99crb600 Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks theres a problem. The shop who assembled the motor and put their name on the heads assured me this was excellent power for the motor........ idk what shop your referring to but they A.. dont know what the fuck they are talking about B. Seen you coming C. Not all that you have stated to be done to this motor is a Story... Dont mean to down you or your car but something IS NOT RIGHT a "SAFE" tune it should still be making 390-400 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Beast Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Sounds like the exhaust is custom made... that could be your issue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMess Posted April 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 headers are stainless with 1.75" primaries and 3" collectors going into a 3"y then into a 3.5" catback and then finished off with a apexi muffler. Thank god for th apexi muffler or she would have put down atleast 20 less horse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirks5oh Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 that's a lot of money to spend for those results. hopefully everythings ok with the motor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMess Posted April 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Erik's car made VERY similar numbers when using the same "sponsor" heads! It should be interesting to see what the verdict is when gearheadz tears into this mess! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks theres a problem. The shop who assembled the motor and put their name on the heads assured me this was excellent power for the motor........ Are the 918 springs sufficient for .640 lift??? http://speed-eng.com/store/comp-cams-918-springs-beehive-max-lift-600-p-7634.html?osCsid=0f54ae4c7539fd233506d1a36f7cbf57 they are good to .600 (giving about .040 for valve clearance) so .640 lift would me maxing them out... but that with out checking it..so. wonder if the retainer is smacking the valve seals. or if your getting into coil bind. you said the valve train is noisy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICEMAN1647545504 Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Like the title says, name the motor and the mods and i'll give u a cookie!!! http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v704/hiitsmejimmy/JimMurray-1.jpg I'm naming it Jim. Where is my cookie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMess Posted April 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 http://speed-eng.com/store/comp-cams-918-springs-beehive-max-lift-600-p-7634.html?osCsid=0f54ae4c7539fd233506d1a36f7cbf57 they are good to .600 (giving about .040 for valve clearance) so .640 lift would me maxing them out... but that with out checking it..so. wonder if the retainer is smacking the valve seals. or if your getting into coil bind. you said the valve train is noisy? Talked to IPS and they "claim" the heads have different springs then what is stated on their website which are made by associated spring and good to ~.690 lift. But year i'm getting a good bit of noise in the valve train. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99ta Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 seems low. keep us updated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam1647545489 Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Talked to IPS and they "claim" the heads have different springs then what is stated on their website which are made by associated spring and good to ~.690 lift. But year i'm getting a good bit of noise in the valve train. Valve train noise is common with aftermarket springs. Valve train noise is not a problem. I highly doubt the valves are smacking anything either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam1647545489 Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Anywho... 40k mile ls1 02' block, mid headers, 3" mandrel bent exhaust, ls6 intake 42lb injectors, 3" CAI,locked TQ, speed density tune,IRS car. Cam-231/234 .640/.590 112 LSA Heads-243 casting 5 axis CNC machined 220cc Intake Runner Intake Flow Rate 305 CFM Exhaust Flow Rate 235 CFM 2.000 intake valves / 1.550 exhaust valves Comp 918 single coil valve springs Respectable??? Get long tube headers, and take off the speed density tune. I cant remember what # the heads are but arent those still just an ls1 head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMess Posted April 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Long tubes wont fit with the 4l60e, car is a 93 FD. No idea why they went speed density. Heads are 243 I believe which are ls6 heads??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Why may I ask the speed density tune? I believe Scott's Z28 put down over 400RWHP on PPC's Dyno and it was a cam only car (to my knowledge). His car is an auto car to boot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Why may I ask the speed density tune? I believe Scott's Z28 put down over 400RWHP on PPC's Dyno and it was a cam only car (to my knowledge). His car is an auto car to boot. you believed me when i said it was a cam only car? :gtfo: its a fucking 6.0 bottom end Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 you believed me when i said it was a cam only car? :gtfo: its a fucking 6.0 bottom end It was quite a while ago, therefore I said I believe it was. Never the less it was still great #'s. PS- I hate you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty2Hotty Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Long tubes wont fit with the 4l60e, car is a 93 FD. No idea why they went speed density. Heads are 243 I believe which are ls6 heads??? I believe the 241 heads were the stock Ls1 casting, 243 LS6 casting, and the 799's were used on later model LS2 motors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Q: Name that motor A: Broken LS1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMess Posted April 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Why may I ask the speed density tune? I believe Scott's Z28 put down over 400RWHP on PPC's Dyno and it was a cam only car (to my knowledge). His car is an auto car to boot. The lsX gods at IPS know the best way to effectively tune the vehicle to top performance so they went speed density, besides them being awesome I have no idea why. And jones I'll give u 2 spark plug wires off the car and still drag that A4 around 270!