My first LS build

patooyee · May 22, 2016

joho75287 said:
Awesome Shawn - cant wait to see that beast in action...
You looked a bit excited...seemed like you breathing hard there... Exciting stuff, huh??

He was like a gitty little kid leaving my shop!

patooyee · Jun 16, 2016

Shawn asked me to post this for him. I am getting choppy info from him at the moment. Apparently he took it to the chassis dyno and had to pull a 2-day all-nighter in the summer heat with his dad to install a new converter because the one he had was too tight and was stalling the engine down. (Maybe I'm misunderstanding him?)

Anyway, they tuned until they got to 405 whp and stopped. They think they had more than that but they were running out of time. Using the fuel consumption formula they say that the engine is a solid 650hp engine right now. This dyno is with a restrictive 3" intake in place. He's since built a 4". He says right now it will light his 49's up!

I think Shawn is either at work or on the road right now. He'll chime in and give more info when he can.

The-Boss · Jun 16, 2016

Good deal. Let's go find the new weak links Shawn. :dblthumb:

redneckengineered · Jun 17, 2016

patooyee said:
Shawn asked me to post this for him. I am getting choppy info from him at the moment. Apparently he took it to the chassis dyno and had to pull a 2-day all-nighter in the summer heat with his dad to install a new converter because the one he had was too tight and was stalling the engine down. (Maybe I'm misunderstanding him?)

Anyway, they tuned until they got to 405 whp and stopped. They think they had more than that but they were running out of time. Using the fuel consumption formula they say that the engine is a solid 650hp engine right now. This dyno is with a restrictive 3" intake in place. He's since built a 4". He says right now it will light his 49's up!

I think Shawn is either at work or on the road right now. He'll chime in and give more info when he can.

Those are pretty insane numbers. Is he willing to share specs on the motor? I know he built that himself, good for him.

patooyee · Jun 17, 2016

redneckengineered said:
Those are pretty insane numbers. Is he willing to share specs on the motor? I know he built that himself, good for him.

He and a friend of his named JR built it with some meddling on my part as well. (I mainly screwed things up in order to provide learning opportunities!) Sadly, JR contracted cancer shorty after and is not doing well from my understanding. I think Shawn has posted a partial parts list already and plans to post a complete list eventually. I don't want to speak for him though. I know it has a huge cam. Way bigger than most LS guys run. The tuner says it's the biggest cam he's ever tuned on an LS and seems to think that it caused some of the tuning headaches that they have had.

redneckengineered · Jun 17, 2016

patooyee said:
He and a friend of his named JR built it with some meddling on my part as well. (I mainly screwed things up in order to provide learning opportunities!) Sadly, JR contracted cancer shorty after and is not doing well from my understanding. I think Shawn has posted a partial parts list already and plans to post a complete list eventually. I don't want to speak for him though. I know it has a huge cam. Way bigger than most LS guys run. The tuner says it's the biggest cam he's ever tuned on an LS and seems to think that it caused some of the tuning headaches that they have had.

Stroker? What's the compression? I'd imagine it would have to be in the neighborhood of 13-14:1 to put up those kind of numbers. Sorry to hear that about his buddy

patooyee · Jun 17, 2016

redneckengineered said:
Stroker? What's the compression? I'd imagine it would have to be in the neighborhood of 13-14:1 to put up those kind of numbers. Sorry to hear that about his buddy

Yes, it's a 422 CID stroker. Surprisingly, it is very low compression which is another thing the tuner thinks is affecting the tune. I think Shawn told me it was only about 10.5:1 but he needs to correct me if I'm wrong. He said the tuner thinks it needs to be at least 11.5:1. I think Shawn is considering having the heads milled.

redneckengineered · Jun 17, 2016

patooyee said:
Yes, it's a 422 CID stroker. Surprisingly, it is very low compression which is another thing the tuner thinks is affecting the tune. I think Shawn told me it was only about 10.5:1 but he needs to correct me if I'm wrong. He said the tuner thinks it needs to be at least 11.5:1. I think Shawn is considering having the heads milled.

Good lawd. How do you get that out of a 6.0? I thought 408 was the max but I'm no engine builder.

patooyee · Jun 17, 2016

redneckengineered said:
Good lawd. How do you get that out of a 6.0? I thought 408 was the max but I'm no engine builder.

DK. I recall discussing this with Shawn and JR during the build but don't recall the specifics. I'll let Shawn fill us in on that. I do recall that the pistons come a little further out of the bottom of the bores than some people would be comfortable with and that some clearance work had to be done on the block to clear the crank.

LightBnDr · Jun 17, 2016

I heard the 422 Pistons actually come out of the bottom of the cylinder enough to tilt sideways 12.5deg to suck in crankcase vapors to boost compression. Uses some kind of wankel design to scavenge all the air it can. These things are dope

mna0121 · Jun 17, 2016

Thanks for posting the info for me JJ. Pulling this out of my memory, the bore is 4.125 using Weisco slugs, K1 crank shaft @ 4.100 and rods are 6.125 yielding just over 421 ci. A 408 would use 4.030 bore and 4.00 stroke with the 6.125 rods, of course there are several different combinations you can use to get the same ci. A tall deck LS can be bored and stroked to 600 inches.
Piston wobble at the bottom of the bore is a concern with this much stroke. The piston skirt can catch on the block and damage or even rip the skirt off, that is why you never see a boosted stock block LS over 408 ci. In some of the early pictures of this build thread you can see how close the rod bolts get but no work was needed to the block, bolts or rods. The build is pretty well documented with pictures. These LS engines require way less work than the old school engines do to get the same displacement. I have always been a BBC guy but I am liking this LS. I think GM built this thing with the hot rodder in mind.
I am having some heat issues. I have a Griffin $12 yard sale radiator with a 16" electric fan and shroud. I moved the fan/ shroud off the core by 1/4 inch and added a surge tank but didn't seem to help much. I have a Spal HO 16" fan on order, if that doesn't fix it I will be ordering a new radiator with duel fans.
Compression is a tick below 10.125. The tuner said the engine would be a lot happier at 11.5, 12.5 or more due to the size of the cam and heads.

LightBnDr · Jun 17, 2016

Of course I'm completely being sarcastic Shawn. I was eatin a Texas size Wendy's chicken sandwich and felt like being a smart ass. Wishing I were eating fried EVERYTHING at GMP instead. Lol

I had forgotten completely about this build man. Cool to see it alive

redneckengineered · Jun 19, 2016

mna0121 said:
Thanks for posting the info for me JJ. Pulling this out of my memory, the bore is 4.125 using Weisco slugs, K1 crank shaft @ 4.100 and rods are 6.125 yielding just over 421 ci. A 408 would use 4.030 bore and 4.00 stroke with the 6.125 rods, of course there are several different combinations you can use to get the same ci. A tall deck LS can be bored and stroked to 600 inches.
Piston wobble at the bottom of the bore is a concern with this much stroke. The piston skirt can catch on the block and damage or even rip the skirt off, that is why you never see a boosted stock block LS over 408 ci. In some of the early pictures of this build thread you can see how close the rod bolts get but no work was needed to the block, bolts or rods. The build is pretty well documented with pictures. These LS engines require way less work than the old school engines do to get the same displacement. I have always been a BBC guy but I am liking this LS. I think GM built this thing with the hot rodder in mind.
I am having some heat issues. I have a Griffin $12 yard sale radiator with a 16" electric fan and shroud. I moved the fan/ shroud off the core by 1/4 inch and added a surge tank but didn't seem to help much. I have a Spal HO 16" fan on order, if that doesn't fix it I will be ordering a new radiator with duel fans.
Compression is a tick below 10.125. The tuner said the engine would be a lot happier at 11.5, 12.5 or more due to the size of the cam and heads.

Great info. I would love to see what kind of numbers that monster would put down with the higher compression and some more tuning time.

patooyee · Jun 19, 2016

redneckengineered said:
Great info. I would love to see what kind of numbers that monster would put down with the higher compression and some more tuning time.

x2!

patooyee · Jun 19, 2016

mna0121 said:
Pulling this out of my memory, the bore is 4.125 using Weisco slugs, K1 crank shaft @ 4.100 and rods are 6.125 yielding just over 421 ci.

Wait ...

(3.14 * (4.125 / 2)^2 * 4.1) * 8 = 438 CID

Working the formula backwards from 422 CID using bore as the variable comes out to 4.1" bore.

mna0121 · Jun 19, 2016

That's funny, I think your formula is wrong. Summit racing has a charts for CID, CR that you plug the known numbers into and it figures the numbers for you. I could never get it right with simple math either. I dug up the paper work from where I ordered parts from BTR. So the CID is going to get larger by JJ's math.
The crank shaft is actually a K1 LS1 346 24x reluctor @ 4.125 stroke
Wiseco 4.030 bore pin size are .927x 2.250 with negative 11cc reliefs and 1.050 comp height a set of flat tops here would have given us some more compression
H-beam rods @ 6.125" with Calico coated Clevite bearings same for the main bearings
Durabond coated cam bearings
The heart beat of it all is a BTR custom ground cam shaft 238/250 .651"/ .630" 113+3 @ 50 If you are 40yrs or older you probably remember when a cam was simply referred to by its max lift?
The heads are TEA's 245's TEA is the company Brian Tooley started. They build their castings and do custom work for Trick Flow and I guess anyone that needs their services.
I would like to have the heads milled but don't think I will pull it apart just for that, however if I have to take it apart for any reason I certainly will have them worked on.

Happy Fathers Day to all and as always
Roll Tide Roll

patooyee · Jun 19, 2016

mna0121 said:
That's funny, I think your formula is wrong. Summit racing has a charts for CID, CR that you plug the known numbers into and it figures the numbers for you. I could never get it right with simple math either. I dug up the paper work from where I ordered parts from BTR. So the CID is going to get larger by JJ's math.
The crank shaft is actually a K1 LS1 346 24x reluctor @ 4.125 stroke
Wiseco 4.030 bore pin size are .927x 2.250 with negative 11cc reliefs and 1.050 comp height a set of flat tops here would have given us some more compression
H-beam rods @ 6.125" with Calico coated Clevite bearings same for the main bearings
Durabond coated cam bearings
The heart beat of it all is a BTR custom ground cam shaft 238/250 .651"/ .630" 113+3 @ 50 If you are 40yrs or older you probably remember when a cam was simply referred to by its max lift?
The heads are TEA's 245's TEA is the company Brian Tooley started. They build their castings and do custom work for Trick Flow and I guess anyone that needs their services.
I would like to have the heads milled but don't think I will pull it apart just for that, however if I have to take it apart for any reason I certainly will have them worked on.

Happy Fathers Day to all and as always
Roll Tide Roll

https://www.summitracing.com/expertadviceandnews/calcsandtools/compression-calculator

If that's what you're talking about it generates 438 CID using the numbers I was using as well (4.125 bore x 4.1 stroke). But what numbers do you want to use? If 4.125 stroke x 4.030 bore, it comes out to 421 CID using both my math the the calculator as well.

mna0121 · Jun 19, 2016

But you were coming up with 438 before? Now you have it right at 421.

patooyee · Jun 19, 2016

mna0121 said:
But you were coming up with 438 before? Now you have it right at 421.

Before I was using 4.125 bore x 4.1 stroke (which yields 438) because that's what you listed. But now that you've posted your parts list those numbers change to 4.030 bore x 4.125 stroke which yields 421. The results for both are the same with the calculator or my formula. That is my only point.

mna0121 · Jun 19, 2016

Couple of pics getting ready to make a pull. I have video but I have never been successful at posting them, the few I have one here have been posted by JJ for me.