmmm.
The realtuners radio boys said you are the worst person to get testing results from because you are paid by the manufacturers of the products you test....so it is cool to here you clear that up because now I know that the realtuners radio blokes were making assumptions and really did not know. In this case anyway cos they do put some great info out on that show however in your case they are obviously wrong.
So tell me, you conspiracy nuts: what is the same between Ford and LS besides exhaust port layout? Why would GM "steal" an engine design from the early '60's?? That's just whacko! Besides,who had individual stud mounted rocker arms first? GM in 1955, Ford in 1962! (But that rocker design existed long before 1955!
Or he could buy an L8T crank from a GM dealer for about $650, and use it for various in-betweener stroker builds. But a Big Bang L8T engine would easily surpass the 6.0L Big Bangs. Katech has the new LTK heads that easily outflow GM's Gen V heads.
it still has the same cast pistons and powdered-metal rods, right? It has Gen V heads, but we put good heads on the Gen IV motor. Wonder if it could come close with DI?
@@richardholdener1727 The new iron-block 6.6L truck engine that has a 6.2L bore, but 98 mm stroke forged steel crank. It replaced the 6.0L in HD trucks. It has Gen V rods with the keystoned small end. Piston cooling nozzles. Direct injection, but for max big-bang use, port injection would probably be better for handling that much fuel. The thing is, the engine is designed for higher firing pressure. It's been in production for about a year, so maybe you can get lucky and pick one up in a junkyard.
Hi Richard. Thanks again for all you do. Looking for a turbo magnum v8 build and also a turbo 383 mopar (the factory big bore stroker and chrysler built 3M of them!). Learning lots about boost😄
The LS uses a square head bolt pattern, which isn't unique to the Windsor. It has the same firing order, of which there are only three possible for a dual plane V8, because GM found it's slightly kinder to the bearings. They "stole" the thrust bearing on cap #3 to fix rear main seals. The port orientation is the same, and is a result of the head bolts and pushrod location, like Richard says. Basically best practices for OHV engines at the time. The LT1 heads are based on the high value V6.
When in doubt, lean it out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree . Has anyone considered that good ideas migrate ? Take a Ford FE. Many Y blocks in the modern age are evolutionary center because they are like in some way. That doesn’t mean it was stolen. The Y design there are so many ways to do it. The Mods use it, ya da, because it’s better related to warranty issues. The FE head is genius for it’s day. The cheap stuff can have an iron intake. Their racing stuff can lose 100 lbs off the nose just by making half the head aluminum. It is evolution.
The biggest part of being educated is to accept that there are different opinions. You have to be open to new things.
Tell that to college kids, nowadays.
@@TwoLotus2 college isn't a place to expand minds, it's a place to program and limit free thought.
OPEN YOUR MIND ABOUT COLLEGE-IF YOU DIDN'T GO THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYONE THAT DID HAS LIMITED FREE THOUGHT
@@richardholdener1727 in most cases it's the teachers that create the issue. College should be for education, but in a college math class we received an extended political diatribe. Sad thing is that it seems to happen a lot.
Northstar in the future?
Can't wait for the 3800 and 4200 big bang test. Someone mentioned the 2jzed and comparison to the 4200, well just remember the Japanese always overengineer their automotive products. Even though the 2jzed has its limits too, I've heard that at round 1900hp they start to give up. The 2jzeds that you see making 2500hp are billet blocks.
Is a tunnel ram with a hat on e 85 na more powerful
some of these ads are an HOUR long!!!!!!!!!!!
an ad is 1 hour long?
The big problem seem to be that the marketing department is in control of a lot of stuff, and I guess the people that asks for all the wrong stuff and give them ideas. People that buy cams based on how loopy the idle is should be forced to run with blown head gaskets, if you ask me.
Big twins are great
We have all seen that companies pay to have "testing" done that is skewed in their favor. It happens in all walks of sales.
Yes there are some testing guys like you that do very fair tests and put the info out there for all of us. There are others that only care about money.
where have you seen that
Strange question
What is difference other than fuel rails.
