Poor Man's LS2... for five grand...

[zangiefisgod]

OK- so I've been doing some research on a SBC build in the $5k-ish range that will yield 400+whp. Some say LS1, some say LQ4/9, some say just muster up the extra cash and buy the LS2 - let's get a thread going on SBC builds that match/exceed these power numbers and were built on a budget.

[BRAAP]

Great topic of discussion!

 

My $.02

Yes, LS2 performance in a Gen I SBC can be had and I'm not just talking peak numbers either, but equivalent or greater power throughout the useable RPM range, the SBC can and does compete with the LS series of GM power plants!

 

First off, most you already know that I am bent on the LS engines, even sold off all my SBC goodies and have gone nuts with the LSx obsession. As such my bias is always towards the LSx. Architecture of the LSx is pure genius, all gasket surfaces are single plane, intake does not transfer coolant, roller cam design, gorgeous chambers and ports, used parts are very affordable and acceptable for mild performance, etc. Realistically, per the premise of this thread I have to put my bias aside, Yes, LS2 performance can be had from a GEN I SBC in mild to hot street applications!

 

Can it be done within a budget that would make the general car guy sway towards the traditional SBC vs the LSx?

The answer to that lies in the resourcefulness of the guy brainstorming, researching, sourcing parts, new and used, etc.

 

SBC!

Has been around since the dawn of time, (1955), been built in soooo many configurations it would make even a regular car guy dizzy let alone SBC aficionados. With so much aftermarket support, dyno testing and building in all forms of racing from bubba in his swamp buggy to the Indianapolis 500, this engine will go down in history as THE most successful high-performance power plant in the world, PERIOD! So many iterations, variations, abominations of this powerplants have been designed, built, and ran successfully and unsuccessfully that with the publicly available info regarding what does and does not work it’s almost difficult to build an SBC that doesn’t perform! The traditional SBC is a choice not to be overlooked, even in today’s quad cam, mutli-valve world the SBC can and still sets the world on its ear in the high performance arena!

Down sides? Its technology is dated, mid 20th century to be exact!

 

 

LSx!

Enter the 21 century, you’d think that with 100 years of internal combustion technology in the record books, the current crop of modern production engines would far exceed the power and efficiency of internal combustion power plants designed and manufactured some half a century earlier... Think again! Yes the current crop of power plants offer superior efficiency in terms of fuel, thermal, and to an even lesser degree, volumetric but only barely, and even that is seems to be debatable!

 

Enter the Popular Hot Rodding/JEGS Engine masters build off! What the heck could a car guy magazine/parts suppliers sponsored engine-build-off have to do with this discussion? Keep reading and I’ll tell you or go out buy the February 2010 issue of Popular Hot Rodding on the shelves now, (Dec 28 ’09) and read for yourself! Personally I was surprised to see such old technology successfully competing in such an event that now allows the modern power-plants such as the LSx, modern Hemi, Ford Mod, etc! Lots of vintage Mopar HEMI’s, old school Ford Cammer, even a Ford “Y” block competed!

 

When the engine masters build off started, it was limited to the traditional V-8 power plants, induction limited to a single 4 bbl carb, all engines tested on the same Dyno. What makes this challenge so cool is how the winner is determined! “Average” power produced over a broad specified RPM range and that figure is divided by the engines displacement leveling the playing field displacement wise. Granted, making huge PEAK numbers is important and for some is relatively easy but to maintain those huge umbers over a large RPM window and NOW you have an engine building competition, one that showcases not only a particular engine designs ability to be flexible in making good usable broad power but also an engine builders connection to all things internal combustion related and what works most efficiently under such a broad RPM range! Previous years this average was taken from 2500 RPM to 6500 RPM! This year that changed to 3000-7000 RPM and these new rules also diversified induction, i.e. induction is OPEN! ITB’s, Dual quad tunnel rams, EFI, etc is all legal and these new rules also opened up the competition to the modern V-8s, i.e. LSx, new Mopar Hemi, and Ford Mod engines! (intersingly, only one Ford Mod, NO modern Hemis, yet 4 of the push rod LSx’s entered!?)

