HOW MUCH POWER IS THE LS3 ROD MOD REALLY WORTH? 427 LS3 STROKER INTAKE TEST-STOCK LS3 VS ROD MOD
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 сер 2024
- WHAT IS THE LS3 ROD MOD? HOW MUCH POWER IS THE ROD MOD INTAKE WORTH? CAN I INCREASE POWER OF MY LS3 WITH A ROD MOD INTAKE? WHAT SIZE THROTTLE BODY SHOULD I RUN WITH MY ROD MOD INTAKE? 90MM VS 102MM THROTTLE BODY TEST! DOES A BIG THROTTLE BODY HELP POWER? WHAT IF THE THROTTLE BODY IS BIGGER THAN THE INTAKE OPENING? CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO WHERE I COMPARED A STOCK LS3 INTAKE AND 90MM DBW THROTTLE BODY TO A ROD MOD LS3 INTAKE. I ALSO COMPARED THE ROD MOD INTAKE WITH A 90MM THROTTLE BODY AND 102MM THROTTLE BODY? DID THE BIG THROTTLE BODY HURT POWER SINCE THE OPENING IN THE INTAKE WAS ONLY 90M?
Man, those Chevrolet engineers who made that intake were out for victory, weren't they?
The whole engine is amazing. The ls3 is the best na ls they made in my opinion.
@@Skubasteph Id argue for the LS7 myself.
@@Skubasteph How do you all feel about "LT", some are showing "LT" results exceeding LS3/LS7, but up until that time I was personally seeing better LS3/LS7 results.
@@dennisrobinson8008 I think the LT motors are more difficult to make big power with. Folks are making 2000+ with the newest l8t iron block, but with aftermarket fueling and run like an Ls engine. LT engines really shine stock and supercharged, with constant variable valve timing and direct injection. Cvvt adds tons of power and driveability under the curve. Most cams from what i can see remove the cvvt, which defeats some of the purpose of running the higher tech engine. DI seems pretty expensive to upgrade, so port injection is probably better, which basically puts you back to a fancy LS
@@Saddedude ehh there really expensive rare engine that like to drop valves. so id always go for the ls3 over the ls7.
598 lb/ft divided by 427 CID = 1.40 lb/ft/CID. That is impressive and needs a lot of overlap to be realised. It we just chose 274 degrees on the exhaust lobes for the calculations we get 274 - 247 = 27 degrees difference, divided by four we get 6.75 degrees.
112 LSA - 6.75 degrees = 105.25 degrees LSA. This cam has overlap as if it was a 247/247 cam on a 105.5 LSA. :)
No wonder it works well.
Always nice to see 8 lambdasensors and 8 exhaust temp. probes.
The rod mod is the modern equivalent to eliminating the throttle body coolant crossover on the LS1 for power
Nah. It's the modern equivalent of flipping the lid on a Gen 1 SBC. I hate coolant crossovers.
It's the enthusiast equivalent of a 'tornado' - which is hilarious considering how enthusiasts mock the 'tornado' lol
What would really be cool is if somebody could compile a list of all the parts tested and grade them on a hp/dollar ratio to pick out all the best mods by their hp value
Need to run this same test on a stock ls3
GPI has already done that test with their Intake shootout
@@justinw6448 got a link only one I found from gpi made like 610
@@Smithtobewith This is the GPi intake test video on stock bottom end LS3 (376ci vs 427ci in this video), ported OEM heads (vs TFS aftermarket heads in this video) and a different cam. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but you can compare the deltas with no other changes made. It's possible the GPI engine was using an OEM water pump as well.
ua-cam.com/video/LnAO1rKg7Lg/v-deo.html
my ported ls3 intake made 15hp more over a stock deal on btr's dyno mule. the throat can be matched to a 102mm an you use a gasket. i had also shortened the runners to 7.5". it carried power to 7400. peaked at 6600 an stayed the same to 7k. nick tested it file was lainos ls3 intake i believe.
just cant beat factory ls3 intake! Best in the business
Making great NA LS power. Love all the testing you do
427 with a 4.130 bore is crying out for more cylinder head, especially with the monster camshaft. LS7 with LS3 heads is an interesting choice, seems like a step backwards.
The 102 test matched results with my test of the same. Even with the throat opened as much as possible eliminating the factory o-ring groove completely there was no gain at all with a 102 (on a moderate cam/stock head SBE LS3) - the manifold itself is the restriction at that point.