Between TBSS intake and savanna van 2500? 4 bolt throttle body, basic structure the same
A TBSS SHOULD BE 4 BOLT TB
@@richardholdener1727 well my friend next time your at the scrap yard
2006- 2007 savanna 2500.
Can't send pics. Google it
Seen guys pass them off as TBSS intakes
Spot on! Most reputable companies will tell you what you don't need and steer you in the right direction.
I don't believe GM stole the ls design form Ford because they're center cam push rod engines. most Ford engines are overhead modular design. thank you for the work you do I have learned a lot
Six things. 1.Chevy moved uo from 9 inch deck to The 9.22 inch deck...as the Cleveland 351C and Essex 232. 2. Chev moved back to four bolt per bore head bolts, not Five. Just like Fords Cleveland. 3. Lifters moved up to 875 thou, JLF". (Just like Fords Cleveland). 4. The firing order moved to the Cleveland f/o JLF. 5. Chevy Moved back to wedge head...just like the Essex 90 232 and SVO 4.5 Cosworth~Brodix heads. 6. The port phasing is Windsor and Cleveland. Although it was Buicks Nail head and the alloy BOP 215 - Buick 300. But no conspiracy theory. Just co-incidence fellas. Ford guys get butt hurt when GM Powertrain make as much power as a quad cam Mod or Cleveland with less features.
Richard. I would not brag about modding a Chevy Sprint turbo. Love u man!
I'M ALL TURBO SPRINT-ALL THE TURBO TIME!
Those cars were killer. 97hp from less than a liter. How is that not amazing??!!
@@dustinjackson8646 it's just not amazing. A 1994 suzuki gsx750f katana was 98 hp and at 0.750 liters with a built in 6 speed sequential gear box. And internal starter, alternator. Oh and it weighed less than 100 pounds... That my friend is amazing
@@b.c4066 agreed. Amazing. But not many other CARS in 1987 had 97hp from a 998cc 3 cylinder!!
Cool, but not even close to amazing
How close are the Toyota 5.7 to the GM 5.7engines? I heard the blocks where close, but heads different
Not close at all. The deck height and bore spacing are both different.
Richard, I was having internet trouble and couldn’t respond in real time. The 1988 celica alltracs 3sgte engine is still in my garage taken apart. I bought everything I needed for a complete high boost build including pistons and rods but got discouraged when it came to the valve train design. The bucket and shim design is what stopped me from pursuing the build as I have heard there are issues when spinning the engine above 8k rpm. I’m starting to rethink my original plan of a K24 swap. I don’t know if I want to do all that fabrication. All I need for the 3sgte is cams for a complete build.
I have been building a baja bug for the desert and have had just about enough fabrication for awhile. I installed an sr20det in it and am almost done with the airbag suspension. So trying to fab everything needed for a Kswap into the celica seems daunting.
who makes cams?
@@richardholdener1727 hks, bc, and GSC whom I hadn’t heard of.
All those cams won’t fit my stock head. They only fit the gen 2 and newer. So I also bought another long block from an mr2 turbo. My build is actually a stroker using the 5s crank from a non turbo mr2 or Camry. Pistons are semi custom units from CP. The crank will have to be turned to accept the 3sgte rods which are off the shelf units. I could go on and on. How much time do you have?
Always wanted to ask if you ever tuned or know someone that ever messed with nitromethane and Hydrazine and what makes it so illegal for drag racing applications?
it is very unstable and has killed people
I have a 6.0 gmc motor and I just had a stage 2 sloppy cam put in..the guy got new pushrods..manleys 7.450 -7.500..when I picked it up he said that 2 of the new pushrod didn't fit...so he used 2 of the old ones...?? I am kinda nervous about this...should I be ????? He measured them he said..I dont want any weak spots....thank you.
THEY SHOULD ALL BE THE SAME UNLESS THE INSTALLED HEIGHT OF THE VALVES ARE DIFFERENT OR MOUNTING HEIGHT OF THE ROCKER (DOUBT CAM LOBES WOULD BE OFF THAT MUCH)
@@richardholdener1727 thanks...I hurd stock ones were weak to begin with and didn't want the 2 old ones to be a weak link..especially since I just spend 1500 on it I don't have...is this a normal thing ? Should I have someone look at it...I dont know...a ford guy did the cam..great guy,..but I hate to do all this work restoring my 68 chevy truck get the engine it and have any problems.........ugggg... thank you......