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 And jones I'll give 2 spark plug wires off the car and still drag that A4 around 270!!! Are you shitting me ? A 38x.xx RWHP car will beat a 2xxWHP car ? NO FUCKING WAY ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMess Posted April 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 calm down I kid i kid! I sure hope it's not broken! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Talked to IPS and they "claim" the heads have different springs then what is stated on their website which are made by associated spring and good to ~.690 lift. But year i'm getting a good bit of noise in the valve train. Jim, I will back my "claim" again, we switched the springs in those heads quite a while back, and have not updated the listing online. Take a valve cover off and see for your self if you dont mind, it is a chome dual spring rated to .690 lift just as I told you in my e-mail, when I mailed you your chart. Uncertain of your valve train noise, they do get louder with larger cams, you do still have stock lifters. As for your power output, I believe that to be inline with comparables, (we have used that same cam and head package on a few cars, LS1 , and LS2).Similarly from a LS2 Vette (Antony's old vette), manual with a ported throttle body, kooks long tubes, same cam, same heads, and a 3.57 gear which is stock I believe, versus your 4.07 I believe or there about in the Mazda rear end ; that ls2 vette made 437 wheel horsepower, deduct say 5-7 percent for the auto and stock converter, 437 deduced 7% puts us at 406 wheel horsepower, then a bit for the rear end gear differences, and the bigger LS2 motor kooks, TB, ect. So again I think your power is certainly in the correct range. As for the speed density, that is a whole another issue that has been gone over by un-educated people several times in CR, and I believe there isn't a need to go over it again in this example. Regards http://www.ipsmotorsports.net/pictures/Brandon%20Photos/Anthony%20gray.bmp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 Jim, I will back my "claim" again, we switched the springs in those heads quite a while back, and have not updated the listing online. Take a valve cover off and see for your self if you dont mind, it is a chome dual spring rated to .690 lift just as I told you in my e-mail, when I mailed you your chart. Uncertain of your valve train noise, they do get louder with larger cams, you do still have stock lifters. As for your power output, I believe that to be inline with comparables, (we have used that same cam and head package on a few cars, LS1 , and LS2).Similarly from a LS2 Vette (Antony's old vette), manual with a ported throttle body, kooks long tubes, same cam, same heads, and a 3.57 gear which is stock I believe, versus your 4.07 I believe or there about in the Mazda rear end ; that ls2 vette made 437 wheel horsepower, deduct say 5-7 percent for the auto and stock converter, 437 deduced 7% puts us at 406 wheel horsepower, then a bit for the rear end gear differences, and the bigger LS2 motor kooks, TB, ect. So again I think your power is certainly in the correct range. As for the speed density, that is a whole another issue that has been gone over by un-educated people several times in CR, and I believe there isn't a need to go over it again in this example. Regards http://www.ipsmotorsports.net/pictures/Brandon%20Photos/Anthony%20gray.bmp PS: Please build me a custom turbo kit that puts down approx. 400awhp so I may drag him around 270. KTHANKSBYE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMess Posted April 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 When I initially spoke with you guys about a head/cam package to put me in the 400 range you guys said not a problem and you'd be able to get me there! Well $3,000.00 later I'm still far from that number! When I question the dyno numbers I was assured by the tuner that those were great numbers especially the TQ. I appreciate everyones input on the forum. I sure hope when gearhead tears the motor apart your heads are "as advertised" because it sure would look bad to have another set returned, wouldnt it??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 (edited) un-educated people:lol: thats good shit. so your telling me, that every oem car maker is just wasting there money, putting maf sensors on cars...yep i guess that seems reasonable to me . Gm,used a maf, and a map for a reason. plumbed into the intake, so that way, when you stab it, the pcm can see that faster then the maf can see it, and do enrichment that way. now, if your doing a race only thing, yeah, ditch the maf..you wont need it.. but for something your going to run on the street, leave the fucking maf in it. drive-ability is way better. hell even honda went to a maf finally in 05. theres a reason the 88 mustang had a map, and in 89 it went to a maf. un-educated. Edited April 2, 2010 by Removed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted April 2, 2010 Report Share Posted April 2, 2010 When I initially spoke with you guys about a head/cam package to put me in the 400 range you guys said not a problem and you'd be able to get me there! Well $3,000.00 later I'm still far from that number! When I question the dyno numbers I was assured by the tuner that those were great numbers especially the TQ. I appreciate everyones input on the forum. I sure hope when gearhead tears the motor apart your heads are "as advertised" because it sure would look bad to have another set returned, wouldnt it??? "as advertised" is not a concern . Also as a summation of your lack of information, the heads are not a embarresment, as it was not our mistake, unfortunatly our machinest made an error, and the matter was resolved with a 100% refund. Good to see you yesterday as well, hope everything works out. -Regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.