We ran the CNC ported LS3 TFS head to allow us to run the LS3 intake tests. They flow more than enough to support the tested power level.
@@richardholdener1727 for sure, gotta have LS3 heads to test LS3 intakes. Just saying it's an odd combo, in most cases of you were going to the trouble of the big bore, you wanna take advantage of it!
we ran ls7 heads too
Sweet, can't wait to see the results!
I tested one years ago on my heads and cam LS3. Not surprised.
Shor is the man for a dyno tune in Kentucky 💪🏾💯keep up the good work
That’s weird. I did a direct compression of the rod mod and I picked up hood power on a Texas speed ls3. I think the rod mod works way way better and it’s more efficient on standard cammed ls3 “6.2” vs the big 427. Here’s my dyno video with a direct back to back comparison. We swapped the stock intake manifold to a rod mod intake with the exact same conditions without changing the tune and picked up really good power! ua-cam.com/video/TsMIhDaqUco/v-deo.html
would be odd if it worked better on a less powerful motor
@@richardholdener1727aye the don’t lie. We did back to back runs on the same day under the same conditions.
@@Its_Mike_Myke My LS2 with Mast Ls3 heads stock LS3 intake vararam and a healthy cam 624/615 243/250/114 made 477/418 I shaved the heads from 66cc to 63 cc and a .045 headgasket got an X-air air intake and the Rodmod and the car made 522/467🤗
There’s a few uncontrolled variables going on when it comes to the placement of the rods within the LS3 intake manifold. Different companies use different techniques and Rod size/placement. As always, love the channel and the effort y’all put in for the data🤙🏼
@@richardholdener1727 That manifold was not designed be used on a big inch stroker. If on LS3 or l77 or l77 stock cubic inch yes makes power up to about 6,600 rpm.
Rick Crawford has been doing the rod mod for a while.
Thanks for visiting our great state. It had to have been a long drive from California
Haha I made it in early! Hell yes! Mr Holdner, thank you for all that you do. I love your content man keep doing it and thank you!!!
man, brian tooley loves him some exhaust duration, even on the all motor cams.
a lot of cam makers are doing that. i don't wanna lose more drivability just to wing out at extra 4hp at the very top. i know rec ports are a little deficient but still...
not sure where you get the notion of 4 extra hp
@@richardholdener1727 I think he's using a hyperbolic statement, seems like he's suggesting that compared to other can designers/manufactures, BT likes to push exhaust duration more than most, for little power gain at a cost of a lot of driveability.
At least that's what I think he's saying?
"he likes to push exhaust duration more than most for little power gain at the cost of driveability," said no knowledgeable individual ever. Take care with generalities...or just look at the success of the Truck Norris cam. Much to be learned
Explain how a NA LS3 making 650+ HP _deficient ?_
@@richardholdener1727 I'm just older now and milder cam timing guy now. The "it's not that serious" phase. lol
Great Video Richard! Ived watched this vid multiple times since u released it. I really like these types of videos where u test other engine mods vs the normal camshaft and heads. But those are great too! 👍
many GM engineers in LS/LT development are NHRA Record Holder/Event Winners. Hence good performance from production products.
Good stuff as always. Can't wait for a video of the other one I saw on that table 👀
Wow. That's a lot of exhaust duration. I understand that for the same EVC, longer duration with an earlier EVO builds more midrange torque. I'm of the thinking that it forces the header to behave like a venturi operated siphon.
-- Honestly, I see absolutely no reason to run any other intake on an LS3 than the stock one.
-- The LS3 is easily the best engine GM ever made. If you're not happy with a cammed LS3, it's because you're picking fights outside your weight class. No dirt accumulates under the manifold like you get with a coyote. It's lightweight. It runs quite fine in factory trim. GM really did their best with it.
Those of us who have a ls3, l77 or l76 with rec port heads know that this was totally the wrong combination to run this test on. This manifold is designed to run under 7k rpms with stock size engine. Test by Rick Crawfords and countless others show around a 15 rwhp increase and good gains in torque under the curve on stock sized engines. Rod mod out flows fast up to 6,600 rpms on stock sized engines and GPI would not be selling them if they didnt make power for years
THIS WAS A GPI ROD MOD
@@richardholdener1727 He never said it wasn't or was anybody else that did the mod. But a good way to deflect I guess.
@richardholdener1727 my man...test oem vs rod mod on a stock LS3. Proven time and time again at the track.
That being said, I'm surprised at these results. I expected better.
@@SilverSurfer77 wrong engine combo for this test should been done on ls3 with smaller cam.