@@mikeh5168 @Mike H @Mike H hey Mike
sorry for your troubles regarding the pushrods... although none of that adds up....or the person that installed the cam either misspoke, perhaps making crap up?
For the clearance to be off that significantly would mean there is some sort of anomaly as in damage to bores etc.
If the rods were damaged maybe during shipping or what have you, obviously they should have been returned/replaced. Can't just go and stuff in the old one's.... depending on type of cam _ roller or flat tappet
peace
Would, could anyone tell me the pros and cons of a destroked 400 small block Chevy compared to a stroked 350. I built a 377 destroked 400 long time ago and it was one of the best running engines I have ever built. I never built a stroked 350... Thus my question and desire to know pros and cons of both..... Thanks!!!!!
THEY BOTH WORK WELL-THE BIGGER BORE ON THE 400 CAN HELP WITH HEAD FLOW.
@@richardholdener1727 Thanks Richard!!! I owned an automotive machine shop back in the 80's and built a lot of engines. That 377 was a high winding stout running machine!!!!!! I would like to build another one with some modern technology like heads, fuel injection, and good cam...
Well, it's folks like yourself that have held manufacturers to task, and lifted the veil of crap. Keep doing what you do Richard Holdener!
Would like to see the different bore to stroke configurations of the same CID put to rest once and for all.
Of course it would need to be a fair test so if you use a sbc 400 block with a sbc 307 crank and a sbc 307 with a sbc 400 crank, lastly a sbc 305 with a 4" stroke crank.
Use a sbc 350 for the standard numbers. Again so its fair, use sbc 305 Vortec heads all with the same static compression ratio so the smallest bore engine has a chance against the larger bore engines.
Maybe a couple different cam shafts in the mix and if you're up to it throw some boost in the mix? Make sure the same cams are used in all of them when comparing results.
I've heard that conspiracy theory about GM stealing the cylinder head design from Ford. It's not true. They just got away from the siamesed intake and exhaust ports for better air distribution. They definitely didn't take the raised runner and 15 degree valve angle idea from Ford. They took that idea from their race program. The bowtie heads were 18 degrees and they saw that thise engines ran more efficiently and didn't need as much spark advance of the SBC. And you could run more lift with less piston-to-valve clearance issues. The LS and Gen 5 engines are the best thing since sliced bread! Hence the reason I converted from the good ole SBC to the LS...
I keep seeing guys post on the Internet that LS heads will bolt to a Windsor block. Richard could do a 12 minute video showing if that's true or not.
its not a perfect fit-so it would take some doing-bore centers are slightly different-have not looked at pushrod/rocker situation
@@richardholdener1727 It's one of those myths I don't believe. Or dropping a Windsor head gasket on an LS block would show if locating dowels and water holes don't line up.
Sometimes the science drives things toward a logical design. Ever noticed all the SUV's look the same. All the sedans look like drips. I suppose they could make a modern adaptation of the Edsel so as not to copy the roller skates and drips.
So many variations of gm v8s out there going back to 1917 there is absolutely no reason to copy a sbf.....and if the ls was a copy of a windsor it would be a turd like a windsor.
I feel there is anti Mopar Small Block Conspiracy. The 360 with modified EngineQuest iron heads can flow 295 cfm. Suerly there is Ford Cleveland and LS power for a 6 liter combination with similar to FoMoCo and GM Powertrain head flow. The Wedge LA is not being focused on. Just my opinion. And the Cleveland 366 NASCAR tri power gave the 340 Six Pack its carbs. I really would like to see the 340 Six beat the Boss 351s 383 hp rating on the dyno. Can anyone see why the Mopar Small block 1966 to 1990 has been consipred against...the Magnum and Hemi are different and improved, but Mopar probably could have done More with Less like the LS. Thoughts?
