The AI-generated cat pictures thread
07-07-2012, 04:59 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: DF-DUB
Posts: 625
Total Cats: 21
I wasnt saying the C2 Vette is being built badly, i was saying its overbuilt for the power level, as in that amount of power is doable with less. I assumed he was doing it for durability as it seem
s he likes to road race
On to examples.
Now no one is making 700hp on an LS1, but people are doing over 500hp quite a bit, with lots in the 470+whp range and a few over 500whp range.
Lets start with the lowly LS1.
Patrick G (LS1 Cam Guru) did 500WHP not 500hp on a stock cube LS1
DYNO
He used AFR heads but remember this is on a small bore motor which is bad mkay. It severly limits room for bigger valves (he ran a 2.02 intake) he did have some trickery on the heads (combustion chamber bores were opened to 4" instead or 3.9", but the runner stayed off the shelf AFR.
Others got close, i remember a guy in 06 that made 490wjhp on a MS3 cam (off the shelf) and some PRC 5.3 heads, those are budget parts from 6 years ago before all this low angle stuff and bad *** GM heads came out.
LS3 guys are doing over 510whp CAM ONLY, and LS2 guys are doing it heads and cam with a stock bottom end, once you go to a big bore setup (4.0 and up) your head selection really opens up to some of the awesome GM stuff, that gets even better with porting. last I heard people were getting over 400cfm out of worked LS7, and the L92 are pretty much a baby LS7 setup, and are like 600 bucks from GM
IIRC Sleeved GM block 427 cubes with Ported L92 or LS7 heads.
QuickZoh6 made 661whp na on modified LS7 block and ported LS7 heads.
603whp on a LS3 block and TFS 235 heads.
I'm a little rusty on the current LSx stuff, I was thinking the MAST heads were an aftermarket casting but it seems they do porting of GM heads so those are a good choice, but I think the aftermarket block and ITB setup is still overkill, given the results of the GM stuff. Im sure his setup will end up being nasty though
Everything I mentioned was WHP not HP.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 05:11 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,155
Total Cats: 406
Thats funny, I remember a while back when I posted the first coyote to make 500 hp at the wheels and all you feggits said "ooooh, big deal, people are making eighty thousand horsepowerz on LS engines with just a cold air intake" or some ----.
Cams + Bolt ons:
Blue line is GT intake manifold, Red line is Boss 302 manifold. Plus, its on a dyno dynamics not a bullshit dynojet.
The LS engines are great and all. Very light, compact, and doing a lot with an ancient design, but there is something to be said for a modern head design with variable valve timing.
Cams + Bolt ons:
Blue line is GT intake manifold, Red line is Boss 302 manifold. Plus, its on a dyno dynamics not a bullshit dynojet.
The LS engines are great and all. Very light, compact, and doing a lot with an ancient design, but there is something to be said for a modern head design with variable valve timing.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 05:21 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: DF-DUB
Posts: 625
Total Cats: 21
The LS3 is doing the same thing, plus its cheaper and easier to modify, unless the price on cams for a mod motor has gone WAY down, compared to the 4.6.
I like the 5.0 but I dont think its better than LSxs for power.
I like the 5.0 but I dont think its better than LSxs for power.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 05:27 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,155
Total Cats: 406
Naw, theyre expensive as hell, especially since you need 4 of them.
As far as bang-for-buck, there is no comparison. The LS engines have the same aftermarket support of the 80 years of similar engines that came before them.
The Coyote engine is brand new, the only thing that carries over from the 4.6 is the rods, but theyre still pretty expensive.
The point is, 500whp from a 5.0 with cams and 500whp from a 6.2 with a cam.
GM is staying traditional and relying on displacement, Ford is building a more European V8 relying on revs.
I will admit that the LS3 making 500hp will probably be faster than the Coyote making 500hp in the same chassis.
As far as bang-for-buck, there is no comparison. The LS engines have the same aftermarket support of the 80 years of similar engines that came before them.
The Coyote engine is brand new, the only thing that carries over from the 4.6 is the rods, but theyre still pretty expensive.
