(http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z301/666meat/IM000608.jpg)
http://460ford.com/viewtopic.php?t=18923
I was reading up on it on corral
Allot of guys including myself are interested, it seems to be one of those backwoods secrets that got out maybe once it figured out some one will mass produce cams and intakes then ill try it
I laughed when the guy said wait till the Chevy guys find out the Ls1 was design around the ford motor.
Appears you'll need a bunch of JB Weld for that upper row of head bolts...
So apparently Yates had his hands in the design eh..?
Really curious what kinda power this setup will make,
and I bet the Chevy boys are ' red hot barbed wire too, lol
Well that's something different..............
I kinda figured that GM coppied the SBF design for the LS serries heads. SBC always used that staggered IEEI intake/exhaust design. Then the LS1 came out and it had the smarter Ford design......;)
I have a feeling this will be done a few more times. Looks interesting, even though I'm usually one for keeping brand parts with their own.
Very interesting....
Funny, I was gonna ask about the LS design vs. the modular motors in a different thread. On Wrecks to Riches the other night, they had an LS2 that made 400 hp and still got 20 mpg. It had me wondering what mileage the modulars get. Now using the LS heads on a Ford block, has me wondering what kind of mileage this'll get? It seems to me getting 400 hp and 20 mpg, would be pretty decent.
LS2 is 400HP/400TQ bone stock. And in a nearly 4,000Lb GTO it gets 25-28 MPG with the 6-Speed.
This swap really has me thinking as the LSx heads outflow every small block head from any manufacturer. I do have 2 302's here...
Interesting, but I fail to see the point. Why take the heads of an aluminum 6-bolt-main block of at least 346ci (and goes up to 427ci) and install them on a cast iron 2-bolt main block that's been known to split in two at even modest horsepower numbers? The only point I can see to this swap would be that you can still use a Ford tranny, but personally I'd rather have a 700R4/4L60E or T-56 than an AOD or T5 anyway.
There's the electronics aspect too, but surely making a GM computer and wiring work in a Ford would be easier than fabbing up a custom intake and having a custom cam ground.
Still, it is nice to see some good ol' fashioned hot-rodding still exists...
looks like a good idea... but i cant wait to see what he's gonna do with the intake.
Carm,
I agree with you on the "what's the point", but I think he's going for price. Those heads were $75 for the pair, and a 5.0 is $250 at any time. If he could get a cam and intake made cheap enough, you're looking at less then $1000 for a 400HP engine.
Then again, complete LS1/T56 pull outs with wiring are less then $3000. Without the trans you're looking at $1500-$2000.
I'll stick with the entire LSx then.
The heads for the $75 was a cheap set for some good heads can't wait to see it put all together and see it run.
Do us all a favor and invest in some punctuation...... :rolleyes:
Ya never know what's possible when a hot rodder gets a wild hair. :burnout: His project reminds me of those guys who are putting a twin cam, 4 valve Volvo head on their turbo coupes.
ahh. why not just get custom pistons. no need for a special cam. and just throw a carb on it to run. then mill a 351w intake. if it's going to be cheap. the pistons will just be the the most expensive engine part. if he could install them himself on some rods.
but for the work he is doing id rather bolt a set of Clevland heads on and worry about changing water passages and a ford intake milld down or spacers. and run all ford parts. (guess youd still need pistons though due to canted valves) but hell ford did it! and you can even have EFi now. been done
The custom cam is required because the valve arrangement on the LSx heads is different than the Ford heads. Using the Ford cam would result in intake valves opening when you want the exhaust valves to and vice versa...
The Mark VIII's 4.6 DOHC can get 29 mpg in that car, you might expect 30 under the right conditions on the highway with an aerodynamic car.
Also, that's just with a 4 speed auto, with a T-56 you should be able to get even better mileage.
in my mustang i have gotten as good of an average as 31.3 on the highway with the 5 speed. premium fuel only. 4.6 DOHC
... The best I ever mustered with my V6 was ~30 mpg. As soon as the roads stopped being flat it dropped a few mpg's. Daily I get about 22-18mpg with mostly highway driving.
The 3v guys seem to get as good or better mileage than the sixes as well.
Those GM LS heads on a SBF block (if they would fit) would be great news for the boys at Popular Hot Rodding and their "Project Orphan" Mustang.
They took a 87-89 LX Mustang that had a 5.0 in it and put a GM LS something in it, along with a factory GM 6 speed, and had the balls to published that terrible buildup in their mag.
Could they take SB Ford heads ( with some reverse engineering) and put them on a GM LS shortblock and try to fool people into believing it is a SBF?
I keep thinking about the CAM thing and I know the E/I are different but going carb and putting the cam in 180 advanced would that change it. I’m to tired to think that hard right now but later ill probably answer it myself.
That "terrible buildup" went 9's for under $10,000 car included.
My Mustang averages 25-26 MPG on the highway at reasonable speeds. That's WITH the blower.....
Sure it did...but is it more of an insult to the GM guys or Ford Guys when a GM engine is put into a Ford body? ( or visa versa) Or does it make the Mustang look glorious when it runs nines?
Most people in the stands at a track see that "Ford" running nines.
I just don't get. If I had an LS engine, (which by the way is a fantastic engine!) I would look for a S-10 or a 78-81 Malibu like everyone else is doing and stick it in it.
I'd put one in a late '70's Oldsmobile Regency 2-door.
NO it wont work all it will do is change the firing order the I/E are still backwards.
Exactly - you'd simply change the firing order from 13726548 to 65481372. The intake and exhaust valves would still open and close at the wrong time.
Now maybe, just maybe, if you could get the cam to run backward you'd end up with the correct timing, but that would involve a custom gear drive.
Thinking about running the cam backward - I wonder if a marine reverse-rotation cam would work - it would have to spin "normally" in this setup, but its grind would mirror that of a normal-rotation cam, which should fix the problem...
I like the way you think this would be a lot easer then a 700 dollar cam I almost want to hint to the guy but the way he thinks I’m sure he thought of it already.
I’m rooting for him
but how Cheap is a "Marine CAM" for a ford roller?
If somebody is trying to do something like this then I doubt there considering "cheap". If they are there a fool.. Cheap would be aftermarket bolt on aluminum heads, or cheaper GT40p Heads.
Custom grind cams are reasonable... The "blanks" I have seen for those have full round lobes to start with, meaning they can have any grind put on them. I'm sure those are done on a CNC cam grinder and the lift and duration are most likely plugged into a CAM program Like ESPRIT that I use (see below) I would think for a charge one could have any grind (including firing order) ground into any blank they wanted.
"I want a Chevy grind on a Ford blank with X Lift and X duration"
Sounds like an easy problem to overcome.