Welcome to the FirebirdV6.com/CamaroV6.com forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
what correct information? all youve done is post hp/ci stats. other than that you've said nothing of use.
i said its not impressive at all, and compared it to 50 year old technology, and also the 3.8l
and somehow i get bashed and called a moron and im getting "smoked" or whatever.
engines were based on the fact that they could make 1hp per ci.. the SBC was the first engine to do that, and it was a HUGE deal.. that happened back in.. oh 1955? that was 54 years ago, and while technology has improved so much since then, they cant even make a normal engine that can back those numbers up?
edit* maybe you are mistaking me for trying to say that the ls1 engine has LOW horsepower.. i was under the impression a lot of people here would agree with me, so im thinking you guys arent understanding what im saying..
im not saying it has low horsepower or is a slow/crappy engine.. im saying that the performance numbers the engine puts out isnt impressive compared to how many ci it is
Wasn't the point of that initial comment that everyone has FUTURE plans, so for now we are only talking about stuff that has already been done??
kinda...I think he was referring more to the people who are making "grocery lists though" or the guys that say yea I am going to do it...then when they figure out all that is involved they back down...Either way it doesn't really matter....you can add me to the list in about 1 month then, happy?
No, but I will call you stupid for misspelling "liking".....
Sue me for not using "spell check" and typing too fast...
i said its not impressive at all, and compared it to 50 year old technology, and also the 3.8l
and somehow i get bashed and called a moron and im getting "smoked" or whatever.
engines were based on the fact that they could make 1hp per ci.. the SBC was the first engine to do that, and it was a HUGE deal.. that happened back in.. oh 1955? that was 54 years ago, and while technology has improved so much since then, they cant even make a normal engine that can back those numbers up?
edit* maybe you are mistaking me for trying to say that the ls1 engine has LOW horsepower.. i was under the impression a lot of people here would agree with me, so im thinking you guys arent understanding what im saying..
im not saying it has low horsepower or is a slow/crappy engine.. im saying that the performance numbers the engine puts out isnt impressive compared to how many ci it is
hmmmmm and in 1955 we were still using these little things called a CARBURATOR...
Fuel Injection has proven to be way more efficient and just because your gen I makes 1 hp/1 ci dont mean ****. wahoo. you can stomp the gas and burn rubber. I can do that in my 3.8. Except I don't burn 5 gallons of gas punching it at one light.
you cant compare the LS1 to the original SBC motors because the two engines are from two different time periods, and the goals, as well as the policitcs surrounding them were different. Sure, your gen one has a good power to displacement ratio, but how's the gas mileage? That was a big concern of GM while producing the LS1 with the rising cost of fuel. IT wasn't a concern in the 60's. That's why Pontiac used the 455 and the Chevelle had a 454 big block. Do you see any cars out there now with anything near that kind of displacement out of an 8 cylinder model? GM's goal is to sell cars. So by comparing an LS1 to an old SBC stock for stock....its like comparing 80's music to now.....the times are different, and because of that, so are the characteristics that comprise the time period.
Go pull up some LS1 Stats from the Corvette Motors or look at the WS6 Numbers and then add exhaust and headers.... the LS1 can crush with a little work.
kinda...I think he was referring more to the people who are making "grocery lists though" or the guys that say yea I am going to do it...then when they figure out all that is involved they back down...Either way it doesn't really matter....you can add me to the list in about 1 month then, happy?
its easy if you can find a wrecked ls1 car for $3500
Go pull up some LS1 Stats from the Corvette Motors or look at the WS6 Numbers and then add exhaust and headers.... the LS1 can crush with a little work.
i know, i already said in this thread that the ls1 can be a killer engine
its easy if you can find a wrecked ls1 car for $3500
Wasn't talking about an LS1 swap... I was talking about I am going to Cam only...and the list was find 2 members who have made progress for something major either a s/c, turbo, cam only, or heads/cam build...
And it is not easy to find a wrecked LS1 here for $3500....you might be able to find one with something like 255,000km on it for in arond 4-5grand... but then you are just asking for problems...
Like I said, over here I have looked at SEVERAL LS1's...unless you are spending in upwards of 13-15 grand....I have deteremined you are pretty much wasting your time going to look at them...everything for less money then that, that I have looked at has been in ****ty condition...
hmmmmm and in 1955 we were still using these little things called a CARBURATOR...
Fuel Injection has proven to be way more efficient and just because your gen I makes 1 hp/1 ci dont mean ****. wahoo. you can stomp the gas and burn rubber. I can do that in my 3.8. Except I don't burn 5 gallons of gas punching it at one light.
Actually John Ligenfelter Industries did a dyno and efficiency test, and found that a properly jetted four barrel was as efficient as fuel injection, but as far as tuning for a proper fuel curve through the rpm range, fuel injection was better...ill see if i can find where i saw that at.
Team NoVa
2000 Firebird- Intake, Pacesetters, !cat, full 2.5 to flowcrapster, 1.9 rockers, LS6 springs and Intense modded retainers, WS6 speedlines, T/A bumpers and hatch, 5 spd swapped, SOON TO BE nitrous'd and cammed.
to me its like having sex with an ugly twin sister...who still isnt all that bad, just has some moles in odd places, and doesnt have an @$$, and kinda smells like goat cheese....yeah, kinda like that.
really eh? I don't Know, I think this sounds pretty damn good
I'm not crazy about the revving part, the camera makes it sound more raspy then it is I think...plus, even the v8's are raspy when you free rev them in either park or neutral...but both cars sound beautiful under load....
and this is a 2002 LS1 cam only...as you can hear, there is also rasp to that car as well... sounds soo sweet though...
Actually John Ligenfelter Industries did a dyno and efficiency test, and found that a properly jetted four barrel was as efficient as fuel injection, but as far as tuning for a proper fuel curve through the rpm range, fuel injection was better...ill see if i can find where i saw that at.
Car expresses who you are. If you have a ****ty car, you must be a ****ty person;)<br /><br /><a href=\"http://www.cardomain.com/ride/995979\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.cardomain.com/ride/995979</a>
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment