This is why I went with the LS in my truck. Btw it revs to 7,000 with no fancy stuff and you have heard it. 
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
The Willomet Charger
- Thread starter AgDieseler
- Start date
A desecration to Mopar nuts everywhere, this is my protouring, LS-powered, 1970 Dodge Charger; built at my shop, Willomet Motor & Fabrication.
That's one aggressive plan, I like your style!
1 - 600 WHP, is about 750 crank HP, is definitely doable with some heads that can flow almost 400 cfm on the intake ports, especially at high RPM, but to rev it to 8000 RPM I would heavily lean toward a solid roller lifter, and running a solid roller to 8K, and last for 100K RPM is not something that usually goes together.
My cousin runs a 438 CID LS7 to 8500 or even 8800, but he refreshes it every season.
You can push a hydraulic lifter to 8K with lighter valves (maybe titanium), but it requires special ultra short travel hydraulic lifters and adjustable valvetrain. The difference between 7200 and 8000 in what parts are required is astonishing. 7200 is pretty easy, 8000 gets very expensive.
If I was doing what you want to do I would probably go with a full shaft rocker from T&D and the ultra short travel hydraulic lifters, having a solid roller last that long is unlikely. They are doing it with the new LT6, but that has double the valves that are smaller and lighter with 4 cams, and requires much less spring pressure than a pushrod engine at that RPM. The "lash" is hard on parts over time. Piston speed won't be the problem with a 4" stroke and 8K, that is no problem with todays piston materials. I think making the bottom end last to 100K is not challenging. Its making the valvetrain take 8K RPM and last to 100K that's the challenge. I think with the correct cam with slower ramp rates for the street, and the right valves and springs it could possibly be done, but it's not something any manufacturer or builder is going to guarantee.
2 - aluminum block is nearly always better if it fits the budget.
3 - mostly off the shelf parts for an LS shouldn't be a problem, but you will likely need a custom cam for your goals of high RPM and long life.
4 - again, not a problem, I prefer the Callies Magnum or UD center counterweight cranks, they used to call the UD the XL, for Xtra Light crankshafts.
5 - see #1
6 and 7 - not a problem, dry sump is superior in every way but the wallet, and oil change speed.
8 - probably not necessary for an NA engine, but if you really push the compression could be implemented with success.
I think what you are doing is typically one of those things where a lot people dream of it, but to actually implement it is much more difficult(expensive), 8K redline and go for 100K miles is not something I would put in the same engine realistically as RPM is exponentially hard on parts.
My shop/office phone is 262-495-8861, sometimes I am running power tools or on the phone and have to call you back.
Last edited:
Yeah, unfortunately, the value to reward curve on a hydraulic roller lifter tends to really start to taper off after 6000 RPM. Anything it’s going to be run that hard that often is gonna have to be solid, and then we start having wear items.
Nothing, because I don't use knock sensors on NA engines 
There's definitely the sloppy mechanic crowd that will drag race turbo motors on stock bottom end engines and shift in the 7500-8k range with regular hydraulic lifters. In fact they say that's the only way the SBE motors will survive under big boost and power in 700-1k hp range is to stay above the peak torque rpm at say 5k rpm which is where you're highest firing pressures are and can tend to lift heads or bend rods if the rpm drops too much during a shift. And of course this is mostly E85 too.
All that said it's not a sustainable model and you're definitely not getting 100k Miles. And of course a lot of these guys end up eating motors anyway, but the beauty of it is that you can go find another 200k mile 4.8L for $250 and just slap it back together reusing all your head gaskets and head bolts.
I gotta respect what they can accomplish for very little money and that everyone said it wouldn't work, however that's not the intention of your crazy build here being that it's such a high quality of craftsmanship. I'm gonna let Heath take the reins on this one as high end LS builds aren't my specialty.
All that said it's not a sustainable model and you're definitely not getting 100k Miles. And of course a lot of these guys end up eating motors anyway, but the beauty of it is that you can go find another 200k mile 4.8L for $250 and just slap it back together reusing all your head gaskets and head bolts.
I gotta respect what they can accomplish for very little money and that everyone said it wouldn't work, however that's not the intention of your crazy build here being that it's such a high quality of craftsmanship. I'm gonna let Heath take the reins on this one as high end LS builds aren't my specialty.
I'd stay in the 4.0 stroke for sure.
During all my research for mine it seemed like a hit or miss above that. Some guys can run a 4+ hard for years, and be fine other guys have piston issues constantly.
I did see that Wiseco seemed to have the pistons nailed down for the longer stroke stuff (4+). And most people agreed with that when it was stated.
Wrist pin location and ring placement gets odd in the real long stuff.
During all my research for mine it seemed like a hit or miss above that. Some guys can run a 4+ hard for years, and be fine other guys have piston issues constantly.
I did see that Wiseco seemed to have the pistons nailed down for the longer stroke stuff (4+). And most people agreed with that when it was stated.
Wrist pin location and ring placement gets odd in the real long stuff.
I shortened your quote to illustrate....I guess it depends on what's your definition of "works". Most probably don't get many miles and a limited number of passes off of that type of build, that doesn't really "work" for me. Also, a lot of power is being wasted while being on the verge of a floating valve/piston catastrophe every pass. My style is more build it once and drive it a long time. Not build it often and drive it little.
