are there any DOHC V8 platforms that are as swap-friendly as an LS motor? and by that i mean they aren't like 50k (so pic not related).
i remember someone saying some Toyota 1UZ or something was decent but didn't make a lot of power for what money you put into it.
BMW M60
Nissan VH and VK
Toyota UZ and UR
Modular Fords
maybe a volvo v8
maybe an audi
there are DOHC heads for LS engines aswell
>>13803043
oh the cadillac northstar, but only late model ones are reliable, and arent as cheap
>>13803043
out of those which is the best bang for buck? the ls with a dohc head?
>>13803028
>>13803043
VH/VK, UZ and the 5.0 Ford are the more popular ones.
I only ever hear of Audi V8 swaps into other Audis
Nissan VK isn't very common right now, but I don't see why not. almost as light as an LS, makes 330hp and can make more easily, cheap and not very wide. Many people use the VH, but that engine is very wide and very heavy. It's a fucking beast if you can find something to put it in and build it up. I've seen some that make close to 1000hp stock bottom end, and ones that rev over 9k. Really stout bottom end.
>>13803062
>the ls with a dohc head?
Not exactly cost friendly, the DOHC LS kit alone is 8 grand minimum.
>>13803062
where do you live?
if you are in america all of them are cheap, a ford 5.0 from a wrecked mustang is prob ur best bet because of that cheap aftermarket
>>13803072
http://www.v8nissans.com/forums/showthread.php?14-Engine-Transmission-Weight-Thread
>>13803043
also, the Jaguar AJ-V8
you could pull one from an s-type or an xj
>>13803099
canada but i'm planning to move to the states soon. i thought ford blocks were all OHV.
>>13803240
some are sohc 3 valve and others are dohc 4 valves
>>13803028
mercedes 113 (cheap and small) and bmw s65 (small and powerful)
>>13803070
>look up b5 ls swaps
>nowhere to be found
I love audi but their shit is all fucked up
>>13803282
MAYBE a d2 or d3 could fit an LS. The b5s don't even fit Audi v8s without relocating the radiator
>>13803099
how do the 5.0s compare to the VZs?
>>13803755
you mean toyota UZ?
the ford makes more power stock, but the UZ is cheaper and smaller, probably lighter aswell
if you are planning on doing the swap just for shit an jiggles, get a cheap 3UZ and supercharge it
>>13803899
I was planning to go NA for a long while and do some basic balancing/tuning to get the hang of it. which platform is better for NA performance?
>>13803977
whichever you find more aftermarket for, probably the Ford, but according to ebay, those are waaay more expensive than an UZ. The cheapest coyote 5.0 I could find was like 5k, whereas 3UZ were 1.5k
a 3UZ with an intake/exhaust and porting could easily make 350hp
you'd probably need cams, fuel and a new computer for 400hp
>>13803294
I have seen acouple of passats with the audi v8. Not very popular, even though they tend to be the same vehicle. It's much more common to get the 30v V6 supercharged/turbo.
It is worth mentioning that modding community isn't that large beyond tuning/bolt-onto the original drivetrain.
since when is an ls swap friendly
>>13804294
500+afternoon senpai
>>13804294
since they are common and well documented for several vehicles, hell, some even have kits available.
Compare it to a VAG 4.2, where the wiring harness is noticeably more complex.
>>13804633
thats because the wiring harness from an audi is from a car that actually has features unlike the shit the ls came in.
no engine swap is friendly unless its something the car had an option for or stars align and everything just works(tm) but you wouldnt know that till u got into it anyway.
i highly doubt swapping a 1uz or 2jz or w/e weeb shit is any more or less complicated than an ls.
>>13804672
That is precisely the point. The LS is simpler than other options available. It may not be the simplest, but it is friendly.
The ls is going to be the easiest for several reasons. One being that the overall package is much smaller than OHC v8's, making it easier to swap in smaller engine bays. Another is that since it came in so many vehicles, there are a lot of factory bolt on layouts for your belt accessories and your oil pan, meaning there's a good chance that you won't have to do any major fabrication to get everything to fit. Besides, it only takes about $1k to get an ls1 to put down ~430whp. There's a reason that they're so popular...
It's not very difficult to maintain the factory ls pcm and harness, just have to convert it to standalone where it only needs power, ground, and an ignition signal. Or you can do what I did and throw all of that in the trash and go with an aftermarket standalone.
Transmission options are another benefit, you get to choose from all the old bulletproof gm auto's, the early manual 3 and 4 speeds, the 5 speeds from the trucks, or the t56/4l60e that they came with. They all bolt right up.