CONSPIRED AGAINST? PLEASE SEE THE HEMI VIDS ON THE CHANNEL THAT NO ONE WATCHED-ALSO I AM LOOKING TO TEST THE MAGNUM 360 AND HAVE SAID TIME AND AGIN THAT I WANT TO TEST A REPLICA OF THE 6-PACK 340 (BUT YES-IT'S A CONSPIRACY!)
Lol.Thanks for the reply:-)
watch project farm. thats alot of testing proving claims wrong
My question was rod strength, not rod length on the H22. Any idea how durable the stock units are?
I HAVE NOT TESTED THOSE RODS-BUT I HAVE RUN 500 HP ON STOCK B-SERIES RODS SO I THINK THEY WILL BE FINE
Thank you, good sir.
Talking bout who's engine is what ?
Nobody bitchin about the Duramax being an Isuzu
Because it's not. The original one was collaboratively designed by Isuzu, and it is manufactured in a joint venture plant, but the new L5P design was developed entirely at GM Powertrain.
@@andyharman3022 iwas at gm training on that engine before it was released
Isuzu designed engine
With updated enhancements by gm power train
Guess you coughed up for one of those junks
@@timtaylor6147 No, I have two Cummins- powered Dodges. But I like the Duramax engine.
Redheaded stepchild of the car industry with the most real world information priceless
Co2 spray bar on the intercooler and also the killerchiller uses the AC system through the intercooler. Both work amazing. The co2 is cheap but needs refilled
Q-Jet on the LS please.
Not a bad idea Don!!! That would be awesome hearing that quadrajet cracking the secondaries open!
Back in the 80's, I was the Q-jet tuning king!!! I loved that I could make a Q-jet outperform a Holley!!!!! I don't even know what a Q-jet looks like now!!!!! lol!!!
Lol! Im a ford guy & I will somtimes joke about it but its a chevy engine. It shares some traits with ford but those traits are not exclusive with ford. It has the deep skirt block, ford & Chrysler have had engines that shared that trait. It was a good design. The LS has 10 bolt heads, ford used 10 bolt heads for yrs. It proved to be just fine but was looked down on by chevy guys forever. Now there hero engine uses 10 bolt heads. Ok, were over it. Bore spacing is very close to the ford small block. But if im not mistaken its not exact. I believe about .020 difference. Close enuf to use ford torque plates if boring. The LS has heads that flow rediculas amounts of air, fords clevlands heads flowed rediculas amounts of air. So chevy made a modern engine that is proving to be a excellent engine. It shares some good quality from other engines of the past that were on some fords. Its not a copy,, its not stolen. Its just a good engine like some of the fords were good engines.
Speaking of John Lingenfelter. I have a SBC Mercruiser tunnel ram port injected with appears to have a BBC Mercruiser top with a twin blade throttle blade throttle body that I got from John. I'm wondering if what it would be good for. I would like to send you pictures of it. Thanks for all the hard work on your videos.
Hydrogen powered engines....cohen's egg is awesome tho.
Gasoline is a hydrocarbon. The "hydro" in hydrocarbon is actually hydrogen. So nearly every car IS hydrogen powered right now!
Enough hydrogen in bore to point little fuel is needed. Fuel that is condensed and atamized before mixed with hydrogen, something along those lines... Lots of story's out there
Would love to see a side by side comparison between 331 and 347 Ford builds.
There is a mix of real product claims and false claims. If you are willing to search it out, today you can find information to gauge what claims are real and which are not. Many claims include fine print with the truth included. I find it easier to state the "problem" I am trying to solve and then finding the solution so, the advertising really doesn't impact me, but given my background, I also see advertising for what it is.
I figure by about this time 2 years from now Richard will have posted enough testing that everything 95% of us need to know will be available. Please keep it up.
From what I found, the original basis of the head was designed by Robert Yates for the Ford NASCAR team. Yates was forced to share the data of his new head with all the teams involved in NASCAR and that is the basis for the LS head and piston. If you read the documentation of the development of the Yates head, it sounds like an exact description of the early LS head. Obviously some things were changed and refined prior to release.
"When Yates first introduced his cylinder head in 1991, it created a sudden jump in horsepower for his Fords and soon, the other Ford engine builders who gained access to it through the Special Vehicle Operations. Yates himself reluctantly shared his concept, but had little choice because NASCAR mandated for 1992 an “out of the box” cylinder head for each manufacturer to help cut costs by not allowing any modifications.
If Yates wanted to continue using his own head, he would have to share it as the cylinder head designated for use by all Ford teams. Preston Miller, the chief field engineer for SVO at the time, nominated the Yates head for NASCAR’s new “out of the box” rule versus those of Roush, Junior Johnson or Ernie Elliott.
The Yates cylinder head was radically different. It had smaller valves and a smaller cylinder chamber which used flat pistons versus the domed versions. The key concept was getting the air and fuel mixture to combine and ignite more efficiently."
Quote from Robert Yates:
"I was chasing the idea of how to make an engine work efficiently with a flat-top piston, because it just took forever to make a domed piston. We didn’t have CNC machinery back then, and you had to do everything by hand. It was just aggravating because it took up so much time. We had a flat-top piston and were working on the cylinder head to work with it. I was working on the flow bench one night and the intake port was going right where the pushrod needed to be, so I ran a tube through the port for the pushrod to go through, which was common to do back then. I noticed that it was causing the air and fuel to separate right there were it hits the tube. I thought, “I’ve got to get rid of that.”
So I made a set of heads with straight walls and nothing in the way. I ended up putting an engine with the new heads on the dyno about 11 o’clock one night and made a pull. And just listening to it I thought something was wrong, my dyno is messed up. I’m making 700 horsepower and back then 650 or 660 was the average."
The 351W and the LS share a lot of geometry. Does that mean something was "stolen"? Doesn't seem so to me, but Ford guys like to cry about it and use it as a reason to forcefully take claim to one of the greatest pushrod V8's ever made.
THE YATES HEAD WAS AN OUT GROWTH OF THE CLEVELAND HEAD-WHICH WAS A COPY OF THE BBC HEAD-AND AROUND IT GOES
@@richardholdener1727 LOL. Love it. So you're saying Yates was lying about his motivation and thought process?
Also along the lines of the German V8 they always seem to be all forged internals I have a 99 E430 Mercedes and I run 150 shot of nitrous has 200k on it and it's pretty badass would love to see one of those Motors running boost with some ring Gap😳
FAST manifold will grow your hair back.
th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.vdDMNrq1spixJ2dMPhcWawHaJJ?pid=Api&rs=1
😳
fun fact, the LS is more similar to the cadillac big block than it is to the ford windsor
The manliest fru fru drink! You rock man!
RIP John Lingenfelter. Master of the TPI The SuperRam was one of the best TPI intakes for the street, IMO. The StealthRam was better IMO, even though getting it set up right was a pain (I had one). The MiniRam was the better intake for higher RPM. MiniRam accepts the 1206 and 1207 intake gasket, IIRC. The StealthRam only accepted the 1205 intake gasket unless you ported matched it to a 1206.
I'm with you...dont care. I'm just trying to learn and make my build the best I can.
If Gale Banks says it’s true...he would provide the data and damn near probably do a 12 part series to show the proof and have the patent to go with it.
I trust:
Mama
Gale Banks
Jesus
John Elway
Jesus, mama, Gale banks, Dan Marino.🎱,🃏,🩺,Jay, Animal mother, rafter man,🏀,tt,bad bush.1000ys stare. War face. 👍🇺🇲🦅🌎⚓👹🐕⚔🎯.
Damn I’m sitting there watching your SBF videos and missed the live stream. Do a side by side cam test on a SBF 347!! See what the differences really are!!!
Would like to see a lq9 vs a stroked 5.3 to a 6.0
Personally I don't believe anyone unless you say it's true
don't believe me either!
408 SBC Vs 408 Ls ???
Long-debated by the websperts... Symmetrical ports is all. LS 4.4 vs SBF 4.38 spacing that goes back to 1955.
But, the Godzilla has some LT1 similarities
The 5.0 was Cleveland based on the Big Block Lincoln Mercury Truck Flathead 317 of 1951, the Rivolia Y block of 1953, and Ford had that 4.375 transfer line dimension locked in by 1951. Chev copied Ford in 1955. The 62 Fairlane 221 just removed another 150 pounds of Deap Skirt Y block to become the Short Skirt SBF. Who stole what from whom First. Its a Fred Flintstone Multicolored chockolate heist Pebbles, they took it from somewhere Barney. Oooh, Here Ford...have some of mine. Gee thanks Barney.
Lets just say everybody wants to make a buck and they are sharing very optimistic numbers
So many ads I can't even watch this.
Daimler taking the GENIII Viper chassis for their Gullwing SLS
Should try a dodge 4.7 with boost I jus got a jeep with a 4.7
I’ve been told it was common for engine design/development engineers
To work for different companies they’ll do a project for mopar finish then go knock one out for Ford then move to Chevy couple of year after.....
So it’s easy to see certain design kews from one engine to another
You can rest assured that it's true. I worked at GM Powertrain, and I knew engineers and designers there that had worked for Ford and Chrysler. If you spend a 30 year career in the auto industry, you get around. I also worked at Eaton Corp before GM, and I did projects with GM, Ford, and Chrysler. There is a lot that suppliers bring to the party that effects the products that car manufacturers sell. Also, every manufacturer has a competitive benchmarking operation, so everybody knows what everybody else is making. They even test other manufacturers' engines, and know how they perform.
The whole Canted Valve 385, 335 and Boss 302 and 429 team, Stirret, Macara, were ex Chevrolet. The four engines were Chevy headed Polyspheric Chrysler LAs in concept, with Mark IV Mystery Motor port spacings...a L Polyspheric that slepts with a Hemi. What was different was hiw Ford spun the intake and exhaust ports to short side the runners, and how they flattened the valve angle...almost Heron headed for the 385, 335, Boss 302. The 4th, the Boss 429, was really unique. GM Powetrain used 40 years of advanced tech and staff payed for in retainer. Its the best co-operative design ever. The knock sensors, tappet chest and intake porting with the wedge head...a marvel of great committee work. The proprietry rules werent broken...GM Powertrain opened its wallet and used race technicians, 3D imageing and team work to make the LS a wonder if our time. Props to them.A Ford guy said that...Me!
Naa on stealing it from Ford. The LS was stolen from or copied the big Cadillac V8's. Just look at the valve cover, early closed chamber 472/500 heads, same. Same amount of head bolts. This is common knowledge within us from the engine rebuilding industry! FFS the alternator tensioner bolt is the exact same. The LS is just a modernized mini 500 Cad.....
OK just to be clear, this is total sarcasm just to be clear. But the rounded valve cover shape is similar.
More likely Ford copied the LS with their new pushrod V8 truck engine....lol
And please.. do a cam swap on the Godzilla, run na and boosted. Stock, then with a good cam.
LS fox swaps are sex! LMAO! Back in my Ford days before I converted to SBC, I loved the Fox body Stangs! My dad had an 83 Mustang 5.0 GL (basically an LX). He gave it to me in 1993 and I promptly blew it up, lol! I wish I kept that car. An LS would be in it now. Super light and HP/TQ = FAST CAR! LOL
John Lingenfelter. RIP. He is missed.
yes
Can you imagine what he would be accomplishing now. Big cam cores, faster ecu's, tall deck raised cam blocks. Plastic intakes for the lt1 and gen1 sbc stuff.
Richard have you done any research on holly's hi ram boosted with the sniper EFI 351 w ?