I do know guys like that, they also try to convince me to build a twin turbo LS instead of a twin turbo large CID big block because it could make the same power and weigh less. Yeah, but you just turned an engine that could make 1400 HP for years on pump gas into an engine that is on the verge of pinging and lifting a head all the time, may need E85, and won't last that long at that power level.
Ask 10 different people and you'll get 10 different opinions.
In general, the more power you are making per cubic inch, the more maintenance it will require. Whether you get there from boost, nitrous, or RPM. Notice the constant, per cubic inch. A 7.0L hydraulic roller pump gas LS has the same maintenance as a 4.8L hydraulic roller pump gas LS. But at the same hp/cid you'll get 46% more power out of the 7.0L.
With todays piston and ring materials 4.100 stroke on an LS really isn't a problem, with the correct parts. That only moves the wrist pin .050" vs a 4" stroke and the wrist pin hole is in the oil ring groove either way. Would I do that to a boosted engine, not usually, but I wouldn't trust a 4.000 stroke LS with a lot of boost either, you want a taller piston for boost. Mild boost isn't really a problem if it's tuned correctly and the right parts.
I have a 427 ls3 in my nova. Not running yet but dynoed 680hp at 7500 at westech. I had tony mamo from mamo motorsports build it with his complete topend. It sounded amazing reving up. With my tkx trans, carbon driveshaft, rps twin carbon clutch and gundrilled axles in the 9" floater im expecting just under 600 to the tires
Wow! Sounds like a recipe that one might ctrl+c and ctrl+v.
Do you have a more detailed breakdown?
David
let me dig up the build sheet. this engine was built 5 years ago. im really slow on this build. my suburban has been much faster. it started with a texas speed short block that i got on a black friday deal. i then had Tony assemble with his top end. He was the top guy at afr before going out on his own. he has a ton of builds on ls1tech especially on the corvette forum. his write up on my engine is under small bore 427 under the dyno section.
You're going to hurt some feelings, not mine, but someones.
Yeah. Some folks are pretty tender-hearted about this stuff. There’s a b-body forum that has me all but black listed.
David
Mopar guys be like, "We gotta stop letting these GM guys get their hands on our old cars!"
That's exactly what I was talking about, a 427 LS3, nice build. I don't think you'll see that much power at the tires due to driveline loss, I think if you find a hub dyno you could see that much power at the axles. Then again I've seen a 70 HP swing just changing tires on a chassis dyno, due to tire weight alone, it wasn't gearing. It throws the math off on the dyno because it's just calculating accelerating a mass, and you change the mass, so maybe with your lightweight drivetrain it will, it may depend on the tires. If you eliminate them, you can see maybe a ~10% loss on a hub dyno instead of the variable 15 - 50% loss on a chassis dyno.
I have one sitting in my shop for a customer, ready to dyno, but he hasn't moved forward with the dyno quite yet, hopefully soon. It's a hydraulic roller cam, aluminum block., 11.5:1 compression for premium pump gas with that cam, and we are expecting similar numbers but at around 7000 RPM with a 7400 RPM redline, I spec'd all the parts.
Really appreciate this kind of experience being shared. It helps me maintain perspective on what’s important - building a car that’s fun and fast, and having reasonable expectations for how many horsepressures I need to do that.
Also, corner is coming together. I make all these filler plates from 16ga so there’s enough material to flatten and blend.
I just need to fill in the top, and I can get back on firewall corners.
David
Found the build sheet. It made peak power at 7250 and shift point is 7500. I was a little off.
Mms 260cc ls3 heads
12:1 compression for 93 octane
Ported mid runner fast 102
243/254 114+3 cam
Limited travel hydraulic lifters
Yella terra 1.7 rockers
Manton pushrods. Cant find the original dyno vid but heres a link to my Facebook post of it
Mms 260cc ls3 heads
12:1 compression for 93 octane
Ported mid runner fast 102
243/254 114+3 cam
Limited travel hydraulic lifters
Yella terra 1.7 rockers
Manton pushrods. Cant find the original dyno vid but heres a link to my Facebook post of it
That sounds amazing, I wish I knew how to find that cam.
That cam by itself won't work well with your heads or converter, or stroke, or vehicle combo Ben. It's also probably going to have more "chop" than your rattler cam but because of the duration, not the LSA.
I have an extremely similar but slightly larger cam in a 427 LS3 build I spec'd, 247/263, 297/313, .624 lift, 114 LSA, 110 ICL, I like a larger duration split with rectangular port heads. But these engines also has more stroke, higher compression, aftermarket LS3 heads vs your engine Ben. It also has and a single plane intake with Volcano dry nitrous for when you really want to go fast at the track. It's going in a 66/67 Chevy II so the owner wanted the carb look too.
David, have you seen the cross ram intake from Edelbrock, it has dual throttle bodies and a cool look that you might like for your Chrysler and may be 1/4 the cost of the Australian Harrop intake.
Available in Red or Black but could be custom painted obviously.
Cross-Ram Small Block Chevy LS3 Black Intake Manifold
Edelbrock Black Cross- Ram LS3 Rect Ports Intake Manifold GM LS Engines
www.edelbrock.com
Last edited:
