![]() |
Originally Posted by 242LS
(Post 4671968)
post some pics |
Originally Posted by Precision
(Post 4671962)
I love that this is catching on. 4-5 years ago everyone thought I was crazy for thinking I could build reliable LS engine that were turbo charged. This summer I put over 45 hours on my 42 Fountain without a hiccup. The best part was all the double takes as people walked by it at the Shootout while we had it tied up at Ron's.
Keep up the good work! |
I noticed you said you were replacing blown bbc engines that were burning 110gph EACH. Im hoping these were making at least 1000hp each neighborhood ?
I do understand some engine designs are more fuel efficient than others, but at some point it still takes x amount of fuel to make x amount of hp. in the truck world, when the LS was an option along side the 8.1L bbc engine, the fuel savings were not all that impressive in my opinion. If you took a mid 2000s chevy 3500 dually 4x4 , with a 4.10 rear, and towed a boat, its not like the 8.1 got 8mpg while the 6.0 liter ls was getting 16mpg towing the same load. There was a small fuel mileage gain with the 6 liter, but it also didnt make nearly the torque the 8.1 liter did, nor did it make that torque at such a low rpm as the 8.1 liter did. Ive had a few tow rigs . A 6 liter ford diesel, 5.4 gas ford, v10 gas ford, and 454 vortec chevy. They all got in the 8-10mpg range towing a heavy boat. My theory is it simply requires x amount of fuel to keep a truck/boat going at 70mph, and theres only so much fat to trim to get it done. I dont buy the story that a 600hp LS is gonna be a huge game changer for your wallet at the gas pump over a similarly equipped bbc making 600hp. That being said, looking forward to the results. Always fun to see something different being built. |
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4672012)
I noticed you said you were replacing blown bbc engines that were burning 110gph EACH. Im hoping these were making at least 1000hp each neighborhood ?
I do understand some engine designs are more fuel efficient than others, but at some point it still takes x amount of fuel to make x amount of hp. in the truck world, when the LS was an option along side the 8.1L bbc engine, the fuel savings were not all that impressive in my opinion. If you took a mid 2000s chevy 3500 dually 4x4 , with a 4.10 rear, and towed a boat, its not like the 8.1 got 8mpg while the 6.0 liter ls was getting 16mpg towing the same load. There was a small fuel mileage gain with the 6 liter, but it also didnt make nearly the torque the 8.1 liter did, nor did it make that torque at such a low rpm as the 8.1 liter did. Ive had a few tow rigs . A 6 liter ford diesel, 5.4 gas ford, v10 gas ford, and 454 vortec chevy. They all got in the 8-10mpg range towing a heavy boat. My theory is it simply requires x amount of fuel to keep a truck/boat going at 70mph, and theres only so much fat to trim to get it done. I dont buy the story that a 600hp LS is gonna be a huge game changer for your wallet at the gas pump over a similarly equipped bbc making 600hp. That being said, looking forward to the results. Always fun to see something different being built. Btw MT, that's why I went with the 3:73 8.1L truck... |
Originally Posted by sutphen 30
(Post 4672010)
nice job,,what turbos did you go w/ ?
|
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4672012)
I noticed you said you were replacing blown bbc engines that were burning 110gph EACH. Im hoping these were making at least 1000hp each neighborhood ?
I do understand some engine designs are more fuel efficient than others, but at some point it still takes x amount of fuel to make x amount of hp. in the truck world, when the LS was an option along side the 8.1L bbc engine, the fuel savings were not all that impressive in my opinion. If you took a mid 2000s chevy 3500 dually 4x4 , with a 4.10 rear, and towed a boat, its not like the 8.1 got 8mpg while the 6.0 liter ls was getting 16mpg towing the same load. There was a small fuel mileage gain with the 6 liter, but it also didnt make nearly the torque the 8.1 liter did, nor did it make that torque at such a low rpm as the 8.1 liter did. Ive had a few tow rigs . A 6 liter ford diesel, 5.4 gas ford, v10 gas ford, and 454 vortec chevy. They all got in the 8-10mpg range towing a heavy boat. My theory is it simply requires x amount of fuel to keep a truck/boat going at 70mph, and theres only so much fat to trim to get it done. I dont buy the story that a 600hp LS is gonna be a huge game changer for your wallet at the gas pump over a similarly equipped bbc making 600hp. That being said, looking forward to the results. Always fun to see something different being built. |
I am currently debating on whether I should reinstall a BBC 467 8.72:1 CR, or buy everything for the L92 with vvt delete, cam, lifters, and pushrod upgrade I have sitting in the garage for around $3500. Weight savings and the ability to spin higher rpm may justify the Tq loss some. But then again going to a 376(even stroked to 408) from a 467 is a big difference in low end Tq capabilities. This would be going in a 1977 24' Panther/cheetah/lancer all the same hull. I've been waking up for the past month every morning talking myself in and out of one or the other. That being said I' am interested to see how these turnout. Of course budget is a priority for me being young and trying to have some offshore fun, should probably just reinstall the 467 and enjoy boating... see here I go again talking myself out of the Ls.... Kids..
Those water cooled housings are pretty neat, did some research on that. I didn't realize how many are actually available. |
Originally Posted by bhassett110
(Post 4672080)
I am currently debating on whether I should reinstall a BBC 467 8.72:1 CR, or buy everything for the L92 with vvt delete, cam, lifters, and pushrod upgrade I have sitting in the garage for around $3500. Weight savings and the ability to spin higher rpm may justify the Tq loss some. But then again going to a 376(even stroked to 408) from a 467 is a big difference in low end Tq capabilities. This would be going in a 1977 24' Panther/cheetah/lancer all the same hull. I've been waking up for the past month every morning talking myself in and out of one or the other. That being said I' am interested to see how these turnout. Of course budget is a priority for me being young and trying to have some offshore fun, should probably just reinstall the 467 and enjoy boating... see here I go again talking myself out of the Ls.... Kids..
Those water cooled housings are pretty neat, did some research on that. I didn't realize how many are actually available. |
You painted the intake gasket surface or am I missing something?
|
Originally Posted by Wildman_grafix
(Post 4672117)
You painted the intake gasket surface or am I missing something?
|
Originally Posted by phragle
(Post 4672102)
If your running a 24/7 in lake erie...weight is not your enemy.
|
Originally Posted by Wildman_grafix
(Post 4672117)
You painted the intake gasket surface or am I missing something?
|
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4672012)
I noticed you said you were replacing blown bbc engines that were burning 110gph EACH. Im hoping these were making at least 1000hp each neighborhood ?
I do understand some engine designs are more fuel efficient than others, but at some point it still takes x amount of fuel to make x amount of hp. in the truck world, when the LS was an option along side the 8.1L bbc engine, the fuel savings were not all that impressive in my opinion. If you took a mid 2000s chevy 3500 dually 4x4 , with a 4.10 rear, and towed a boat, its not like the 8.1 got 8mpg while the 6.0 liter ls was getting 16mpg towing the same load. There was a small fuel mileage gain with the 6 liter, but it also didnt make nearly the torque the 8.1 liter did, nor did it make that torque at such a low rpm as the 8.1 liter did. Ive had a few tow rigs . A 6 liter ford diesel, 5.4 gas ford, v10 gas ford, and 454 vortec chevy. They all got in the 8-10mpg range towing a heavy boat. My theory is it simply requires x amount of fuel to keep a truck/boat going at 70mph, and theres only so much fat to trim to get it done. I dont buy the story that a 600hp LS is gonna be a huge game changer for your wallet at the gas pump over a similarly equipped bbc making 600hp. That being said, looking forward to the results. Always fun to see something different being built. |
Originally Posted by mggdoors
(Post 4672239)
Look up some dyno sheets with bsfc and just do the math. There really is a significant difference when comparing similar hp ls to bbc Theres alot of NA bbc engines being built today, that have great cylinder heads, proper camshafts, induction etc, that net sub .500 brake specifics. Of course if some slapped together old turd with a pig rich carb on top , and an overall poor combo, then yes it will be a guzzler. |
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4672346)
that was why i was asking about how much power your blower motors were making that were consuming 110gph worth of fuel. At only 870hp, that BSFC number would be off the chart .
