All hail the LS!

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,500
914
214
Chengdu Province
Have any of you guys seen the results of this year's Engine Masters Competition? I'd just like to point out that the winner of BOTH divisions (Xtreme Street and Street) was a Windsor. HA!

2nd, 3rd, and 4th place in the Street division went to LS engines, 5th and 6th were SBCs.

But the LS is king, right? Touched by the hand of God? How did that Windsor sneak by all those bowties?

I'd also like to point out the the top 12 "Street" competitors -which are limited to sub-6500 RPM operation- all used single plane carb-style intakes (4 of them converted to EFI, including the winning Windsor).

But but but, what I read on the internet was...
 
  • Sponsors (?)


I don't know about the LS being "touched by the hand of God", but certainly touched by the hand of technology. That being said, The fact that Ford has not produced a pushrod engine in a car since what 1995? So there has been no real factory support or technology for over 16 years on Ford pushrod engines. The aftermarket has made big strides, but it has not been driven by FoMoCo. Given enough time the LS engine will at some point surpass the Windsor in these contests. (if the current format is kept). The thing is that GM will HAVE to drop pushrod V-8 engines from an efficiency/emissions standpoint soon. Kind of hard to have variable cam timing on a cam in block design, and you cannot get the hp/liter out of a pushrod V-8 that you can get out of a overhead cam design. GM will probably nurse the LS along in it's current form for a while by using Direct Injection to help out on the efficiency/emissions front, but at some point the large displacement engines will have to go away. Ford is making as much if not more power from their smaller displacement V-8 engines that GM and Chrysler are making from larger cid pushrod engines. It is great to see a Windsor on top now, but one wonders what a new 5.0 could do in a similar contest limiting the displacement to 5.0 or so liters.
 
i read on the internet to stay away from canadians. I'm pretty sure we all know by now that $ for $ the windsor CANNOT compete with the ls. Sure if you buy new everything for both engines they will perform nearly the same. But if stuck to what "god" gave them the windsor is a joke. I'd like to see a stock head comparison build and see what becomes of it.
 
GM just blessed the LS engines with badass heads from the factory. That's the only real advantage it has ever had over the Windsor engines besides always having 350 or more cubes. You have to go pretty high on the aftermarket ladder to get heads that flow what the stock LS heads flow, but once you match them head for head and cube for cube it becomes a pretty even playing field. I really wish the Coyote came in something 400 or so cubic inches, Ford could make a lot more power than they're making if they wanted to.
 

I've got this month's Popular Hot Rodding, which shows the results. I don't know if they've been posted online yet.

I don't know about the LS being "touched by the hand of God", but certainly touched by the hand of technology. That being said, The fact that Ford has not produced a pushrod engine in a car since what 1995? So there has been no real factory support or technology for over 16 years on Ford pushrod engines. The aftermarket has made big strides, but it has not been driven by FoMoCo. Given enough time the LS engine will at some point surpass the Windsor in these contests. (if the current format is kept). The thing is that GM will HAVE to drop pushrod V-8 engines from an efficiency/emissions standpoint soon. Kind of hard to have variable cam timing on a cam in block design, and you cannot get the hp/liter out of a pushrod V-8 that you can get out of a overhead cam design. GM will probably nurse the LS along in it's current form for a while by using Direct Injection to help out on the efficiency/emissions front, but at some point the large displacement engines will have to go away. Ford is making as much if not more power from their smaller displacement V-8 engines that GM and Chrysler are making from larger cid pushrod engines. It is great to see a Windsor on top now, but one wonders what a new 5.0 could do in a similar contest limiting the displacement to 5.0 or so liters.

The aftermarket is never driven by the manufacturer, it's driven by the consumer. If people want to keep building SBFs (and this competition is proof positive that they do), the aftermarket will continue to deliver bigger and better SBF products.

By the way, I'm afraid of direct injection. I'm not afraid of VVT, and I'm not afraid of OHC. But direct injection... It's going to obsolete everything else in a hurry.

Nik that was just a wet dream. Here in the real world LSx > *

Now, change your God damn shorts that's f**king nasty

Jizz in my pants!

i read on the internet to stay away from canadians. I'm pretty sure we all know by now that $ for $ the windsor CANNOT compete with the ls. Sure if you buy new everything for both engines they will perform nearly the same. But if stuck to what "god" gave them the windsor is a joke. I'd like to see a stock head comparison build and see what becomes of it.

It's a moot point, because hot rodders don't use stock stuff. You know by now that I have a lot of respect for the LS, and I see it as a solid foundation, but this competition just supports what I'm always trying to say. If you know what you're doing, you can build just about any V8 to be every bit as competitive as anything else. The LS isn't the end-all-be-all.
 
Isnt it possible for someone to engineer a direct injection SBF head?

Maybe with some really crazy custom built heads but it would be super expensive. I've heard of people using Ranger double spark plug heads on 2.3's and trying to use the 2nd set of plug holes for injectors but i've never heard of anyone making it work.
 
I think it would be more likely for someone to develop VVT for the SBF than it would be for direct injection. Direct injection requires an entire new fuel system and ECM, but the real trick would be the cylinder heads , intake and pistons. Direct injection has some pretty specific geometry for that stuff, you'd basically be building the whole thing from scratch.
 
[SIZE=3 said:
NikwoaC][/SIZE]By the way, I'm afraid of direct injection. I'm not afraid of VVT, and I'm not afraid of OHC. But direct injection... It's going to obsolete everything else in a hurry.

Be afraid of the past, my friend: direct injection has been around since 1925. The Wright R3350 18 cylinder radial aircraft engine had direct fuel injection in 1944. In the automotive market, direct injection has been present in the mass production consumer vehicles since 1996 with Mitsubishi leading the pack.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_direct_injection for more information,
Especally this eye opener...
"Twin-fuel engines
Code named Bobcat, the new twin-fuel engine from Ford is based on a 5.0L V8 engine block but uses E85 cylinder injection and gasoline port injection. The engine was co-developed with Ethanol Boosting Systems, LLC of Cambridge, Massachusetts, which calls its trademarked process DI Octane Boost. The direct injection of ethanol increases the octane of regular gasoline from 88-91 octane to more than 150 octane. The Bobcat project was unveiled to the United States Department of Energy and the SAE International in April 2009.[55][56]" Imagine what kind of boost you could tolerate with 150 octane fuel!
 
EcoBoost is direct injection. In case you guys have not heard, Ford is ramping up to do a 1L EcoBoost engine that makes 118 hp and 125 ft-lb. That's the equivalent of a 590 hp and 625 ft-lb 5.0L engine, folks.
 
I'd also like to point out the the top 12 "Street" competitors -which are limited to sub-6500 RPM operation- all used single plane carb-style intakes (4 of them converted to EFI, including the winning Windsor).

So, out of the top 6 engines, GM placed out of 5 of them.

From the rules on the intake manifold for the EMC:


INTAKE MANIFOLD

If Carburetion used:

Must be commercially available, dual plane, cast iron or aluminum 4-barrel

design


:shrug:
 
So, out of the top 6 engines, GM placed out of 5 of them.

From the rules on the intake manifold for the EMC:


INTAKE MANIFOLD

If Carburetion used:

Must be commercially available, dual plane, cast iron or aluminum 4-barrel

design


:shrug:

You must be reading the wrong year's rules. For 2011:

Street Division-
If Carburetion used: Must be commercially available, single plane or dual plane, cast iron or aluminum 4-barrel design
If Fuel Injection used: Must be any commercially available, cast iron, aluminum, or composite material manifold.

So, if you run EFI, you can basically run whatever intake you want, so long as it's commercially available... Yet they all chose to run single plane carb-style EFI intakes... Hmmm...

Oh, and BTW, in the Street division I count 11 Chevys and 4 Fords. I would say that the fact that Chevy engines placed 5 out of the top 6 is simple probability, haha.