The point is, 500whp from a 5.0 with cams and 500whp from a 6.2 with a cam.
GM is staying traditional and relying on displacement, Ford is building a more European V8 relying on revs.
I will admit that the LS3 making 500hp will probably be faster than the Coyote making 500hp in the same chassis.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 05:38 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
What I consider funny is how long it took Ford to build a modular engine that was even worth talking about power wise, all the while GM continues to use a tried, true, and tested design. You call it an ancient design but I call it brilliance. Long as GM continues to use PUSHROD----------ER motors which make oodles of power AND pass emissions then I will continue to believe they're a FAR superior design.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 05:46 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: DF-DUB
Posts: 625
Total Cats: 21
Naw, theyre expensive as hell, especially since you need 4 of them.
As far as bang-for-buck, there is no comparison. The LS engines have the same aftermarket support of the 80 years of similar engines that came before them.
The Coyote engine is brand new, the only thing that carries over from the 4.6 is the rods, but theyre still pretty expensive.
The point is, 500whp from a 5.0 with cams and 500whp from a 6.2 with a cam.
GM is staying traditional and relying on displacement, Ford is building a more European V8 relying on revs.
I will admit that the LS3 making 500hp will probably be faster than the Coyote making 500hp in the same chassis.
As far as bang-for-buck, there is no comparison. The LS engines have the same aftermarket support of the 80 years of similar engines that came before them.
The Coyote engine is brand new, the only thing that carries over from the 4.6 is the rods, but theyre still pretty expensive.
The point is, 500whp from a 5.0 with cams and 500whp from a 6.2 with a cam.
GM is staying traditional and relying on displacement, Ford is building a more European V8 relying on revs.
I will admit that the LS3 making 500hp will probably be faster than the Coyote making 500hp in the same chassis.
Id rather have more displacement if I can keep weight and size similar. Coyote and LS3 both weigh around 430lbs, I dont have overall dimensions but Im assuming the Coyote is bigger due to the DOHC design.
When you have more displacement, it allows for more torque or a better power band, while maintaining a more relaxed state of tune aiding durability.
Plus you have to consider potential if you plan on modifying. If you have two motors and one is capable of a much bigger displacement and they both have parts available to take advantage of added displacement, the motor with more displacement will have more potential.
I like LSxs because of the guys doing crazy ---- on stock parts. 1000 hp on a stock bottom end 4.8 LSx. Yah.
Or the guys who are boosting stock LQ9s (6.0 truck motor) and making them last on the street at 700whp.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 05:55 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,155
Total Cats: 406
What I consider funny is how long it took Ford to build a modular engine that was even worth talking about power wise, all the while GM continues to use a tried, true, and tested design. You call it an ancient design but I call it brilliance. Long as GM continues to use PUSHROD----------ER motors which make oodles of power AND pass emissions then I will continue to believe they're a FAR superior design.
Also, you havent been paying attention. The old 4.6 was making roughly the same hp/liter as the LS3 did and it came in a lowly Mustang, not an $80k Corvette. Plus, the Koenigsegg CCR was making 800 hp with a supercharged Modular 4.6 back in '04. ***** more legit than Fae.
You cant call it superior just because it makes more power. Its a bigger engine.
A detroit diesel made more power than an LS3, and over 1000 ft/lbs of torque. I bet it would make an awesome engine for a racecar. You should put one in your Miata.
I hope your not getting at hp per liter because I would expect better from the MT.net. Its useless unless racing in a displacement limited class.
Id rather have more displacement if I can keep weight and size similar. Coyote and LS3 both weigh around 430lbs, I dont have overall dimensions but Im assuming the Coyote is bigger due to the DOHC design.
When you have more displacement, it allows for more torque or a better power band, while maintaining a more relaxed state of tune aiding durability.
Plus you have to consider potential if you plan on modifying. If you have two motors and one is capable of a much bigger displacement and they both have parts available to take advantage of added displacement, the motor with more displacement will have more potential.
I like LSxs because of the guys doing crazy ---- on stock parts. 1000 hp on a stock bottom end 4.8 LSx. Yah.