 

2009 Engine Masters rules;

http://krang.popularhotrodding.com/enginemasters/challenge/0901em_official_rules_9_24_09.pdf

 

Traditional wisdom says the modern engines should dominate a competition geared towards power production over a broad RPM range, reality is/was that wasn’t the case! First place went to a Small Block Ford Clevend, an LSx took 2nd! The other LSx’s qualified further down the list, behind small and big block Chevy's, Vintage Chrysler Hemi’s, Ford BOSS 429,s and a BOSS 302, etc.

 

In short, yes a traditional Small Block Chevy can be built to produce as much if not more useable power under a broad street useable RPM range vs the LS2. The real question is, is the builder resourceful enough at matching parts, scrounging and acquiring those parts needed to do so with less money than Joe Blow would spend keeping a sharp eye on eBay for his ready to run LS2, and can that be done more than once? (I believe yes, it can be done! What makes the SBC even more attractive here is how easily and readily it fits the S-30/S-130 chassis)

 

So lets see your SBC builds that would give an LS2 or LS2-clone, (comparably built LQ4/9) a run on the dyno within a useable RPM range, for the same or less $$$$...

[zangiefisgod]

So I jumped over to ls1tech.com to ask those fellas the same question. It became quite apparent that a stock-block LQ9 or LS1 can easily lay down 400+whp with correct heads, cam, exhaust and tune setup:

 

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-internal-engine/1223479-poor-mans-ls2-five-grand.html

 

Now the question: is an LS1 a better starting platform or LQ9? The LS1 seems to have enough stock block/head potential to reach those power numbers, however the LQ9 boasts a .3 liter displacement advantage.

 

Anyone care to comment?

[Slammed68]

So I jumped over to ls1tech.com to ask those fellas the same question. It became quite apparent that a stock-block LQ9 or LS1 can easily lay down 400+whp with correct heads, cam, exhaust and tune setup:

 

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-internal-engine/1223479-poor-mans-ls2-five-grand.html

 

Now the question: is an LS1 a better starting platform or LQ9? The LS1 seems to have enough stock block/head potential to reach those power numbers, however the LQ9 boasts a .3 liter displacement advantage.

 

Anyone care to comment?

 

LQ4 is the way to go if youre looking to get the biggest bang from your buck IMO, it worked very swell for me, and another positive - I am turboing my car this winter, and with the stock 6.0 heads and rod bolts, its boost ready

[zangiefisgod]

LQ4 is the way to go if youre looking to get the biggest bang from your buck IMO, it worked very swell for me, and another positive - I am turboing my car this winter, and with the stock 6.0 heads and rod bolts, its boost ready

 

Ah ha, the all mighty metal snail... yeah, those stock 71cc chambers are very boost friendly! Are you going with a twin setup or single?

[Cable]

The 317 aluminum heads found on the LQ4/LQ9 are far superior to any stock LS1 head (basically a LS6/LS2 head w/larger chambers), plus the larger bore of the 6.0 over the LS1 is better for valve unshrouding too.

[zangiefisgod]

The 317 aluminum heads found on the LQ4/LQ9 are far superior to any stock LS1 head (basically a LS6/LS2 head w/larger chambers), plus the larger bore of the 6.0 over the LS1 is better for valve unshrouding too.

 

I just took a look into comparing the 317 heads with the L92's:

 

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iv-internal-engine/1046983-lq9-lq4-317-l92-heads-2.html

 

If I stay with the 317 heads, what would be the ideal intake & cam setup?

[Cable]

I just took a look into comparing the 317 heads with the L92's:

 

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iv-internal-engine/1046983-lq9-lq4-317-l92-heads-2.html

 

If I stay with the 317 heads, what would be the ideal intake & cam setup?

 

I am sure 'ideal' will vary from person to person. It all depends on your goals and primary purpose(s) for the car.