>>13804989
This guy gets it.
Although oddly enough the transmission is the hardest part to fit in most cars.
>>13804989
>muh cam puts me at 500 crank hp brah
go away
>>13805289
>implying that it couldn't
No u
>>13805355
>firebird ls1 made 305 at the wheels
>a cam will raise that to 430
you are delusional
>>13805376
not saying it's easy, but having it rev higher, better fuel, and better airflow it's not unreasonable to think 100+hp gains on a factory tuned engine.
>>13805403
The ls1 blows up at 5000rpm why would you make it rev any higher
go look at the cam only dyno threads on ls1tech, also lots of people are revving them to 7k, and making power all the way up there...
Seriously, the Ls motors really are that good
It is easy, there are hundreds of documented cam swaps(only need better valve springs and pushrods and a tune) that are putting down 430whp, with all else stock
>>13805403
>not saying it easy
no
you said 1k in mods yields 430whp
a cam is like 1200
lol, a cam is about $400, springs are $260, pushrods are $100...
>>13805536
I'm a different person from>>13804989, although I generally agree, that some time and about 1K can get you 430 if not more.
As always, your mileage may vary.
>go to Ls1 tech
http://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamometer-results-comparisons/219024-cam-only-dyno-thread-26.html
>only 1 car over 400 with "just a cam"
>actually has a tune and intake/exhaust
>>13805565
He says this like that's a lot of money. Maybe he is on welfare?
>>13805592
or perhaprs the one living on welfare is you since you could only afford 1 camshaft kek
Because spending money on 4 cams and making less horsepower is economical as fuck
>>13805628
>you could only afford 1 camshaft kek
what the fuck are you on about?
4valve ford.
Cobra blocks can handle 1000-1500 horsepower easily, and 03-04 Cobras are well proven to hold 700 to the wheel on a stock longblock
>>13805649
the fact that 1 camshaft is cheaper than 4?
>>13805640
dont get mad you got rekt
>>13805667
4valve ford 4.6 btw
>>13805672
why would you buy 4 cams when your engine can only fit one m8?
do you regularly buy 4 times the number of parts needed for your car to prove how rich you are?
>>13805672
>1 is less than 4 therefor im smarter than you
>760 is a lot of money
>animu
Welfare as fuck.
>>13805685
>so poor he could only afford an engine with 1 cam
do you get the joke now anon?
>>13805707
>can only afford 1 camshaft
Welfare as fuck
>>13805726
weird niggas, what can ya do? Just so you know autist, my truck destroys whatever you're trying to brag about.
>>13805726
>this is supposed to be funny
I'm gonna guess you find making friends difficult
>>13805754
>>13805755
>literally cant handle any banter
KEK!
this is why shitposting about pushrods is so fun
>>13805783
>damage control
>>13805794
>butthurt control
stay poor, one day you might be able to afford the other 3 cams
>>13805783
>banter
someone making the same "jokes" over and over again?
bet you're fun at parties, everyone must love your "banter", right?
>>13805807
So I should sell my ls motor? What n/a quad cam motor should I get to replace it?
>>13805843
I bet this is how he actually gets his social interaction for the day and that's why he is willing to shitpost for a response. I spotted this NEET welfare queen from the first post. Desperate for attention of any variety. Pathetic.
>>13805843
>>13805875
>>13805891
this is fucking unreal
no way people can get this butthurt from a simple joke
>>13805904
You're not as funny as you think. Get a trip so I can block you already.
This thread devolved rapidly.
Goodnight.
>>13805977
It's my fault, somehow I thought I could shut him up but really I just gave him the attention he so desperately sought. irl he's the kind of guy it's funny to bully but on the internet he is just kind of sad.
>>13805783
pushrods BTFO yet again
>>13805947
How about you go to reddit where you can down boat posts that hurt your feelings
>>13803028
>are there any DOHC V8 platforms that are as swap-friendly as an LS motor?
No engine is as swap friendly as an LS. None.
Only OHC engine that would come close is a Ford Mod motor. And most of the cheap ones are SOHC.
Any Nissan or Toyota V8 will cost substantially more and make substantially less power than a comparable LS setup.
>>13806059
>LS makes 4 times more power and 16 times more torque
>retards still think rotaries and shitbox motors are good.
>>13805667
>>13805680
Fuckin A senpai just buy a 4v 4.6
>>13806619
> 300hp is four times more Power than 300hp
What?