NOT YET BUT WE KNOW IT WORKS
@@richardholdener1727 im building a stroker 351 /393 with a high ram intake and sniper EFI with twin 88 mm turbos im thinking it should be a decent combo but will see once its up n running thanks for your imput
really hate to correct you because all your videos and your data it's always awesome but at 24:30 you're wrong gillbanks actually slowed the speed of the blower down and it gained a lot of power he did not speed it up when he slowed it down there is less parasitic loss from turning the blower and the Turbo was supplying all of the air the supercharger basically was just getting in the way. Hate to correct you that hurt a little laugh out loud but just never want you to put out false information
SEEMS LIKE YOU DIDN'T HATE IT THAT MUCH-The person who made the comment said he increased the speed-I just said it made sense to me
yeah it was kind of fun 😜 it's just an all your videos that's the only time I ever thought oh my goodness he could possibly be wrong. So now I only believe 99.98% of what you said lol....
Dude you have to admit you are cool, if you don't, it makes the rest of us even more uncool...
Here's a conspiracy that I haven't seen posted yet. Stan Meyers water powered Buggy.
He was murdered!!! Their was 2 different death certificates each saying something different.
The dude was convicted of felony fraud in 1996 after failure to prove his engine worked.. local state courts do not do that to the little guy unless he swindle the investors and made fraudulent claims to entice them to invest.. check your facts bro.
@@b.c4066 were can I find that info. This is news to me. What state,county. He did prove the engine worked. He raised money for the kit to convert any engine to water. He also got patents from countries around the world. Which he had to prove worked. I bet you dont know the city or state or have any links. It would be very helpful if you did.
I did find the law suite, I as amazed to see that. There were many many many lawsuits that were brought up against him. His car was reached by 3 separate "specialist", this is very interesting to me. I will research more. Lol.
@@b.c4066 Meyer showed off his brand new hydrogen powered car and made demonstrations around the United States. Some of the people who saw his advanced contraption were Professor Michael Laughton, who was the Dean of Engineering at Mary College in London, Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin who was a former controller of the British Navy, and Dr Keith Hindley, a UK research chemist.
Everyone who saw the car were amazed at how innovative and revolutionary the entire concept was. They all agreed that Meyer’s fuel cell could turn water into hydrogen fuel with electrolysis, and turns out, produced far more hydrogen than estimated calculations. Meyer claimed that his invention did what the board of sciences thought was absolutely impossible, turning casual tap water into hydrogen fuel and drive his hydrogen powered car cross country with only 75 liters of water.
If you look at who the "experts" were, you will find they were some of the smartest people in their field. They all agreed, it did what Stan said. So why the lawsuit? Big oil? Big auto makers? Global disruption of the economy? Arab influences? Hmmmm.
The realtuners radio boys said you are the worst person to get testing results from because you are paid by the manufacturers of the products you test....so it is cool to here you clear that up because now I know that the realtuners radio blokes were making assumptions and really did not know. In this case anyway cos they do put some great info out on that show however in your case they are obviously wrong.
So tell me, you conspiracy nuts: what is the same between Ford and LS besides exhaust port layout? Why would GM "steal" an engine design from the early '60's?? That's just whacko! Besides,who had individual stud mounted rocker arms first? GM in 1955, Ford in 1962! (But that rocker design existed long before 1955!
here we go
You should convince Westech to buy a L8T test motor, that would be awesome.
Or he could buy an L8T crank from a GM dealer for about $650, and use it for various in-betweener stroker builds. But a Big Bang L8T engine would easily surpass the 6.0L Big Bangs. Katech has the new LTK heads that easily outflow GM's Gen V heads.
what is an L8T
it still has the same cast pistons and powdered-metal rods, right? It has Gen V heads, but we put good heads on the Gen IV motor. Wonder if it could come close with DI?
@@richardholdener1727 The new iron-block 6.6L truck engine that has a 6.2L bore, but 98 mm stroke forged steel crank. It replaced the 6.0L in HD trucks. It has Gen V rods with the keystoned small end. Piston cooling nozzles. Direct injection, but for max big-bang use, port injection would probably be better for handling that much fuel. The thing is, the engine is designed for higher firing pressure. It's been in production for about a year, so maybe you can get lucky and pick one up in a junkyard.
L8T= swap engine of the future. I’ll bet 600 hp would be very attainable in cam only form.
I mean these were the guys that said a $400 chinese turbo kit worked alright c'mon lol
it was $699! and my $163 ebay DNA turbo has been hanging on for 5-6 years now
fake news