![]() |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Going back to your original post. I built a similar combo that I wanted to share. Differences are in blue
Quote:
LSA does not specifically dictate a cams chop, nor is it tied specifically to overlap. It has to do with valve events as a whole. Not getting in to the L92 vs LS6 vs aftermarket head debate as it is way to long to type out. But short answer, it depends on your goals. |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Quote:
Yep, tho not track tested. |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Am I the only one who has noticed that this thread is pushing a year old and the OP hasn't replied since 3-6-13?
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
I did not catch that :)
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
:lol:
his profile shows he hasn't seen/been here since August! Quote:
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
As long as there's still useful info being discussed, who cares?
:lol: |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
I've been reading with interest. Just picked up a 6.0 last week. Got a torquer 3 cam but may not use it now. Just seems too big for a street truck and not enough compression with a LQ4 and stock 317s.
Don't really want to change heads at this point in time as then I'm opening up a new can of worms in comparing stock motor and turbo vs h/c/i. |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Quote:
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Nope, I had no idea. I remember posting way back when, but didn't realize it had been so long.
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Quote:
Opinions are just that. I now realize the thread is old but if I see something I don't agree with I will state it and my logic for why. With the search function I consider it important to post regardless of age of post. |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Except no one here uses the search button lol.
The "Whats gonna fit" threads prove it. |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Jon,
Unfortunately (and I am not pointing fingers here, so don't take it personal) when someone gives opinion that contradicts proven facts, people can be steared the wrong way. I try to provide info based on first hand experience, changes i have tried. Info that i have either proven or disproven. This is what helps people move forward and build projects to better meet their goals. Opinions based on what one was told 3rd hand, well you might not be getting the full story. Heck, i have made 510who cam only in a 2001 camaro. Oh but I forgot to mention the 100hit of n20. See my point? |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Jon, again I wasnt pointing my finger at you. It was a general statement towards some opinions that don't have real world experience to back up their opinions.
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
Ok, sorry, just clarifying what you were getting at.
Unfortunately that's the biggest problem of the internet…people with no or minimal experience touting what they have read as fact. |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
On the other hand, do either of you have all day to answer every thread? Just trying to look at it from both sides here ok. You were taught through grade school out of a book and didn't learn everything hands on. What you have to remember is to take everything with a grain of salt as they say. No one has the time or the experience for every question.
|
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
well I too try to keep my suggestions based on experience vs what "they say".
I'm an old guy that's been out of it for years but always been a hotrodder at heart, and even worked in an automotive machine shop tearing down/building motors (and working with other components like clutch flywheels, brakes, axles, d-shafts etc.) when I was much younger. I often wonder how I got directed away from it to other careers... in more then one field....better pay I guess. anyway, no expert but certainly no newbie either :lol: |
Re: Lq4 Cam/ motor input ???
I wasn't questioning anyone's experience, just that you really have to do your research. Don't take just one thread at face value, dig a little deeper to make sure it's true if you have doubts.
http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...s/viewall.html This article seems to follow with what we stated earlier, L92s have less power lower in the rpms, but more up top. "Stage 2" heads will net more power but I personally don't think the price is worth it. Again though, I'm not claiming experience, just that I do try to check my sources. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com