>>13806497
>No engine is as swap friendly as an LS. None
>He actually believes this
>>13806635
LS's haven't made 300hp since the 90's. Unless you're talking about truck motors or fwd shit.
Try again.
>>13806648
So what ls motor makes 1200hp then?
The lt4 makes like twice as much power, but it's like a hundred times less reliable so there's that :))
>>13806665
>getting baited this hard.
>>13806669
> damage controlling this hard
"I was just jjoking guys I swear!"
Kek
>>13806683
>he said an LS makes 16 times more torque
>you took his post literally.
You're a fucking idiot.
>>13806635
>implying any production rotary ever made 300hp.
Try again.
>>13806708
Ls fanboys are retarded so I dont judge
>>13806716
> production
goal post move harder
but yes the 20 brew made 300hp
>>13805891
>>13805947
>>13805977
>these gif and image macros
Fuck off back to where you came
>>>/reddit/
>>13804134
>whereas 3UZ were 1.5k
You're going to have to spend a little more than that to get one with harness, computer and accessories.
OP here. what's the consensus then?
>>13806733
>wanting to compare non-production engines
That's stupid. No one cares about Chinky Changs 13b that made 900hp for 13 seconds before exploding or some special snowflake racing bullshit.
>but yes the 20 brew made 300hp
No it fucking didn't. It was made at the time of and limited by the 276hp gentleman's agreement in Japan.
>>13806811
Gentlemen agreement was an agreement on the advertisement of power
Many engines still made over that 276hp
Fuckin boob
>>13806806
For strictly talking about V8, the 1UZ and VH/VK probably come close. The width and height is worse than the LS, which can be problematic. I think a VK should fit in almost anything an LS would, makes around the same hp depending on model, and is cheap. You may run into aftermarket problems, but if you can find the aftermarket parts they can make a lot of power, even n/a. VH is good too, but it is very wide. They fit well into the 300ZX Z32, which is a cramped engine bay so maybe they will fit in more cars than most would think. They should go into a 280ZX/Z31 pretty easily, but it isn't a common swap.
coyote 5.0
>>13806825
Except that's wrong.
Case in point. The JDM supra was substantially less powerful than the USDM supra because the JDM supra had to conform to the agreement.
>>13806806
the size and weight aspects are largely benchracing, it doesn't matter till you start trying to put a big block v8 in a mini or something, although usually height is the biggest issue because some people want stock appearance.
cost depends where you are.
i suppose what matters most is the ability of the engine to run out away from the original chassis and trans with no issues.
>>13806852
Look dude the 20brew made well over the limit and everyone who knows the slightest thing about the car knows it
You sound like some dumb kid who just discovered out about it on Wikipedia or something
>>13806884
>It made 300hp because I say so and I believe REALLY HARD that it did.
No. It made 276hp just like the rest of the japanese shitmobiles from the 90's.
You sound like some dumb kid that likes XYZ car/engine so he has delusions of greatness about said car/engine that is out of touch of reality.
Fact: No production Rotary ever made 300hp.
Fact: No production LS ever made LESS than 300hp other than the 4.8 liter iron block budget truck motors that no one cares about.
And even then those 4.8 liter budget truck motors all made more power than any production rotary ever did.
>>13806876
you're right. i probably shouldn't have made this thread. i'm not even sure what rolling chassis i'd wanna put this in. i was merely curious about DOHCs and which were the best bang for buck when it came to drawing out reliable power or the most power. i apologize.
>>13806915
> it made 276hp only because I said so!
Go do some research kid and come back
The fact it makes substantially more torque than the 13brew while maintain the same rev limit should say something
Remember what I said about "advertised" power, yeah?
Now stfu and stop pulling shit out of your ass
>>13806918
>Regretting making a pushrod vs dohc/rotary thread
>not enjoying the sublime shitposting
>mfw op can't even handle these bants
>no face
>>13806929
>Go do some research kid and come back
I have and I know all about the 276hp limited 20b-rew and the 276hp gentlman's agreement.
You seem to not know anything.
>The fact it makes substantially more torque than the 13brew while maintain the same rev limit should say something
Protip: that doesn't mean shit. Just because engine X has more torque than engine Y for a given redline doesn't mean engine X automatically makes more power. Especially on a turbocharged motor. Especially when said engines are limited by an agreement.
>Remember what I said about "advertised" power, yeah?
And remember how I told you you were stupid? The cars were limited in power to the agreement.
Same reason Supras had smaller injectors and smaller turbos in the JDM market to limit power to 276hp.