 

For example, I think my cam is ideal for my 6.0 (see sig). I don't daily-drive the car (but I could if I so desired). As far as my 'ideal' intake I would lean toward the new Edelbrock Pro-Flo XT manifold, but most guys (especially S30 guys wanting to retain the stock flat hood) would prob favor the GM LS6 intake manifold or maybe even a FAST intake manifold.

 

Right now I am still running the stock truck intake and apart from being ugly as sin, it gets the job done.

[EvilC]

I am sure when I get my car retuned and dyno'd, I will put down 400rwhp.

 

Last year the car put down 388rwhp and since then I have done the ud pulley and added a ported F.A.S.T intake and TB. There has been no head work done yet and I still have the block hugger headers that most use from JTR. My motor: Late built 2002 Camaro LS1 with a small cam

[zangiefisgod]

I am sure 'ideal' will vary from person to person. It all depends on your goals and primary purpose(s) for the car.

 

For example, I think my cam is ideal for my 6.0 (see sig). I don't daily-drive the car (but I could if I so desired). As far as my 'ideal' intake I would lean toward the new Edelbrock Pro-Flo XT manifold, but most guys (especially S30 guys wanting to retain the stock flat hood) would prob favor the GM LS6 intake manifold or maybe even a FAST intake manifold.

 

Right now I am still running the stock truck intake and apart from being ugly as sin, it gets the job done.

 

By 'ideal' I meant that I want as much bang for my buck as possible without PTV clearance issues. Hood clearance is also a consideration, but not unless the manifold is significantly taller than OEM. The car will see roughly 1-2k miles per year and will be setup for 'street' use.

 

It would be great if LQ4/9 guys could chime in with something like, "I have an LQ4, with stock heads, an 'X' cam and 'Y' intake and made 'Z' rwhp."

[janaka]

I'm going to vote for the LS1 as well.

I'm running a tiny cam (224/224: .567" lift) on stock 241 heads with a FAST intake and TB, JTR huggers and single 3" exhuast. I should be at or near the 400rwhp with a new dyno. Trapping 120 as the sig says. Knocks down mid 20's MPG as well with the 6spd tranny.

[Cable]

By 'ideal' I meant that I want as much bang for my buck as possible without PTV clearance issues. Hood clearance is also a consideration, but not unless the manifold is significantly taller than OEM. The car will see roughly 1-2k miles per year and will be setup for 'street' use.

 

It would be great if LQ4/9 guys could chime in with something like, "I have an LQ4, with stock heads, an 'X' cam and 'Y' intake and made 'Z' rwhp."

 

There are plenty of cams that you can run that are (imo) boarder line too wild for anything driven on the street besides to the local cruise spot. This is a classic example of bigger isn't always better.

 

Engine size also plays a role in what cam is best suited for you 'ideal' setup, the same cam will be milder in a 6.0 vs a 5.7 LS1.

 

The Edelbrock Pro-Flo intake manifold is VERY tall, so tall that I worry it wouldn't clear my 4" cowl on my hood.

 

Sorry I don't have actual dyno numbers for you. The primary reason I haven't bothered is dyno numbers don't mean squat to me other than bragging rights. But just to be clear, I am sure others have their car(s) dyno'd for reasons other than bragging rights. My car has a 'canned' tune, it runs strong, its not a daily driver nor a race car, so the 'canned' tune is good enough for me.

 

As far as us LQx guys chiming in with x combo making y rwhp, good luck as I don't think there are more than a few of us on Hybridz. However, there are more than a few LS1 guys with combos and dyno numbers on Hybridz, that should at least give you a good idea just with a slightly smaller motor.

 

If you search over at LS1Tech.com I am sure you'll find hundreds of LQx combos with their dyno numbers to help you out.

[zangiefisgod]

There are plenty of cams that you can run that are (imo) boarder line too wild for anything driven on the street besides to the local cruise spot. This is a classic example of bigger isn't always better.

 

Engine size also plays a role in what cam is best suited for you 'ideal' setup, the same cam will be milder in a 6.0 vs a 5.7 LS1.

 

The Edelbrock Pro-Flo intake manifold is VERY tall, so tall that I worry it wouldn't clear my 4" cowl on my hood.