When I saw "rod mod", my brain was thinking connecting rods. That's what I get for hopping on youtube before finishing my morning coffee. 😛
don't look for power in connecting rods
Unless you're David Vizard. He looks for power in everything. 😎
he finds it too
yep!
Rick Crawford came up with the rod mod design
I was watching the vacuum gauge. The stock manifold pulled down to .5, the rod mod only pulled down to .4. At .5", that is a pretty dang narrow window to improve on.
I had a hard time believing adding a couple of rods would make a huge difference if any.. thia confirms it.. thanks Richard.. im sure this video will piss of a few shops haha
Please do an intake testing on this engine, aka Holley hi ram, sheet metal, btr , fast lsxr etc etc
we tested other intakes-see the other vids
Thank you for your knowledge and videos USA 🇺🇸
Would have been good to see how the Fast LSXR intake compared
The LSXR LS3 intake has never shown much power
@@richardholdener1727 What about a Fast LSXR LS7 intake with a 102mm throttle body? Reason is I have one and I am replacing a blown up LS7 with a 427 stroker LS3.
@@Gearbhallno one uses lsxr if anything highram ported or msd ported
Fast LS7 is good-MSD LS7 is better, but these were all LS3 based intakes-not LS7
@@richardholdener1727 Thanks! I am glad I can stick with the one I already have. I expect the MSD intake probably isn't worth the extra money over the one I already have if its good.
I missed the compression ratio on this setup... I feel like it should have made more power with that cam. Were the heads up to the job? Was the LS3 intake, in any form, pretty much maxed out? Do you think this thing could have made closer to 700 hp with bigger heads and a different intake? Overthinking it maybe. ~ 670 is excellent. Let's see that setup with the FAST LSXHR and the proper throttle body opening.
we have Hi Ram, PD, Pro Flo and BTR intakes coming up
@@richardholdener1727 Bless you Richard Holdener
GM 87-90mm throttle bodies are more than big enough to support 700+ hp setups. So I'm not surprised by zero gains. The 102/103s are perfectly fine for setups into the 1000+ hp range, so overkill for this engine. We recently made 1100+ whp on a hub dyno on an LT4 with an off the shelf NW103 - pressure drop between the blower (2650) and the throttle was minor. When you consider that the blower has to be consuming at least 100 hp on top of that, it's a ton of power. Since throttle flow is pretty much a function of area, we'd expect a 90mm to flow 75% of a 103, and be good for at least 750-800 hp.
I would use something bigger on a 1000-hp draw through (PD blower) combo-we always see vacuum and power with 102 at 1000 hp
@@richardholdener1727 We only see 1-2" of pressure drop across a 102/103 at 1000 hp PD setup. Small enough to really not care, especially given how much harder it is to fit the 112 underhood on many LS setups due to belt drive issues/clearances. By comparison, a stock 87mm throttle body was seeing 5-6" of drop at 800 whp PD setup.
and a 700-hp na motor sees sizable gains stepping from a 90mm throttle body to a 102 or bigger
I think you should try to test it in a smaller motor. Everytime I see gains on these is one stock bottom end with heads cam, like on ls2 heads cam or ls3 heads cam and that’s when I see people making 8-12whp increase. Unless you’ve already tested it, if so would be really cool to know what happened.
If the manifold does not show gains on a bigger, more powerful motor, usually it shows even less on a milder, smaller motor
@@richardholdener1727 thanks for the reply and well disappointment hits haha
When you showed the camshaft spec I was thinking wow big split but the carryover past peak HP is really nice ... But kinda sounds like it's messing with the idle
It was bigger than need be-but it comes into play with other intakes tested
That engine needs something like a L.O.D intake on it and ran to 8k rpm. That ls3 intake is holding it back.
I wonder if you had the 87mm throttle body, would there have been any difference with that? Would the low end torque have come up any while snubbing the higher rpm areas?
smaller throttle body never ads low speed torque
Hey Richard r u gonna do a LV3 intake Dyno test and video and are u gonna do a super Richy adj runner intake test and video???
Couldn't find a stock LS3 intake so I bought a used rod mod manifold. I was worried it made less power than stock, glad to see it's just a useless mod 🤘
Awesome test. By the way have you testest how much power the maf sensor worth is? Its good for driveability.Greetings from poland.
we did not run a MAF
I don't know about anyone else, but I personally miss the disco music at the beginning of Richard's videos ... it's just not the same!
me too
Watching this video has me thinking that if the LS3 is the best engine GM ever made, then the Gen 2 Coyote with MMR VVT deletes and a Boss intake is the best engine Ford ever made. I know that procedure absolutely kills midrange torque, but once you shift, it won't matter, and it's a simple setup. No CMCV's to fail, nice raised plenum. Simple. I'm building an S197 with that combo. T56, Solid hub 6-puck ACT clutch, Eaton Truetrac, DTC-60 pads. My only regret is not using a 7.25" Tilton.
VVT deletes is silly
@@richardholdener1727seriously curious why you don’t like vvt deletes
@@anthonywoodall8854 VVT gives you a lot of midrange torque with ZERO effort. For street driving where you don't rev it out completely, the VVT gives you what you want with stock cams. Another benefit of VVT is the weight of the phasers dampening the system. There are a lot of reasons to leave VVT engines bone stock and simply enjoy their greatness.
-- The reason I chose to delete VVT is because this engine is going to see a lot aggressive changes in engine speed. This isn't a drag car. It's a naturally aspirated drift/road race car. Where a drag car does a 3500 RPM dig and then runs for 15 seconds, I'm gonna rip the handbrake, hold it floored on the 8100 limiter and side-step the clutch.
-- Another thing. This car has a bit of axle tramp under braking. So, if I son't want to upshift on a straight because I have a turn coming up, and I get on the brake enough to make it tramp, then that shock goes back into the engine because I have that solid hub 6-puck clutch. I have to use that clutch, because the lower weight makes the transmission shift better. Plus, when this car gets airborne cresting a hill in 4th gear, it's gonna bounce off the limter, the hook dead hard on landing. Again, that shock has to fight the weight in the VVT system.
@@anthonywoodall8854
-- The momentum in the valvetrain pulls the chain guide into the tensioner and then it slaps back out. VVT adds more weight, thus a harder hit. If the chain guides break or wear unevenly, this can cause problems.
-- On a smooth setup, VVT is nice. Ride in an S550 on a stock resonator and muffler delete. They're smooth and sound so sweet.
-- I think this is why BBC's and LS engines dominate offroad. They don't have tensioners. Okay, LS engines do have tensioners, but there's way less slack on those than any other OHC setup.
-- This might also be why the RB-26 and 2JZ are so good. They don't use chain guides. They use tensioners, which are simpler and stiffer.
are you testing the performance design ls3 intake? I recently installed one on my car not time to take to chassis dyno. Appears from draggy results .15 better 1-1.5 mph faster. ls3 crate hotcam engine.
coming today
@@richardholdener1727 your the best lol would be interesting to see in future video if you do 8 widebands on it to see what different runner lengths does
Which size XS intake and throttle body?
I just have the 101 with stock 90mm tbody
this had 8 wide bands on it
Your intake is 102mm
Your exhaust is 2 3/4 primary ending in 3 in
Your restrictions will b come cam and valve size
102mm sounds great but it’s half of your exhaust flow
start thinking heat and pressure
Should have tested the fast lsxr as well
Interesting test.
Can you please confirm the compression ratio of this engine and the fuel used for the test?? Thanks
e85
@@richardholdener1727 can you confirm the compression ratio please? Thanks
Man a rcr rod mod intake with a btr cam, the g8 guys are crying right now lol
😂
They all run silly combos anyways.
I'm sure Rick Crawford is crying.
water pump mod, you run an external pump? part number? last question, can it be used for a daily driver setup? digging the pluming setup, thanks in advance!!
remote dyno pump but Meziere has electric and remotes for sale
Awesome! , I'll look into it , thanks again for the response 😁
Sketchy...If I wanted to skew HP/TQ gain results from a ls3 intake rod mod/porting upgrade, I would use the same engine used in this test because testing 6.2L LS3 intake manifolds on a 7.0L LS7 with some pretty heavy mods makes no sense unless you want to document low power gains.
Agreed-there is something sketchy about a direct back to back dyno test that shows actual results and not what you wanted to happen.
i think this test would have been better on a stock block and heads or even a cammed LS3
feel free to test on the motor you like
@@richardholdener1727 i have but with a dynojet thanks
It would have been nice to see if a fast 102 intake would have done any better on this combo
It wasn't amazing in the previous test. I doubt a couple more cubic inches would make all the difference given how it performed. Given everything I've looked at, including Richard's extensive testing the FAST is most at home on a cathedral port LS.