Or the guys who are boosting stock LQ9s (6.0 truck motor) and making them last on the street at 700whp.
Id rather have more displacement if I can keep weight and size similar. Coyote and LS3 both weigh around 430lbs, I dont have overall dimensions but Im assuming the Coyote is bigger due to the DOHC design.
When you have more displacement, it allows for more torque or a better power band, while maintaining a more relaxed state of tune aiding durability.
Plus you have to consider potential if you plan on modifying. If you have two motors and one is capable of a much bigger displacement and they both have parts available to take advantage of added displacement, the motor with more displacement will have more potential.
I like LSxs because of the guys doing crazy ---- on stock parts. 1000 hp on a stock bottom end 4.8 LSx. Yah.
Or the guys who are boosting stock LQ9s (6.0 truck motor) and making them last on the street at 700whp.
There is not argument about whats the best engine for the dollar to swap into some race car. That conversation is old and boring.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 06:06 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: DF-DUB
Posts: 625
Total Cats: 21
You're biased because of your learning disability.
Also, you havent been paying attention. The old 4.6 was making roughly the same hp/liter as the LS3 did and it came in a lowly Mustang, not an $80k Corvette. Plus, the Koenigsegg CCR was making 800 hp with a supercharged Modular 4.6 back in '04. ***** more legit than Fae.
You cant call it superior just because it makes more power. Its a bigger engine.
A detroit diesel made more power than an LS3, and over 1000 ft/lbs of torque. I bet it would make an awesome engine for a racecar. You should put one in your Miata.
I am talking about HP/Liter because Im not talking about choosing engines for a swap, Im talking about engineering.
There is not argument about whats the best engine for the dollar to swap into some race car. That conversation is old and boring.
Also, you havent been paying attention. The old 4.6 was making roughly the same hp/liter as the LS3 did and it came in a lowly Mustang, not an $80k Corvette. Plus, the Koenigsegg CCR was making 800 hp with a supercharged Modular 4.6 back in '04. ***** more legit than Fae.
You cant call it superior just because it makes more power. Its a bigger engine.
A detroit diesel made more power than an LS3, and over 1000 ft/lbs of torque. I bet it would make an awesome engine for a racecar. You should put one in your Miata.
I am talking about HP/Liter because Im not talking about choosing engines for a swap, Im talking about engineering.
There is not argument about whats the best engine for the dollar to swap into some race car. That conversation is old and boring.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 06:14 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,155
Total Cats: 406
Depends of the goals for a project.
If youre really concerned with size, then yes, you would be concerned. If youre concerned with performance you would go for the 4 valve per cylinder, pent-roof combustion chamber, DOHC with independent variable valve timing.
It would also probably be direct injected and turbocharged...
If Ford were to build a bigger engine with their heads or GM to build an engine with modern heads, it would be better is every imaginable way other than size.
The viewpoint of enthusiast is fixated on cost and availability. The reason so many people modify Hondas and Chevys is because of the massive aftermarket support. The reason they have massive aftermarket support is because the engines had potential to begin with.
If people keep doing the same thing, there is never innovation, never improvement.
I remember a time when everybody thought the LS engines were ---- because parts were expensive and you were better off building a SBC/BBC. Then, I remember when the bigger LS engines came out and everybody thought they were ---- because all the parts were for the older smaller ones.
If youre really concerned with size, then yes, you would be concerned. If youre concerned with performance you would go for the 4 valve per cylinder, pent-roof combustion chamber, DOHC with independent variable valve timing.
It would also probably be direct injected and turbocharged...
If Ford were to build a bigger engine with their heads or GM to build an engine with modern heads, it would be better is every imaginable way other than size.
The viewpoint of enthusiast is fixated on cost and availability. The reason so many people modify Hondas and Chevys is because of the massive aftermarket support. The reason they have massive aftermarket support is because the engines had potential to begin with.
If people keep doing the same thing, there is never innovation, never improvement.
