Yellow Bullet Forums banner

41 - 60 of 129 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,932 Posts
More like 360 cfm stock. Either way though LS7 heads get cars moving.

Cam only LS7 vettes with untouched ports are in the 9s naturally aspirated. Not bad for never having undone engine mounts or head bolts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,570 Posts
Well if they go that high no wonder factory LS7 vettes are into the 9s with the ports untouched.

If factory Ls7 heads flow 390 then the aftermarket including BES offerings are doing a terrible job of improving on that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,932 Posts
If factory Ls7 heads flow 390 then the aftermarket including BES offerings are doing a terrible job of improving on that.
Well I figure theyre around 360 untouched, and reworked they push and exceed the 400 mark.

Im yet to see a x-section of the 7.3 head, but if its like the 6.2 pic posted here, the intake valves have the tops tilted towards the intake, more like a hemi... very different to a 12 degree LS7 head... apples and oranges. If it is set up this way, might be awesome with boost though. Time will tell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
Know of some getting 400's from the factory casting...another SAM guy, Zach's right hand guy for port work.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
Whats impressive is that the factory intake made within 30 hp of a full custom billet intake.
I've been saying it for quite a while... Ford stuff seems to be very well engineered. The factory intake is biased towards lower RPM torque I'm sure.

I'll be very curious to see what some talented head porters can do with the 7.3 head.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,820 Posts
Ls7 makes 505 with stock cam. Theres cam only swaps well over 550 whp which is much closer to 625-650 flywheel on stock head stock intakes. Full exhaust obviously

The new 6.2 LT1 is even more impressive imo. 550’s whp cam swapped easily. Also a 600-650 hp range deal
And the Compression ratio on the LS7 is what nobody answered and the 7.3 someone said it was a mild cam and i'm sure the compression ratio isn't nearly as much as the LS7 and the 7.3 still made almost 600 horsepower!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,796 Posts
And the Compression ratio on the LS7 is what nobody answered and the 7.3 someone said it was a mild cam and i'm sure the compression ratio isn't nearly as much as the LS7 and the 7.3 still made almost 600 horsepower!!
You could look it up lol google says 11:1
Gm claims 600 sae hp from their stage 3 “hot cam” fwiw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,284 Posts
Ford did a really good job at building a truck specific, high development cost, minimum part count (except for main cap bolts), minimum warranty percentage (once past the current valve guide issue) engine assembly. Naturally, the comfort zone of most performance aftermarket stuff is with push rod engines so it's the new shiny penny for Ford types. At an optimistic 1.7hp/ci naturally aspirated, it'll hit just over 800hp with thin cylinder walls and an extra 1/4 inch of stroke. (Ford says it can be bored out .010 so you know folks will go .030 right away.) How much will all that cost? You'll note that the dyno video said they used David Vizard for a cam recipe and the intake calcs so it wan't just someone using tribal knowledge to make more power. With the GT500, or more precisely, the 5.2 cammer, is nearing 900hp with a pulley and E85 tune, what is really more desirable to put in a hotrod? A Landshark digger with a cobrajet(?) bolt-in is a stout little package. I'm not sure I'd want to help the development of the 7.3 into a "481X", especially since a Kaase SR71'd race block engine makes 1100hp with no development.
Maybe if the 7.3 doesn't sound as rough/bad/annoying as an FE digger, it could be desirable? YMMV
55890
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,820 Posts
Ford did a really good job at building a truck specific, high development cost, minimum part count (except for main cap bolts), minimum warranty percentage (once past the current valve guide issue) engine assembly. Naturally, the comfort zone of most performance aftermarket stuff is with push rod engines so it's the new shiny penny for Ford types. At an optimistic 1.7hp/ci naturally aspirated, it'll hit just over 800hp with thin cylinder walls and an extra 1/4 inch of stroke. (Ford says it can be bored out .010 so you know folks will go .030 right away.) How much will all that cost? You'll note that the dyno video said they used David Vizard for a cam recipe and the intake calcs so it wan't just someone using tribal knowledge to make more power. With the GT500, or more precisely, the 5.2 cammer, is nearing 900hp with a pulley and E85 tune, what is really more desirable to put in a hotrod? A Landshark digger with a cobrajet(?) bolt-in is a stout little package. I'm not sure I'd want to help the development of the 7.3 into a "481X", especially since a Kaase SR71'd race block engine makes 1100hp with no development.
Maybe if the 7.3 doesn't sound as rough/bad/annoying as an FE digger, it could be desirable? YMMV
View attachment 55890
Thanks for the picture pretty damn cool IMO!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
How much power did the ls put out the first year it was produced? How many variations to get to where it’s at now? Just sayin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,796 Posts
How much power did the ls put out the first year it was produced? How many variations to get to where it’s at now? Just sayin
It made 350 flywheel rated but often dyno’d 300+ stock at the tires. Soon as cams and tuning equipment came out guys were making near 600 whp on cam and nitrous shots, and were destroying everything on the streets. The motors were stout. I was surprised to see how long it took for someone to figure out the iron truck motors were the crown jewl of budget boost world
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
604 Posts
It made 350 flywheel rated but often dyno’d 300+ stock at the tires. Soon as cams and tuning equipment came out guys were making near 600 whp on cam and nitrous shots, and were destroying everything on the streets. The motors were stout. I was surprised to see how long it took for someone to figure out the iron truck motors were the crown jewl of budget boost world
  • The tiny 281 in 2005 mustang was rated at 320 hp and was getting 300+ at the rear wheels with a cold air intake. Not sure what they were getting with cams and nitrous, lol, but as far as destroying everything on the street I guess there wasn't any around here. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,796 Posts
  • The tiny 281 in 2005 mustang was rated at 320 hp and was getting 300+ at the rear wheels with a cold air intake. Not sure what they were getting with cams and nitrous, lol, but as far as destroying everything on the street I guess there wasn't any around here. ;)
If your dyno reads 300 with those mustangs then our ls stuff is closer to 350-360 whp lol. Never seen 3v go over 270-280 with exhaust and tune around here but not many around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
604 Posts
If your dyno reads 300 with those mustangs then our ls stuff is closer to 350-360 whp lol. Never seen 3v go over 270-280 with exhaust and tune around here but not many around.
Guy had chip, gears and cold air intake, was actually 315 but I had a hard time believing it myself. Ive got a stock 2007 for an everyday summer driver, good on gas and can still pass someone. Far from fast for today's standards, lol. Just saying that was only a 281 ci making similar power to the first LS's
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Guy had chip, gears and cold air intake, was actually 315 but I had a hard time believing it myself. Ive got a stock 2007 for an everyday summer driver, good on gas and can still pass someone. Far from fast for today's standards, lol. Just saying that was only a 281 ci making similar power to the first LS's
“Only 281” yet bigger than a 582 lol
 
41 - 60 of 129 Posts
Top