 

Sorry I don't have actual dyno numbers for you. The primary reason I haven't bothered is dyno numbers don't mean squat to me other than bragging rights. But just to be clear, I am sure others have their car(s) dyno'd for reasons other than bragging rights. My car has a 'canned' tune, it runs strong, its not a daily driver nor a race car, so the 'canned' tune is good enough for me.

 

As far as us LQx guys chiming in with x combo making y rwhp, good luck as I don't think there are more than a few of us on Hybridz. However, there are more than a few LS1 guys with combos and dyno numbers on Hybridz, that should at least give you a good idea just with a slightly smaller motor.

 

If you search over at LS1Tech.com I am sure you'll find hundreds of LQx combos with their dyno numbers to help you out.

 

 

K bud, thanks for your $.02

[rags]

Seems to me you are looking to see which motor will give you the best bang for the buck for a 5 grand outlay. Well that depends on what you are spending on the donor motor you start with. Both are very capable of putting down 400whp. My LS1 with 228 cam (there are much better cams) 5.3 heads, FAST manifold and blockhuggers through a single exhaust put down 408 whp without an aggressive tune.

 

My advice is to shop for the least expensive motor you can find and go from there. You won't be disappointed with either motor.

 

Joe

Edited January 8, 2010 by rags
spelling

[BRAAP]

Seems to me you are looking to see which motor will give you the best bang for the buck for a 5 grand outlay. Well that depends on what you are spending on the donor motor you start with. Both are very capable of putting down 400whp. My LS1 with 228 cam (there are much better cams) 5.3 heads, FAST manifold and blockhuggers through a single exhaust put down 408 whp without an aggressive tune.

 

My advice is to shop for the least expensive motor you can find and go from there. You won't be disappointed with either motor.

 

Joe

 

Exactly! Keeping an open mind and not letting the bent towards the LSx sway you, (that is my bias as well, but keeping an open mind means just that), I as the other guys that posted are biased towards the LSx.

 

Realistically, within the established $5000 budget and 400ish WHP power goal you established, here in 2010, BOTH can and will deliver! What separates the ideal route for YOU to take right now is how resourceful you are regarding locating the power-plant core from which to build that power from and the necessary parts to meet that goal! For every LSx claim that posts 400+ WHP in this thread, you can undoubtedly find 2 traditional SBC builds at the same measured wheel power level within similar "as running" budgets, mainly because it has been around since 1955 and it has that many more years of development behind it. The Engine-Masters challenge is a premier example of this! Not just peak power, but "average" power, (power under the curve), per Cubic Inch Displacement over a broad RPM range, (again, not just peak figures), which would naturally favor the more modern design such as the LSx and especially the OHC variants like the Ford Mod motors and modern Chrysler HEMI, and even with several LSx entries, the traditional small block still reigned supreme in “power under the curve”! One LSx placed in the top 4, the other LSx's were beat out by small block Chevys, Fords, Chryslers, Vintage Mopar Hemi's etc!

 

In short, don't let the bias towards the modern design sway you as the end all be all. Yes it “should” be superior, but in reality it is still proving itself, especially within a particular budget cap. I have no doubt with the same time and effort in development, the LSx and the other modern power-plants will show their superiority over the mid '50s designs. Those powerplants are still actually quite new and their supremacy at specific power levels, and key here is, “within a specific budget” is just starting to match that of the elder generations of powerplants. In 5-10 years I can see the LSx produce more power for less money than the traditional small block. Right now, in 2010?....

 

That being said, I am bent towards the LSx, even chose the LSx for my personal project, mostly because I already had a core LSx in my shop to start from, (the 5.3 from my wifes Suburban that ate its cam), and wanted to learn more about this new modern powerplant that has MANY attributes that are very attractive from a design and engine builders perspective.

 

6 one, half dozen the other. In 2010, with $5000 and 400ish WHP as the goal, this really boils down to your personal preference...

[MAG58]

I feel that everyone is always talking down on the dinosaurs of the performance world, the 'old' pushrod V8's, since they are 50 year old designs.

 

Something to ponder... These engines (be it SBC, SBF, SBM, BBC, ect.) have been raced basically non stop for the last 60 years, and have been pushed, VERY hard. Countless men who have probably forgot more about engine theory than I will ever hope to learn in a lifetime have devoted their entire lives to extracting the maximum power out of them. With today's modern head designs, cam lobe designs (Tony D will contest that all cam designs are archaic, probably true), and intake designs being designed on computer, run through CFD, and CNC ported, exactly how much of that archaic 50's technology is left? And since everybody and their grandmother has either owned or driven a car powered by these old dogs, parts are unethically cheap. Cant quite be said about LSx parts yet (relatively of course).

 

Nelson racing engines still produces SBC engines that produce more horsepower on good ol' 93 octane than any DOT approved set of rubbers could ever apply to the asphalt before retiring in a fury of smoke. Once could even contest that the 5 bolt/cylinder head attachment design of the ol' dinosaur is superior to that of the LS.

 

Is the LSx a good engine? Without a doubt.

Should the good ol' SBC be discarded on lack of technology? You tell yourself that the next time you lose to one.

 

Just my .02

[RTz]

Well said, Mag.

 

I'll also add, If the traditional SBC is obsolete, so is every Datsun ever built.

[Slammed68]

My LQ4 with 5.3 truck heads, with 317 valves in it, and a 228R (fairly small) cam, and JTR headers, made enough power to hang with a 10.89 @ 126 GTO from a roll.. I'd say if it hooked back then and my clutch wasn't fucked up allowing me tonot be able to shift, it would pull low 11's with only those 2 mods.. Car weight was 2700 with me in it..

 

Here is me running the same GTO with a 228R cam ONLY (stock 318 heads)... remember, this is a 10.89 @ 126 car!!! Fast!

 

 

If you threw L92 heads on a 6.0 (you cant put them on a LS1) along with a matching cam (L92's make MASSIVE power on smaller cams, big ones dont really work well with them) and a FAST intake, you would have a solid minimum 430+ rwhp car.. and you would have spent as much on that setup as you would've an LS2 only..

[Cable]

My LQ4 with 5.3 truck heads, with 317 valves in it, and a 228R (fairly small) cam, and JTR headers, made enough power to hang with a 10.89 @ 126 GTO from a roll.. I'd say if it hooked back then and my clutch wasn't fucked up allowing me tonot be able to shift, it would pull low 11's with only those 2 mods.. Car weight was 2700 with me in it..

 

Here is me running the same GTO with a 228R cam ONLY (stock 318 heads)... remember, this is a 10.89 @ 126 car!!! Fast!

 

 

How much do you think you picked up with the 5.3 heads?

[Michael]

A few points to throw into the mix....

 

1. Is the engine source from a donor vehicle or from a catalog? If you find a LS1 F-body, start with that. If you find a strong-running 350 in XYZ candidate, then start with that. The "better" engine ("there is no best", etc.), on a budget, is the one that is already the most complete, in the most complete state of tune. If all that you have is a Summit catalog and a checkbook, the choices would be skewed differently than if you already had a credible donor.

 

2. Consider not only the engine, but the whole swap... clutch/transmission, mounting system, and so forth. The older stuff is generally more straightforward to swap.

 

3. Consider the age of the swap donor. An early 2000's truck (for example) is probably in sufficiently decent shape that no internal engine work is required (unless you want to swap pistons for higher compression). A donor with a traditional 350 is probably either (1) worn out, (2) low-performance, or (3) both.

 

 

I started 10-11 years ago and was talked into a big block. The LSx world was too new back then, and junkyard finds were rare. I ended up with a semi-junkyard big block, and over the years have replaced everything except for the block, the crank, the rods and the damper. It's been a costly ride. If I were "doing it all over again", I would purchase a complete, running car with an LS1 (or something newer from the same family; maybe truck-based). That probably means settling for an automatic transmission, but that would be OK for a baseline.