I remember a time when everybody thought the LS engines were ---- because parts were expensive and you were better off building a SBC/BBC. Then, I remember when the bigger LS engines came out and everybody thought they were ---- because all the parts were for the older smaller ones.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 06:38 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: DF-DUB
Posts: 625
Total Cats: 21
Depends of the goals for a project.
If youre really concerned with size, then yes, you would be concerned. If youre concerned with performance you would go for the 4 valve per cylinder, pent-roof combustion chamber, DOHC with independent variable valve timing.
It would also probably be direct injected and turbocharged...
If Ford were to build a bigger engine with their heads or GM to build an engine with modern heads, it would be better is every imaginable way other than size.
The viewpoint of enthusiast is fixated on cost and availability. The reason so many people modify Hondas and Chevys is because of the massive aftermarket support. The reason they have massive aftermarket support is because the engines had potential to begin with.
If people keep doing the same thing, there is never innovation, never improvement.
I remember a time when everybody thought the LS engines were ---- because parts were expensive and you were better off building a SBC/BBC. Then, I remember when the bigger LS engines came out and everybody thought they were ---- because all the parts were for the older smaller ones.
If youre really concerned with size, then yes, you would be concerned. If youre concerned with performance you would go for the 4 valve per cylinder, pent-roof combustion chamber, DOHC with independent variable valve timing.
It would also probably be direct injected and turbocharged...
If Ford were to build a bigger engine with their heads or GM to build an engine with modern heads, it would be better is every imaginable way other than size.
The viewpoint of enthusiast is fixated on cost and availability. The reason so many people modify Hondas and Chevys is because of the massive aftermarket support. The reason they have massive aftermarket support is because the engines had potential to begin with.
If people keep doing the same thing, there is never innovation, never improvement.
I remember a time when everybody thought the LS engines were ---- because parts were expensive and you were better off building a SBC/BBC. Then, I remember when the bigger LS engines came out and everybody thought they were ---- because all the parts were for the older smaller ones.
And as you admitted a 500hp LS3 would be faster than a 500hp 5.0 given the same chassis, thats because the LS3 will have the better powerband.
Similar weights between motors with the LS being smaller, its hard to make a good argument for the Coyote over the LSx.
Its funny because the 5.0 is a mod motor, started being built in 92, LSx is a clean sheet design from 97, so technically the LS series is younger also.
Im gonna give the win to the LSx until people start swapping the Coyote in GM chassis.
Reply
0
0
07-07-2012, 07:21 PM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,020
Total Cats: 6,588
New rule:
This the the Random Pictures Thread. The next person who posts an argument about Ford vs. Chevy (vs. DSM vs. Yugo vs. riding a fuсking horse), without including a picture, will be banned.
The BanCock has spoken.
This the the Random Pictures Thread. The next person who posts an argument about Ford vs. Chevy (vs. DSM vs. Yugo vs. riding a fuсking horse), without including a picture, will be banned.
The BanCock has spoken.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2012, 12:07 AM
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
yeah uh waste of time:
so then I'm like "oh how about horsecock! those are big and offensive so I'll image search that (cautiously) and post something funny!"
and I found this:
which totally appears to be something cross-bred with Joe's post **** up there.
but ultimately I learned that
1. with great safesearch comes great responsibility
and
2. a more technical / clinical term would yield better results.
and
3. the internet (and humanity in general) are excruciatingly disturbing.
I present you the poneyboner:
Reply
0
0
I love that!
07-08-2012, 06:19 AM
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 3,214
Total Cats: 1,687
Engine is done.
The whole rebuild project took 34 days, including waiting for headwork, and waiting for a couple unforeseen parts to arrive.
I only drove it to seat the rings (third gear, accel and decel between 2 and 6k rpms). Very nice throttle response, sounds great, and needs a metric ton of autotune...
The whole rebuild project took 34 days, including waiting for headwork, and waiting for a couple unforeseen parts to arrive.
I only drove it to seat the rings (third gear, accel and decel between 2 and 6k rpms). Very nice throttle response, sounds great, and needs a metric ton of autotune...
Reply
0
0