Are you seriously claiming the 20b-rew made more power than the MkIV sSupra's 2JZ-GTE?
Just because you REALLY want it to doesn't change reality scrub.
FACT: The cheapest budget 4.8 LS truck motor made more horsepower than the most powerful production rotaries ever made.
>>13806952
im just tired senpai. i came back from swimming and wanted to do a bunch of modifications to a datsun after seeing the thread the other day but then debated about dying, shit like removing the diff, having slicks but at stock size, straight piping, and fibreglassing the hood, but now i'm not too sure and now i'm tired...farewell.
>>13806918
Depends where you live but Merc M113 is small and light and can be had with 500hp from the factory. Cheaper versions make about 280hp
>>13806988
Good bye OP, god speed on an heroing. I recommend doing some opiates first
>>13806968
The 20b dynos at around 280whp with the turbos ripped off and long intake runners slapped on
Makes 350hp with a boost controller
But keep believing it's actuslly limited to an arbitrary number many other manufacturers capped their advertised power at purely for reasons of parity in advertisement and nothing else :^)
>>13807016
not him but he's right that when the cosmo was around manufacturers took the agreement seriously
>>13807016
Cool made up numbers about modified engines and no proof bro.
FACT: The cheapest budget 4.8 LS truck motor made more horsepower than the most powerful production rotaries ever made.
>>13807046
Made up numbers no
Stay ass mad though and dismiss anything you dokt like as fake
Mazmart made 280whp without the turbos and long intake runners
And there's no such thing as a 4.8l ls engine so Uhh okay?
>>13803028
go to junkyard.
look for veeate.
make mounts.
>>13807066
>Made up numbers no
Claiming a bunch of bullshit on the internet with no proof is the same as making shit up.
>dismiss anything you dokt like as fake
No, I dismiss blatant bullshit as fake.
>Mazmart made 280whp
With a modified non-production spec engine. Neat. What the fuck does this have to do with anything?
>And there's no such thing as a 4.8l ls engine so Uhh okay?
The LY2, L20 and similar.
>>13807186
> mad that a 20b can make over 300 crank hp without the turbos
Kek
And those aren't ls engines
Try again
> pro tip: only an engine with ls in the name is an ls
So wanna try back up your outrageous claims of a 4.8l "ls" motor making more power than any production rotsry?
>>13807211
>> pro tip: only an engine with ls in the name is an ls
damn nigga you're desperate for that "win"
>>13807236
Well it's true
People don't call sohc modular a coyote do they, so why is a vortec an ls
> that's how 500 ls swap meme started some tard thinking a vortec was an ls1
>>13807211
>> mad that a 20b can make over 300 crank hp without the turbos
I don't care what a modified 20b can d. I'm talking about production engines.
>And those aren't ls engines
Yes they are. You're an idiot.
All engines in the gen II and gen Iv smallblock line are known as "LS" engines. Hence "iron block LS", "truck LS", etc.
>http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/engines-drivetrain/1306-4-8l-vs-5-3l-engine-tech-little-ls-slugfest/
>http://oppositelock.kinja.com/speed-on-a-budget-build-a-400hp-chevy-ls-motor-for-und-1125469009
>http://www.dragzine.com/tech-stories/10-basic-tips-to-building-your-first-ls-engine/
>>13807274
>All engines in the gen II and gen Iv
Should be gen III and IV*
>>13807274
You're talking about production engines? Too bad because the topic of discussion was never production engine. Your attempt to move goal posts is a failure
> All engines in the gen II and gen Iv smallblock line are known as "LS" engines.
Nope. Is ls in the name? Is it literally called a "ls*"? Nope? Then it's not a ls, deal with it
> bbbut look at these articles written by random people with no authority regarding gm and their engine naming!!!
kek faggot try again
so show me this 4.8l /LS/ engine please
>>13803062
I have two M60B40s one with about 300k and the other with about 230k.. they aren't growing on trees.
I will want to replace these soon and the LS1 was suggested as an easy ubiquitous option
>>13807300
And just because lazy sub culture has taken to using the term LS synonymously with generation 3 and 4 sbcs doesn't mean it's so
Really it's like a honda kiddie calling an engine a "vtec" instead of its actual designation
>>13806497
>Any Nissan or Toyota V8 will cost substantially more
kek
why are pushrods kuk so retarded?
>>13807046
>>13806968
>>13806915
>copypaste some dumb shit at the end of my post will prove me right!
jesus kid, you are still doing this?
why are americans so mad at japanese and european OHC v8s?
