Finally got this build underway. Picked up and LS1 about a week ago for 300 bucks. It was basically a short block. Got an LS2 manifold(10hp over stock) and everything needed to rebuild the motor. Yesterday i took the motor apart and had it shipped out to the machine shop today along with the heads. Today i removed all the wiring from the engine bay along with a bunch of other unnecessary things. Tomorrow, if weather allows, i'm sandblasting the engine bay and hope to start smoothing it. I'll try to post some pictures of my progress. Don't wanna hear any **** about putting a chevy in a ford cuz i really don't care.
LS1 Fox
1 reading
88_FiveOh
41 - 60 of 135 Posts
that seems a little slow to me, what's the weight of his car?
stuffs more expensive, but it cost to make power so i'm not complaining.
Joined
·
8,096 Posts
what ever an auto z28 with drag lites weighs
Joined
·
2,994 Posts
there was a guy on ls1tech goin 10.3 and he still had the stock heads....he had everything else goin wheels up but still the stock heads
Joined
·
18,912 Posts
the guy I referred to got a 1.6x 60' on street tires.
Joined
·
392 Posts
OP, that's a nice set up. Keep up the good work. I'll have a similar build thread coming up in the near future. It will be somewhat of an off the wall LSx combo. N/A HIGH RPM set up:yes. RobZ has run 9.3xs in his C5 Zo6 with a similar set up that I would like to go with in a fox.
To all the haters, if you don't like it, don't post. Its as simple as that.
Threads like this are what really makes me hate ford only, or GM only sites. Anything that caters to only one brand has the loyalists that feel it is blasphemy to interchange the platforms and engines between two car manufacturers.
It is called hot rodding people. They are taking a better, lighter platform (the fox) and putting in the better (sorry die hard ford guys, it is what it is), lighter LS motor in there.
Don't get me wrong, I love my Mod motors. How many cars can run 9s on a stock longblock set up, just by cramming it with more boost? Not too many.
But then how many ALL MOTOR, cammed 302's, 351w's, or 4.6's with untouched stock heads (that came on THAT motor) could be dropped into a well dialed in fox and run well into the10s?
When it boils down to it, bigger cubes or not, an lsx is simple, cheap (they are out there), and lightweight. Couple that with a fox, and you have a car with some serious potential. It just needs to be set up right.
There are true "cam only"(still have 241 casting ls1 heads) ls1s running 10s. and are pushing 420-440rwhp (maybe more). Of coarse that is with a well dialed in car with a lot of weight reduction.
How many cam only 351w's can do that?
FYI To be a true "cam only" car, it cant have anything other then the stock casting heads that came on that generation motor.
Nice set up. I take it thats a full weight car?
Thats what I was thinking.
There is just so much technology into those heads. I always laugh at the ones that call the LSx's archaic because they use pushrods. Those pushrod motors have so much R&D into them it is unreal. I wont get into the LS7, because that's just unfair. Take the current L92/LS3 heads for example, they flow better than most fully ported aftermarket castings. There are cam only LS3 vettes pushing over 500rwhp. That is not archaic technology. And its not the cubes. It helps, it builds more torque and a little more HP, but if the airflow is there, and the valvetrain can support it, they can make just as much power with less cubes, it just has to be spun higher (sound familiar modular guys?).
Id really like to see a true apples to apples build using all off the shelf OEM engine parts (stock rotating assembly, heads, block), aftermarket bolt ons and Cam(s). Put together a 5.3l lsx and a 5.4l ford. let true engine builders set them up, dyno them for kicks......But the real test would be real world performance. Drop both of the motors on the same car. The only changes that would be allowed to the car is rear diff gears to optimize the set up, and keep the motor in its RPM range.
To all the haters, if you don't like it, don't post. Its as simple as that.
Threads like this are what really makes me hate ford only, or GM only sites. Anything that caters to only one brand has the loyalists that feel it is blasphemy to interchange the platforms and engines between two car manufacturers.
It is called hot rodding people. They are taking a better, lighter platform (the fox) and putting in the better (sorry die hard ford guys, it is what it is), lighter LS motor in there.
Don't get me wrong, I love my Mod motors. How many cars can run 9s on a stock longblock set up, just by cramming it with more boost? Not too many.
But then how many ALL MOTOR, cammed 302's, 351w's, or 4.6's with untouched stock heads (that came on THAT motor) could be dropped into a well dialed in fox and run well into the10s?
When it boils down to it, bigger cubes or not, an lsx is simple, cheap (they are out there), and lightweight. Couple that with a fox, and you have a car with some serious potential. It just needs to be set up right.
Its is not quite as easy as some make it look. BUT, the ls1 can make great power with minimal mods.
There are true "cam only"(still have 241 casting ls1 heads) ls1s running 10s. and are pushing 420-440rwhp (maybe more). Of coarse that is with a well dialed in car with a lot of weight reduction.
How many cam only 351w's can do that?
FYI To be a true "cam only" car, it cant have anything other then the stock casting heads that came on that generation motor.
Nice set up. I take it thats a full weight car?
Thats what I was thinking.
The stock heads are just bad ass. Even the worst flowing 97-98 castings.
There is just so much technology into those heads. I always laugh at the ones that call the LSx's archaic because they use pushrods. Those pushrod motors have so much R&D into them it is unreal. I wont get into the LS7, because that's just unfair. Take the current L92/LS3 heads for example, they flow better than most fully ported aftermarket castings. There are cam only LS3 vettes pushing over 500rwhp. That is not archaic technology. And its not the cubes. It helps, it builds more torque and a little more HP, but if the airflow is there, and the valvetrain can support it, they can make just as much power with less cubes, it just has to be spun higher (sound familiar modular guys?).
Id really like to see a true apples to apples build using all off the shelf OEM engine parts (stock rotating assembly, heads, block), aftermarket bolt ons and Cam(s). Put together a 5.3l lsx and a 5.4l ford. let true engine builders set them up, dyno them for kicks......But the real test would be real world performance. Drop both of the motors on the same car. The only changes that would be allowed to the car is rear diff gears to optimize the set up, and keep the motor in its RPM range.
Joined
·
8,096 Posts
Dont by into that cam only crap.
Those cars have every bolt on put to them, 5500 stalls a seat a steering wheel and a shifter.
You also better believe those cars are toting a Ford 9" with like a 4.56 gear in it and prob a TH400
LSx guys are like fox body guys when it comes to "stock" this and that.
Cam only as in the only internally changed part, they will have fast 90/90's long tubes etc.
Not arguing the LSX motors dont perform, But its just not a fair comparison when you put up 281 vs 346
Now its fords own fault for using the smaller motors, nothing we can do there, but most people dont know how to go about 2v or 4v motors. They just bolt random parts on and think they are dogs.
Those cars have every bolt on put to them, 5500 stalls a seat a steering wheel and a shifter.
You also better believe those cars are toting a Ford 9" with like a 4.56 gear in it and prob a TH400
LSx guys are like fox body guys when it comes to "stock" this and that.
Cam only as in the only internally changed part, they will have fast 90/90's long tubes etc.
Not arguing the LSX motors dont perform, But its just not a fair comparison when you put up 281 vs 346
Now its fords own fault for using the smaller motors, nothing we can do there, but most people dont know how to go about 2v or 4v motors. They just bolt random parts on and think they are dogs.
Joined
·
392 Posts
No one ever claimed that "cam only" means that the only mod they have is a cam. Like you stated, it is without chaning anything internally except the cam and running un ported stock heads (that came on that particular engine).
It is not "cam only" if an ls1 has a set of 243 (ls6/ls2) heads on it.
It is a term that gets too many people bent out of shape. Its similar to an 03 Cobra bieng termed as upper pulley only. Thats obviously not the only mod, its stating that it does not have a lower pulley and is running only the amount of boost available from changing only the upper.
Joined
·
6,172 Posts
I dont see 2 seconds from a cam. Thats about a 150 hp difference.
Joined
·
6,172 Posts
There are guys running 10's with stock spec cams and e7 stock 87-93 heads too...
Joined
·
45 Posts
look at nmra factory stock car look at tommy in his orange notch he went 11.17 on nittos down at zmax in 103 degree weather then off record in Maryland i he went 10.90 sumthing jpcs cars fly in the nmra in what ever class they have them i mean look at real street class and pure street rgr puts out sum good engines
Joined
·
392 Posts
technically they are stock "e7 castings", but those heads are by no means stock. they are prepped and bluprinted to the max. Do a search on stock eliminator cars....Same ****. nad neither are the factory stock engines. they are not running a stock rotating assembly. they are using trick lightweight parts.
