Progress Thread The Only Part Of A Chevy You Don't Have To Tow (until Now), Into An Sn95.

Discussion in '1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-' started by tannerc91gt, Mar 30, 2014.


  1. 84Ttop

    84Ttop They make new pistons every day, so why worry? SN Certified Technician Mod Dude

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    3,039
    Likes Received:
    1,213
    Trophy Points:
    144
    That's what she said ^^^
    #81
  2. tannerc91gt

    tannerc91gt More durable than coconuts and twice as fast

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 1999
    Messages:
    5,119
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    134
    The upside of riding back here is no one notices me licking the window
    #82
  3. revhead347

    revhead347 I have face herpes.

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,469
    Likes Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    124
    You didn't get the 5.3L heads that everyone loves so much?

    Kurt
    #83
  4. Noobz347

    Noobz347 Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor Admin Dude

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 1985
    Messages:
    19,504
    Likes Received:
    2,368
    Trophy Points:
    174

    Splain please.
    #84
  5. revhead347

    revhead347 I have face herpes.

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,469
    Likes Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    124
    LS1 heads don't flow as well. The 5.3 truck heads (LQ4 I believe) flow almost as well as the heads that came on the LS6 (Z06). Most guys source 5.3 heads or spend extra money for AFRs for a stronger LS1 build.

    Kurt
    #85
  6. hoopty5.0

    hoopty5.0 Mustang Master

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    104
    LQ4 is the lower compression 6.0 and uses the 317 head, which flows almost 300 cfm. Theres a 243 (I think) head that you are referring to that are better. As to how much, I don't know. The way I see it, it's like the intake - there isn't enough difference between the truck intake and the LS6 to justify spending the money.
    #86
    tannerc91gt likes this.
  7. Noobz347

    Noobz347 Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor Admin Dude

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 1985
    Messages:
    19,504
    Likes Received:
    2,368
    Trophy Points:
    174

    Ahh... Thanks. I have an 01 Burb with the LQ4. It's an 01' so it has the undersized (read: problematic) exhaust manifold bolts. Those heads go for a measly $300 a set from Rock Auto. Cheaper for me, to just buy a set of heads than to have a machinist rebuild my old ones and dig out the broken exhaust bolts.

    I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't another head that I should be looking at vs. the ones that come stock on my 5.3.

    Thanks Kurt :)
    #87
  8. Noobz347

    Noobz347 Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor Admin Dude

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 1985
    Messages:
    19,504
    Likes Received:
    2,368
    Trophy Points:
    174
    Oh wait... I think my motor is labeled LM7.

    You guys know how that falls into the scheme of things as far as heads and intakes go?

    Is there an advantage to going with something other than the OEM replacements?
    #88
  9. hoopty5.0

    hoopty5.0 Mustang Master

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    104
    #89
  10. hoopty5.0

    hoopty5.0 Mustang Master

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    104
    #90
  11. madspeed

    madspeed Colonel Mustard Mod Dude Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 1999
    Messages:
    8,010
    Likes Received:
    1,121
    Trophy Points:
    174
    that makes you an LQser
    #91
  12. revhead347

    revhead347 I have face herpes.

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,469
    Likes Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    124
    243 head, that's what I was thinking of. I'm not that savy with my Chevy engines.

    Kurt
    #92
  13. Noobz347

    Noobz347 Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor Admin Dude

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 1985
    Messages:
    19,504
    Likes Received:
    2,368
    Trophy Points:
    174

    Looked through that thread and a couple of others. Doesn't look to be a very significant change with the heads. Some mild porting and a crank changes seem to be biggest deals in the power quest at the sacrifice of economy. Not a huge change in torque production though.

    Also not too much mention of long tube advantages when discussing LS either. :shrug: Not sure why that is.
    #93
  14. hoopty5.0

    hoopty5.0 Mustang Master

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    104
    That's odd. I've always thought longtubes are the second biggest gain behind cam swaps on those...
    #94
  15. Noobz347

    Noobz347 Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor Admin Dude

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 1985
    Messages:
    19,504
    Likes Received:
    2,368
    Trophy Points:
    174
    It could be that I just didn't come across the right threads. :shrug:

    Been thinking of ditching my manifolds and installing LTs when I swap the heads.
    #95
  16. tannerc91gt

    tannerc91gt More durable than coconuts and twice as fast

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 1999
    Messages:
    5,119
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    134
    Some of your terminology bouncing around has confused me a bit but I'll try here.
    The 243s are an LS6 head, the 799s being the truck equivalent minus sodium filled valves. Stock, these are the best cathedral port heads.
    241s are a later cast LS1 head that aren't very desirable (came on my 04 gto for example). 317 heads, which I think are the 6.0 heads you're referring to, flow pretty good numbers and wouldn't be worth the switch to a 243 IMO. The lq4 is the low compression iron 6.0 compared to the lq9. The heads on my build are NOT lq4/lq9 heads, as they came from a 99 TA. They're early ls1 heads and STOCK are a pretty poorly flowing head in comparison. These are ported to PRC level 2 specs are flow pretty well for what they are as well as being milled .065. Motor has been dyno proven already and I'm not so quick to jump on the 243 bandwagon for minimal gains.
    They're going to meet my current power goals and if the time comes to upgrade the heads I'll most like step to a TEA ported rectangular port head.
    #96
    hoopty5.0 likes this.
  17. Noobz347

    Noobz347 Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor Admin Dude

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 1985
    Messages:
    19,504
    Likes Received:
    2,368
    Trophy Points:
    174
    Ah yes.... We'd forgotten the PRC level 2 spec. :nonono: How silly of us. o_O











    :scratch:












    :leaving:
    #97
    hoopty5.0 likes this.
  18. tannerc91gt

    tannerc91gt More durable than coconuts and twice as fast

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 1999
    Messages:
    5,119
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    134
    Stage 2. My bad. All the info can be found on Texas speeds website. I was asked, I answered. I don't see the need for sarcasm. Must have missed something
    #98
  19. Noobz347

    Noobz347 Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor Admin Dude

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 1985
    Messages:
    19,504
    Likes Received:
    2,368
    Trophy Points:
    174
    Only part you missed was that it was a joke (making it sound like everyone has heard of the porting).... LOL

    It was my response to not knowing what the specific porting was. I really don't know much about the Chevy lingo.
    #99
  20. tannerc91gt

    tannerc91gt More durable than coconuts and twice as fast

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 1999
    Messages:
    5,119
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    134
    I think had you used a couple more smileys I could have picked up on the sarcasm. @madmike1157 can fill you in on the proper usage
    Noobz347 likes this.

Share This Page