>>13807300
>You're talking about production engines?
We've always been talking about production engines. Since the beginning. Why the fuck would we talk about anything else?
>Nope. Is ls in the name? Is it literally called a "ls*"? Nope? Then it's not a ls, deal with it
Doesn't matter. LS is used to refer to all gen III and gen IV smallblocks and any enthusiast knows this.
Even Chevy refers to it's LC9 as an LS:
http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/crate-engines/e-rod-lc9.html
>LC9
>An affordable LS crate engine
>Engine Type: LS-Series Gen IV Small-Block V-8
>LS crate engine
>LS series
You just got BTFO faggot.
>>13807350
Except even Chevy refers to it's own Gen III/GenIV smallblocks as "LS" engines that don't have an explicit "LSx" engine code.
http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/crate-engines/connect-cruise-lc9.html
>>13807432
Refer back to the picture where everyone is holding the engines, the picture that started this discussion
the rotsry pictured is not a production engine
> doesn't matter
it does matter. If LS is not in the name it is not a LS, simple as that
That engine linked isn't a 4.8l engine btw either so you aren't btfoing anything
And it makes less power than a 20brew with a boost controller. Or is comparing a lightly modified engine from last century unfair according to you?
>>13807430
>americans
No
Just fuccboi chebby fans
>>13807449
> lc9
> not 4.8l
American education kek the dumb shits confuse lc with ls and 5.3 with 4.8 top kek
It's called dyslexia go get it fixed
>>13807470
>>13807470
>Refer back to the picture where everyone is holding the engines, the picture that started this discussion
>the rotsry pictured is not a production engine
Then you're comparing a non-production rotary to a production LS which is fucking stupid. So the entirety of your argument is based on a retarded premise. Congratulations?
>it does matter. If LS is not in the name it is not a LS, simple as that
GM, the maker of the engines says you're wrong faggot.
http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/crate-engines/e-rod-lc9.html
>LC9
>An affordable LS crate engine
>Engine Type: LS-Series Gen IV Small-Block V-8
>LC9
>LS crate engine
>LS series
You got BTFO again.
Try one more time.
>>13807430
Ford makes solid OHC V8s my man. It's just corvettefags
>>13807470
So to recap,
the weakest LS is stronger than any factory rotary
the weakest Vortec is also stronger than any factory rotary
Yes?
>>13807480
The LC9 being a "LS series" engine according too Chevy themselves proves that Gen III/IV motors without engine codes in the LSx range are still considered LS motors.
You're an idiot.
>>13807491
>stronger
>>13807483
It's a production rotsry from the 70s with aftermarket housing and rotors because new ones are no longer in production
Or is comparing a 1.3l from the 70s to modern v8s too unfair? Top kek
no ls in the name, not an ls
>>13807491
A rotary is more reliable than the most powerful v8 currently available from gm
How does that feel
> muh lt4 and 6000 mile replacements
>>13807496
Sorry friend I can't call it an ls unless an ls is in the name
My friend is from a family of niggers but I don't call him a nigger because his name isn't nigger see where I'm coming from senpai?
And one last point before my phone goes flat
> gm fangirls so desperate they have to compare 21st century v8s to an engine that has mainly been unchanged since the 60s with the exception of fuel injection and forced induction
Muh 7l chebby v8 vs muh 1.3l mazda 2 spinner thing waah waah
>>13807520
>It's a production rotsry from the 70s with aftermarket housing and rotors
It's a modified motor. Neat. No one cares that you want to compare a modified engine to a stock one.
>Or is comparing a 1.3l
>1.3l
Retard detected.
>from the 70s to modern v8s too unfair?
It doesn't matter. you're comparing a stock engine to a modified one. Are you implying a modified engine from the 70's can't make power?
>no ls in the name, not an ls
GM says their own GenIII/IV motors are LS's. No one cares that some autist on the internet is wrong and says otherwise.
>A rotary is more reliable than the most powerful v8 currently available from gm
Here's GM's smallest weakest LS shortblock 4.8 liter taking more abuse than a rotary could dream of before they ran out of dyno time and making 1200hp Pic related:
http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/hrdp-1109-stock-gm-ls-engine-big-bang-theory/
Protip: the only 1200hp rotaries you are going to find are special snowflake drag rotaries that can make only make four to five 1/4 mile passes before needing a rebuild.
>>13807533
No one cares that you choose to be wrong autist.
>>13807520
>A rotary is more reliable than the least reliable v8 currently available from gm
>How does that feel
sounds like they're making progress in the dorito world
>>13807559
>to an engine that has mainly been unchanged since the 60s
That's fucking wrong retard.
what are:
>staged multi ports
>two piece apex seals
>combustion divots
>side housing exhaust ports
>o ring lands
etc.
>> gm fangirls so desperate they have to compare 21st century v8s
How does it feel that the best rotary ever made is a worse performance engine than literally the worst LS V8 Chevy dropped into their budget trucks?
>Muh 7l chebby v8
The LS7 literally decimates every production rotary in every way possible. It's such a bad comparrison it woudl take TWO of the best rotaries mazda ever put in a production car to stack up to an LS in output. And then the LS would weigh around half as much.
>muh 1.3l mazda 2 spinner
>1.3l
You can always tell the idiots in these discussions when someone tries to compare a rotary against a piston engine and cites a 1.3 liter displacement.
>>13807567
>engine dyno
>abuse
>>13807634
>60 dyno runs
>76mm twin turbos
>26psi of boost
>1200hp on an engine meant to make 280hp stock
>not abuse
nigga plz.
>>13807650
yes
i mean its impressive, but it will do less than 10 pulls once you put it on a car and has acesories and has to withstand heat and other bullshit
>>13803028
>i remember someone saying some Toyota 1UZ or something was decent but didn't make a lot of power for what money you put into it.
Yeah well, they're only like $500. They can make a cool sound, too.
>>13806915
You honestly believe it only had 276 hp when it had 297 lb-ft of torque, had 90% of that torque available between 1800 RPM and the peak HP, and revved to 7000 RPM?
Do you have any clue how horsepower is even calculated? That's mathmatically impossible unless you're using some special grade of retard math.
The real peak HP was at least 305hp, perhaps more.
>>13803028
Get an older 1uzfe and strap a vortec supercharger to it. Headers, exhaust and tune.
>>13803028
Problem with the UZ is the transmission - iirc you need an adapter plate to fit either a W58, R154, or you could put a Chevy pattern on there and throw in a T56. Also, they aren't nearly as bulletproof as the chev smallblocks - their breaking point is between 400-500hp on the stock internals. You also need a VVT delete if you want some reliable horsepower.
>>13803043
All of those are quite a bit bigger then an LS, making them less swap-friendly. Besides, adpating that Yamaha /Volvo V8 to longitudinal RWD is a mess from with I can remember from that one turbobricks thread.
>>13803062
DOHC heads for the LS are expensive as hell.
>>13804989
I agree with most said but a ls1 will not make 430 wheel with 1k mods. An ls3 can $800 longtubes and $200 tune, but no way a ls1 can. Full bolt on ls1 (stock heads and cams) will make around 360 wheel.
>>13809402
Cam**
My mistake
>>13806915
>>13806968
stock skyline R32 gtrs made 281 awhp to the wheels. the gentleman's agreement only limited advertised horsepower.
Don't make gm make another dohc V8.
405 hp in 93
Everyone got btfo
>>13809517
Yeah or you'll end up with this
>>13809530
Who doesn't want a fwd V8 bro?
>>13809517
but that was made by lotus
>>13809931
also it didint made 400 hp, it made less because GM wanted MUH 4.4 INCH BORE
>>13803055
Northstars only flaw was the headbolts which are easily remedied with head studs. The time and cost associated with the fix is removing and reinserting the engine into the car which is a non issue if you're swapping the engine.
>>13809958
Made 385, then 405 starting in 93. Lotus helped design, lotus had no part in building the motors.
>>13810071
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/chevrolet-corvette-zr-1-the-lt-5-powerplant-page-2
no one said lotus built them, but they designed it
Nissan VH/VK sound so good, i'd swap one of those into any car.
>>13812726
japan a shit
>>13809156
You have no idea how turbocharged engines work.
Also your hopes and dreams about some rotary making more than 276hp do no mesh with the reality of the most powerful production rotary making only 276hp.
>>13812736
It's good, engine + trans is even lighter than an LS and T56 (the engine alone is heavier though). The problem is how wide they are, and power stock. VHs make close to 300hp, which is less than LS1s and were super wide. The VK wasn't as wide, and made 330hp stock. Both engines can make more pretty easily, but maybe not as easily as an LS (duh, it's down 1.5l). I'm surprised VK isn't as popular, it has everything to make it good.
>>13815360
The aftermarket just isn't there
>>13815360
no, you don't understand