Well dialed in car or not, those factory stock cars are making some serious power. Drop a genuine stock 87-93 5.0 longblock in one of those factory stock cars and I'm willing to bet they will be lucky to knock off a low 12.
The LS cars that we/I am talking about are using TRUE box stock heads, and stock rotating assembly. Not a class specific race prepped bullet. It is a given that it is in a lightweight, well dialed in car.
EXACTLY! Race prepped engines with all the "tricks"
I have nothing bad to say about any of those combo's. Id love to build a competetive NMRA real street car!
Joined
·
6,172 Posts
1.17a) HEADS, PERMITTED: Only original manufacture, generally available heads, accepted by NMRA, permitted. External and internal modifications prohibited in port area. Spark plug placement and depth must remain stock. Billet, one-off, custom and/or fabricated heads prohibited.
1.17d) HEADS, PORTING: Prohibited. Runners and combustion chambers must retain OEM appearance and dimensions. Final acceptance at the discretion of NMRA Technical Department.
1.17f) HEADS, VALVES: Maximum valve sizes for 302W heads are 1.850” intake/ 1.550” exhaust.
Not really that worked over, just springs and slightly larger valves...
1.17d) HEADS, PORTING: Prohibited. Runners and combustion chambers must retain OEM appearance and dimensions. Final acceptance at the discretion of NMRA Technical Department.
1.17f) HEADS, VALVES: Maximum valve sizes for 302W heads are 1.850” intake/ 1.550” exhaust.
Not really that worked over, just springs and slightly larger valves...
Joined
·
3,397 Posts
nmra factory stock /thread
Joined
·
2,216 Posts
NMRA FS is pretty strict with their rules. However, when they say "stock spec" camshafts, they actually mean factory lift. The duration, lobe seperation (overlap) and centerline can be different from stock. '09 rules state that max valve lift cannot exceed .480" Which means you can use whatever cam you want (hydraulic), as long as valve lift doesnt exceed .480" which is measured at the retainer. This is quite the opposite of "Stock" in my opinion.
So using your imagination, there is a TON of different combinations available with camshafts. This would imply, that while the class says "Stock," there is actually nothing "Stock" about a Factory Stock Mustang.
Stock means it hasnt been touched, or modified in any way, shape or form from its original condition.
PS. Milling the heads is also legal, as long as the combustion chambers meet specifications.
So using your imagination, there is a TON of different combinations available with camshafts. This would imply, that while the class says "Stock," there is actually nothing "Stock" about a Factory Stock Mustang.
Stock means it hasnt been touched, or modified in any way, shape or form from its original condition.
PS. Milling the heads is also legal, as long as the combustion chambers meet specifications.
Joined
·
392 Posts
A lot can be done to the head without porting and stayig in those guidelines. Like I said, do a search on a set of "stock eliminator" class. Thier heads have very strick limititions much like NMRA F/S heads. The same type of work that goes into a stock eliminator head, goes into an NMRA F/S head.
It is not apples to apples when comparing a stock LS1 to a race prepped "stock 5.0".
Just to give an Idea of what goes into one of these "stock" 5.0's in F/S, here is a older quote from somone making a statment about how expensive it is to build a F/S car to be competitive (I only quoted it up to him talking about the engine, not the rest of the car):
Joined
·
6,172 Posts
Well then the class could shave some more time off, if the changed it to "cam only" Factory Stock.
Joined
·
8,096 Posts
LS1 stock head has like a 195cc intake runner as to an E7's what 135cc if its lucky?!?
Joined
·
392 Posts
Exactly! And it also has better valve angles. Stock for stock, its no comparison. People are trying to compare race prepped "stock 5.0s" to truly stock ls1s. The ls motor in stock form is in another league then any of the mustang based stock pushrod and modular motors.
Prep one in similar fashion as an nmra f/s motor and your probably looking at 500 or so rwhp . Considering the f/s 5.0s are pushing around 400 (out of a 225 fw rated motor)
like i said, its not an apples to apples comparison, no matter how you look at it.
41 - 60 of 135 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