Theres alot of NA bbc engines being built today, that have great cylinder heads, proper camshafts, induction etc, that net sub .500 brake specifics. Of course if some slapped together old turd with a pig rich carb on top , and an overall poor combo, then yes it will be a guzzler. |
|
Nice. I can’t decide to paint my engine or leave bare aluminum. But, that looks very nice. |
Originally Posted by Hot Rod 29
(Post 4672890)
Nice. I can’t decide to paint my engine or leave bare aluminum. But, that looks very nice. |
looking awesome
|
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...b3d8c912e.jpegA little more engine porn. Just sprayed exhaust. |
Originally Posted by sutphen 30
(Post 4672915)
looking awesome
|
what accessory brackets are you using?is the circ. pump(bolts onto engine block) a gm unit or a modded one?
|
Originally Posted by sutphen 30
(Post 4672992)
what accessory brackets are you using?is the circ. pump(bolts onto engine block) a gm unit or a modded one?
|
Gonna go insane with this insanely long msd woring harness. Time to bust out the solder gun. Chop chop chop. Snip snip snip |
I like the blue with the black intake. That is nice. |
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...b2249152c.jpegLittle progress on my motors. |
Originally Posted by Hot Rod 29
(Post 4674650)
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...b2249152c.jpegLittle progress on my motors. |
Originally Posted by ezstriper
(Post 4674839)
Nice looking setup...not sure how the 102 mm TB going to be on a boat...may hurt the power where you need it most
|
First off before you beat me up the is not the ginal mounting location and the bypass port on the stsinlesshousing will be cut off and a 90 12an stainless fitting will be tig welded in place there. It will end up on the valkey pan horizontally mounted. Just a reference on how to save a f**c ton of money vs hardin unit. That being said this moroso housing is the same as the speedmaster (pro comp). The speedmaster can be had for $20 less. This is how you make a raw water remote thermostat for in my case less than $200 per motor. https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...56cb5bc27.jpeghttps://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...853c9d150.jpeg https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...2bbbf0397.jpeg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...d127b69cb.jpeg https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...2de26c8ef.jpeg https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...edddd8e36.jpeg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...d671d8c2a.jpeg |
Originally Posted by hogie roll
(Post 4674871)
They never make less power anywhere that I’ve seen. Tip in will alter though. |
|
Originally Posted by ezstriper
(Post 4674839)
Nice looking setup...not sure how the 102 mm TB going to be on a boat...may hurt the power where you need it most
|
Originally Posted by Hot Rod 29
(Post 4675077)
where I need it the most is above 6,000. This boat is under 5000 lbs with 2 of these motors. I don’t need any extra torque. I’m sure these motors will have more horses and ft lbs than the old school 5.7’s that came out. |
Originally Posted by mggdoors
(Post 4675062)
The throttle body will be fine. The intake will hurt you bad below 5k. Ive ran that intake on a car before. Like to rev to make good power at 6-65k plus under 10/10 loss below 5000 rpm’s on a 6.2. But above 5000 should be 15-20 gain. It’s what I wanted. Upper end horses. Broad power curve. It will still make more power than the 5.7’s from 1500 rpm up. |
Originally Posted by mggdoors
(Post 4675078)
The old 5.7 and big blocks vs LS engines dont even belong in the same category. Light years ahead. Yours will be a goid runner just not optimal intake for rpm range of a boat but will mske good power regardless |
I just realuzed it is fitech. I tjought it was holley sniper intake, which is the one I tested before. Very similar design but have to testing on that intake to backup previous statement as it is not the holley. Disregard |
I like the remote coil mounts. |
Pretty cool setup honestly. Nice tight little package. Well done OP!
Plus its an LS and we all know they rock (make big power and a monkey can work on them)! |
Update: had a back injury. Back at it. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...4828d3aea.jpeghttps://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...7de947a48.jpeg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...9506819ad.jpeg |
You almost want to go straight to a museum so it doesn't get dirty. Beautiful.
BTW - Does anyone have the dyno sheet/numbers for a stock Merc 330 or 420? I'd love to see how the torque numbers compare. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.