@@emperorbobarino in the intake test the motor was just stock ls3 with a mild cam pushing just 52x hp. This one flowing more air would have shown if the intake opening really is a restriction or not. Fast performs same as ls3 intake except for it having 102mm opening vs the 90mm. Testing 90 vs 102mm throttle body is not as helpful since opening is restricted.
@@clueless4wat322 It pretty much doesn't matter. Watch the performance design test. The biggest gain was 11HP for TB/TB opening. The difference on a 427 CID engine between a 90 and a 102 was 6 HP. 6 HP on an engine this big, making this much power.
@@emperorbobarino good to know, I'll take a look at that also. I thought it might be closer to 20hp on a good run but even then I could never justify the cost of it. Thanks for the info!
@@clueless4wat322 Sure thing. Factory LS3 manifold is really, really hard to beat on stuff less than 7L/427 cid, is LS3 headed and under 7k rpms. Doesn't hurt that it comes with the motor and has the best hood clearance either.
Do I spy some other brand new rec port intakes on the table? Really curious to see how those compare. This is a combo where I would expect good things from a proper 102 intake and TB setup.
I have a ported rod mod intake on my "LS3" former Escalade engine. I don't know if it made more power, but it sure likes to howl at part throttle.
I can see the rounded top of the new Performance Design XS LS3 intake in the background.
that test coming today
Did you notice the yellow intake air duct trying to collapse when you ran the 102? It appeared to be an air restriction or something.
it's not
Compare the Fast LS3 to the rod modded LS3 intake
fast LS3 doesn't add much over stock LS3
I've ported/rod modded lots of ls3 intakes. Typically we have found track performance improved .1-.15 and 1+ mph from doing the rod mod / porting.
Other than that... yea a 102 isn't gonna make any difference if you don't epoxy up and port the intake out to a 102.....been there done that.🙄
To be honest i can't believe you would even waste time trying it like you did.
I don’t really see much point in the tb test. If you don’t blend the opening I think you just testing how consistent the dyno is 😢 I mean you have one intake with hours and hours of a waste of time into it and it would only take a solid 10 mins to blend that opening😂 maybe I’m missing something do they get to thin or is there some reason why people go through all the trouble of that rod mod but don’t blend the entry?
to go to 102mm opening you need to intersect the o-ring channel
@@richardholdener1727 I have a gasket with my 102
Hmm you didnt run a ported stock throttle body from Mamo or Soler which is most of us do when running a rod mod intake manifold please redo test with ported 90mm throttle body
other intakes with the 90mm made much more power-'not that
@@richardholdener1727 I would like to see that
F yea!
Would a smaller engine have more of a turbulence issue to be solved by the rodmod?
turbulence?
@@richardholdener1727 isn’t the purpose of the rodmod to straighten out turbulent air?
just to improve airflow into the port
why rick the yelo intake pipe move so mutch .....air restriction ,,,,,me be ??? and tamk for all the good infos sir ,,,merci bien
not restrictive
@@richardholdener1727 tanks for the feed back alway 110% true stuff....merci
I havent seen more than 10 hp from the rod mod.
Is this the ported rod mod or just the rod mod?
He mentioned there being some port matching so I’d assume that they did.
Looked like some minor porting around the inlet, but I'd be interested to know if the runners were ported as well. GPI, as well as people doing A-B testing on them on dynos, pretty consistently shows 6-8 HP on stock engines and 12-15 HP with a decent cam for the *ported rod mod*. Typically the mid-range torque also picks up double digits as well.
@@thebradnoyes I did hear him mention they ported it to handle the bigger throttle body I must have missed if he talked about them poting the rest of the intake.
We did NO additional porting to the intake other than what came with the Rod Mod modifications-Also, it was not matched to the larger throttle body (the mismatch was shown in the video).
Put a high ram on it!
we did
@@richardholdener1727 what was the result?
that vid is up
@@richardholdener1727 I watched it that's more my style thanks buddy
Something is off about this test. 😊
agreed-it provided data
Snake oil……7hp?…..hahahahahaha
Where is the Chevy copied the ford Windsor guy.😂
Remember kids, please don’t ever start bolts with a power tool the way this guy is doing in the video. Completely unsat.
Remember people reading this comment, he had no idea about the setting on the gun or the experience of the guy yielding the tool
thats a expensive motor right there only to get waxed by a 302 coyote on the street even this race engine is only 1.5 hp/ci sad a coyote does that stock
I like Coyotes and have tested them, but an na coyote is bus lengths behind a 700-hp 427.