This is additional improvement beyond a 20% gain obtained in the naturally aspirated 6.2L LS3 V-8 by increasing the radius of the hone over-travel fillets from three to 10 millimeters. It's cast from 319-T5 aluminum and fitted with cast-iron cylinder linersīulkheads in the LSA engine block have been strengthened 20 percent by optimizing the size of the bulkhead "windows" to take advantage of material thickness in the bulkhead. The 6.2L Gen IV small block has been further refined for the LSA. Would hate to go through the trouble to make the car fast with a LSA just to find out the bottom end is on borrowed time.īlock PN: (Pulled from GM Performance website, could find the PN specifically for SS or the LSA in the CTS-V) or are they just different part numbers for the same parts? Would really love to know before diving into FI project. What are the specs/performance/power tolerances for the part numbers below. Any of our members familiar enough with GM part numbers, or these engines in general.can they hold the same power as Gen 2 V? I've heard anecdotally that no they aren't at the 650-700BHP and 650+ LBS range that LS3 rods just simply bend. However, what I was unable to find an answer to was whether or not there were actually differences between those parts and further more the power/performance limits of those parts. I found it strange that GM would over engineer the NA version of the LS3 and I did find that the part numbers were different for the major components of the short block. Well that just didn't seem correct to me so I started searching for Part Numbers. Doing my research into how much power the bottom ends of these engines could hold and one of my CTS-V friends suggested that it had a the same bottom end as the Gen 2 V and they can hold a lot of power without worries.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |