Completed LSx (or 1 or 6 or 7 or...)?

[TurboStreetCar]

Syst: Im not getting emotional, your were just being ridiculous. I daily drove my hayabusa, there not rough at all, very well mannered on the street. a street car is exactly that a car that you drive on the street. something street legal, passes inspection besides emissions, DOT tires, pump gas, etc.

Wissas: why a 500 horsepower street car? i dont know, ask Chevy. Performance driven is different then race car. Though a performance driven streetcar isnt going to do non stop laps all day on a track, 1/4 mile or roadcourse.

If my comments about power delivery are worthless because i like how turbos feel, then yours are too because you like how the lsx always has power. Just because i like something doesn't mean i cant compare it to something else. I dont like lag, im not going to go buy the biggest turbo because i enjoy waiting for boost, BUT lag isnt that bad on any street turbo.

I cant see the lsx in a supra get that much better gas mileage then the 7m. in vette's with the little MPG meter thing, i seen high 20's cruising in 6th. occasionally 30. Thats also in a car thats 3200lbs and VERY aerodynamic. people have reported on here around 25mpg with a 7m.

 

[SySt]

Your comments about power delivery are somewhat pointless in this topic. We are comparing engine performance. You have a right to like whatever sort of power delivery you want, but nothing beats the ability to lay down more power at any given moment in an argument about engine performance.

When I mentioned sport bikes I was referring to such bikes as a CBR600, R6, R1, GSXR1000 etc. A Hayabusa is kinda getting away from the sport bike title. I would compare that to calling a Bugatti Veyron a sports car. At any rate, you may consider sport bikes well mannered. Hell a car with a rigid frame, lots of power, sticky tires and tight suspension such as a race car to be very well mannered.

 

[Ma70.Ent]

All I have to say is someone should pioneer the LSX swap then sell "kits" that have all of the required parts. It would be like the LSX RX7s...except in a Supra!

 

[SySt]

All I have to say is someone should pioneer the LSX swap then sell "kits" that have all of the required parts. It would be like the LSX RX7s...except in a Supra!

I wish that had been done when I started my swap. Unfortunately I don't think it is all that feasible. The T56 does not fit in the transmission tunnel without some pounding and cutting the factory transmission mounts. Also, the shifter does not line up to the factory hole very well unless you move the engine forward which would require modifying the front subframe so the oil pan does not hit it. The T56 also requires a larger clutch master cylinder. One out of a land cruiser works but does not quite bolt up.

There is a guy around who put a 5.3L LSX in his MK3. I believe he used a combination of 7M mounts and Corvette mounts for the engine. He used a TK600 for the transmission though, which is a 5-speed and may not require the tunnel modifications. He also used a factory f-body driveshaft.

 

[TurboStreetCar]

Your comments about power delivery are somewhat pointless in this topic. We are comparing engine performance. You have a right to like whatever sort of power delivery you want, but nothing beats the ability to lay down more power at any given moment in an argument about engine performance.

When I mentioned sport bikes I was referring to such bikes as a CBR600, R6, R1, GSXR1000 etc. A Hayabusa is kinda getting away from the sport bike title. I would compare that to calling a Bugatti Veyron a sports car. At any rate, you may consider sport bikes well mannered. Hell a car with a rigid frame, lots of power, sticky tires and tight suspension such as a race car to be very well mannered.

Your first paragraph is amazing, more and more i feel you don't have the ability to read just to type very technically. Ive said it many times that i agreed the lsx had better lower end. Though that doesn't change the fact that turbo lag isnt that incredibly bad.

Ive ridden my friends 07 gskr1k, it not worse then the busa, a little more vibration but thats about all, nowhere near as bad as a rough car at all.

Bugatti, more like a porsche 911 but faster.

 

[SySt]

Your first paragraph is amazing, more and more i feel you don't have the ability to read just to type very technically. Ive said it many times that i agreed the lsx had better lower end. Though that doesn't change the fact that turbo lag isnt that incredibly bad.

Ive ridden my friends 07 gskr1k, it not worse then the busa, a little more vibration but thats about all, nowhere near as bad as a rough car at all.

Bugatti, more like a porsche 911 but faster.

911s are somewhat known for their handling abilities, Busas are not. That is why I would compare the Busa to a Veyron, they're fast but not exactly the most agile.

My point in saying I would daily drive a bike is that all the wind noise, engine noise, vibration, road feel and general effort to drive does not bother me. I can sit on a hot day at a stop light with my jacket, helmet and gloves on and not be too uncomfortable. Thus, I do not require anymore comfort out of a car. So my definition of a street car can, and has been totally different than someone elses. That is why I think, you thought this argument was going towards race cars rather than street cars. It depends, but I would drive a race car on the street daily. So a street car to me, can be a race car.

Are you really trying to argue your opinion about turbo lag? In a performance application it would always be better to have no lag. Frankly I don't care if you think it's not that incredibly bad. I am trying to argue objectivley, that would be a very subjective arguement.

 

[suprabad]

chunks, I'm looking at all your replys...
There's a definite pattern in your posts...you have changed the criteria, blurred the facts, insulted the dissenting opinionators, and overlooked, ignored or just plain pretended like anything you couldn't address or overcome with a logical arguement didn't exist (ex.dismissing the dyno charts or failing to recognize the obvious higher number of failing points on a 7mgte, or your arguement for the 7m's 2 bolt mains not being weaker than a 6 bolt main block).

In short, you're playing "lawyer ball" here.

C'mon bro...you're better than that, don't ignore logic and plain old reality to defend a position out of brand loyaltly.

I believe if you were to re-read all your posts and be honest with yourself, you would see that you are being emotional about this, and that you're assertion (the 7m is any kind of match for an LS motor reliability, power, power delivery, torque etc.,) is factually wrong.

You're a smart enough guy to make a bad arguement seem plausible, so I have to believe you're smart enough to see the reality here...if you would take a step back and re-think it.

:icon_bigg

 

[Wiisass]

If I'm going to ask Chevy, then let's just look at what motor they're using.

And I don't mean driven by performance, I mean driven, like pushing the car, driving at the limits, etc. You're an idiot if you do this on the street.

You're logic is horrible. You don't mind lag because you like the way a turbo feels, that's purely subjective. How can you compare that to the fact that power is always available on an Lsx. I'm not negating anything about power delivery when comparing the two. I'm just ignoring your opinion because it's subjective.

Syst's comments about your power delivery comments are on point. He can read, it seems that you can't understand why you thinking that lag isn't bad isn't the same as people who want power all the time. This could be quantifiably proven if we had two cars making the same peak power, but one a 7m and one a LSx. Compare the lap times of those cars and you will see how lag equates to lost time.

If you come back and say for a street car it's not bad, well since there's no timing or anything, then lag doesn't really mean anything other than poor power delivery in comparison. And since you're in low rpms a lot of the time on the street, then I would think that low to mid range performance would be more important than top end on the street. So if you're turbo doesn't spool until 4k rpm, then it's going to be boring to drive on the street.

As far as gas mileage, even just comparing EPA numbers for a 2001 corvette and a 88 turbo supra. The corvette epa numbers say 17/26 and the supra numbers are 16/22. So if you're pushing a lot more power out of a 7m, you're mileage isn't going to be as good as if your pushing a little more power out of an LSx. I mean this depends on driving style and where you're driving and all of that. But I still think with the same person driving and going the same places, an LSx would get better mileage than a 7m and probably by a decent margin, enough to see some money saved over the course of a week.

Tim

 

[TurboStreetCar]

911s are somewhat known for their handling abilities, Busas are not. That is why I would compare the Busa to a Veyron, they're fast but not exactly the most agile.

My point in saying I would daily drive a bike is that all the wind noise, engine noise, vibration, road feel and general effort to drive does not bother me. I can sit on a hot day at a stop light with my jacket, helmet and gloves on and not be too uncomfortable. Thus, I do not require anymore comfort out of a car. So my definition of a street car can, and has been totally different than someone elses. That is why I think, you thought this argument was going towards race cars rather than street cars. It depends, but I would drive a race car on the street daily. So a street car to me, can be a race car.

Are you really trying to argue your opinion about turbo lag? In a performance application it would always be better to have no lag. Frankly I don't care if you think it's not that incredibly bad. I am trying to argue objectivley, that would be a very subjective arguement.

Though the Veyron is a little expensive, the busa is not, i was more referring to the comfort and speed....

I understand your second paragraph and agree.

Ok third paragraph, seems you and Wiisas are both hung up on me not minding turbo lag. Hmm.....i believe ive said it a number of times i agree the lsx has better power delivery and better low end compared to a turbo car, i never said turbo lag was better then instant power. Ok? Got it?

Suprabad:I questioned his reading ability because this is the fourth post now i said that the lsx has the upper hand in low end, and every time i get a response "how can you say turbo lag is better then power on tap?".

I dismissed Dyno charts because there was no argument, ive agreed on more area under the curve and better power delivery on the side of the lsx time and time again.

The higher number of failure points bieng the IC piping and such, i believe i said something about that to this effect. "Anything could happen with those parts i understand, but thats also not horsepower dependent, thats regardless of output they could get damaged."

2 bolt mains with 2 more main caps, i said something about that as well to this effect "2-bolt but 2 more, and one piston per throw. seeing as people make 600+ with no more then MAYBE billet mains i dont see your point. you have double the load we do on the same spot on the crank and we have 2 more mains supporting the crank. 2 more mains supporting the crank is much more then having journals "a bit" bigger"

Im not changing anything, ive said from the beginning Cost for cost its cheaper or equal to have a 500rwhp 7m as it is to swap an ls1 making equal power, and that if the 7m is built properly, will be just as reliable. Nowhere did i ever say low end would be better for the 7m or the 7m was a better engine or anything of the sort.

I have said lag isn't that bad because its not that bad, you guys are making it seem like it takes alot longer then it does for boost to build.

Wiisas:I never said i like lag or lag is better then having power on tap. Im a turbo guy, so i dont mind the slight half second of lag before all the power hits in. I also dont remember comparing it to having power on tap and saying its better. Show me where i did and ill apologize but until you find where i said it Enough with saying the same thing over and over again. This is the fourth post ive made in a row saying either turbo cars don't have the best low end or the lxs has better low end.

If the turbo doesn't spool until 4krpm thats a little excessive, ive been saying for a street turbo. Full boost will be at the latest at 3700 rpm, with boost starting at like 2500. Your misunderstanding what im saying, i dont like lag, i dont want so big of a turbo i have alot of lag, lag isnt better then having full power on tap. I did say i like the feeling of the turbo spooling, witch usually only takes about a quarter of a second at max.

Fuel mileage would prolly be better for a turbo car because you would be off boost just driving around, whereas the lsx cant be "turned off". its trying to make 500 horsepower at all times, where the turbo car is making the same as it would stock untill you push the pedal and hit boost. Though its a toss up on driving style, so who knows.

 

[Ma70.Ent]

lol, this is the thread that keeps on going.

I'll probably end up moving this to the "Other Engines" section and sticky it.

 

[TurboStreetCar]

lol, this is the thread that keeps on going.

I'll probably end up moving this to the "Other Engines" section and sticky it.

Eh ill be out of this one too soon, its going in circles and i spent way too much time on here today.

 

[Wiisass]

So we agree on power delivery, area under the hp and torque curves and number of failure points. So it's just cost and reliability that you still think a 7m has better than an LSx. Well since i have yet to see a true list for either build in terms of actual parts and actual cost. There was a rough one that someone posted a few pages ago, that was off and seemed biased to the 7m.

And the whole reliability thing, well whatever, I've said as much as I can and I know that the argument isn't that the Lsx can handle it but it's that the 7m can. It has been proven that the 7m can handle higher power, but at what cost and under what situations. There's references to other people but nothing really from them. I know the motor can be built to handle the power but I think it will need more supporting mods which means more cost to be reliable at that power level. Where the LSx won't need much to reliable handle the same power. And since we agreed that power delivery and power under the curve are better for the LSx with the same peak power, that would make the LSx car faster than the 7m car.

If you want to continue this, I would like to at least see a dyno plot for a 400+hp 7m with a parts list, then we might be able to get a better idea on the cost of doing it that way.

lol, this is the thread that keeps on going.

I'll probably end up moving this to the "Other Engines" section and sticky it.

Don't sticky it, it's not worth it. It was supposed to be a discussion on the Lsx in an Mk3 but ended up trying to prove why the LSx is a better choice than the 7m.

So just let it die. I've posted everything to support my stance on the issue and I'm assuming what Nosechunks posted was his whole view on all of this.

Tim

 

[suprabad]

It was supposed to be a discussion on the Lsx in an Mk3 Tim

I'm still hoping that someone will post some pic's and some information on a completed or near completed LS, and some details about the swap.

I've found you can save yourself alot of trouble by learning from someone elses trial and error.

I'm kinda surprised there's not more of these conversions on the road.:icon_surp

I'd be interested in seeing this thread stickyed because you gotta know this kind of swap is going to start happening a lot, as 7m parts get harder and harder to get and the aftermarket support continues to dry-up.

 

[SySt]

Here is a few pics of my nearly completed swap. I also have a build thread going in the build up forum.

 

[TurboStreetCar]

This is my last one on this topic cause this will go on forever otherwise.

Decent comparison. A couple things just to be fair. 400 for an R154 clutch that would hold 500hp? I want to know where to get that. I would think probably double that for something that would work for the setup. The rest is probably alright, but you would also need to include tuning, so whatever that costs. I won't even complain about the cheap manifold and IC setup becuase you can get stuff for that price that would probably work alright.

For the LS1, that could be right. I was looking at some numbers and with just a cam people are making 400whp. So if you drop the heads ($1200), you're at $6900.
Tim

That was what you replied back to my price list, and that list didn't favor anything. Even doubling the cost of the clutch at your request would put the 500horse 7m at $7150. compared to $8100 for a comparable stock bottom end ~450rwhp ls1 swap. That cost is cost of parts readily available now, anyone can find better deals here and there. because you might piece a 500horsepower ls1 together for 1000 bucks from some guy that just had to get rid of the engine for some urgent reason doesn't mean everyone can.

All those prices for the 7m are actual cost, brand new off the shelf besides machine work that i cant see being terribly more expensive. Tuning would most likely need to be done for both plus there was no cost added for having someone do all the fab work. Since those prices are all off the shelf prices im sure you could save some money here or there in a 7m build aswell.

my point? cost is up to owner and the situation on the cost of parts. im sure you could find some things cheaper for a ls1 swap, but i m sure you could also find things cheaper for a 7m build. Theres no way to determine it, unless you got an estimate from a shop to do the conversion/build and compared the estimates.

Reliability, how well do ls1's handle 450-500 horsepower on stock bottom ends? if you need to build the bottom end its hands down cheaper for the 7m.
That cost is for a 7m to make and handle 500horsepower reliably at the cost of going to the store and buying the parts, all brand new.

Overall, reliability will most likely be even, depending on how the stock bottom end in an ls1 will take 450-500 horsepower, Cost is indeterminable because the prices vary so greatly. Streetability as in just driving around to work or school (smooth and comfortable factor) i would say goes to the 7m, its stock untill in boost where as the lsx would always be aggressive because its cammed (not crazy but enough to be rougher then a stock cammed 7m) Power delivery would go initially to the lsx, but after the quarter of a second of lag it would be even. I could only see that bieng an issue on maybe an auto cross or road course track as you stated.

One isnt "better" then the other, if you like snappy power thats right on the pedal, then you take the ls1, if you like turbo cars, ease of upgrade (turning boost up/swapping a turbo gives more power rather then changing heads/cam every time you want more power) and don't feel like doing an engine conversion you keep the 7m.

Theres a difference between our arguments, your trying to prove the ls1 is better, im trying to prove the 7m can do what the ls1 can do at that level.

Last point, Im not posting any dyno charts because its pointless for me to waste my time looking for one. Rods and pistons will support 500horsepower no problem, Not to mention dynos are horrible for showing spool up time and real life horsepower, especially inertia based dynos.

 

[Wiisass]

2800 for built completed motor
400 for clutch kit
1200 for turbo
450 for injectors
500 for ic, piping and couplers turbo to TB,
200 for turbo manifold.
500 for maft pro.
200 for all other little gaskets, flywheel machining, valve shims, timing belt, water pump.
500 for exhaust system

$6750 for a 7m that will make and handle 500 horse to the tire reliably.

Alright, so was the 2800 assembled cost? Did you use ARP hardware for the head studs, rod bolts, mains? 400 for clutch was already addressed, I wish there was a 400 clutch good for 500hp for the R154. Is 450 for injectors and accurate price? What injectors and is a different fuel rail needed. I thought a lot of injectors were at least 100ea, which would put that up at 600 at least for direct fit stuff. 500 for ic, piping, etc would that be an ebay special intercooler? And 200 for an ebay special manifold, I'm guessing? I don't know if I would consider that reliable. Does 500 for maft pro cover all the sensors needed and everything or will that work the with stock AFM? And is that a good enough system to get a good, reliable tune on a 500hp 7m? The exhaust system numbers are alright if you're just talking about the catback. But what about downpipe, turbo elbow? And is that turbo internal or externally gated? If it's external, you would need a wastegate and dump tube or dump tube routed back into the downpipe.

I guess upgraded oil cooler, cooling system can be left out because they would probably be upgraded on both swaps. What about a new fuel pump or would you trust the stock turbo fuel pump for this task? And I think tuning should be considered here because compared to the LSx on which tuning can be done with the stock ECU, the new aftermarket ECU is going to need more dialing in and probably more time on the 7m to get from stock power to 500hp. Where on the LSx, the tuning won't take as much time because it will probably be a much simpler process.

So depending on all of that, the 7m build would be getting a little more expensive. And if I were really building a 7m, I would probably end up spending more money to do it right. I would run a different ECU, I would want a full standalone. I would also want a front facing intake manifold because I hate that over the top setup. But that's preference and doesn't need to be considered for this comparison but it was taken into consideration for my own.

As for the rest of your last post, better is not a subjective thing. Better can be quantified as to what you're doing. In my application, the LSx is better than building the 7m. For a street car, it's going to be more preference because you're just driving around on the street.

But I like how you're finally trying to turn this around and instead of just being defensive about the 7m. It was a good step, but since you're done with this, I guess it doesn't really matter. And I think I've already proved that the Lsx is better, I'm just trying to figure out why you can't accept that it may be a better option. I guess it could just be brand loyalty or something like that.

And you're failure to produce dyno sheets is just giving up. How else is engine power measured? What other quantifiable means would you have to show engine performance? Do you just not want to post a dyno plot because if it's overlayed with the LS1 plot, you will see how many places that the 7m is weaker than the Ls1?

Whatever, I'm over this discussion. Lsx > 7m.

 

[suprabad]

1

...how well do ls1's handle 450-500 horsepower on stock bottom ends? if you need to build the bottom end its hands down cheaper for the 7m.

Very well.
No need to go beyond stock at 500 hp.
No big dollar issues there.

Overall, reliability will most likely be even, ,

I can't believe you can say this with a straight face.
400 or 500 hp on motor alone out of an LS is not a big deal, on the other hand, that kind of horesepower out of a 7M is pushing it pretty good.
Not to mention the fact that the LS will respond better to Nos than the 7M.

Streetability as in just driving around to work or school (smooth and comfortable factor) i would say goes to the 7m, its stock untill in boost where as the lsx would always be aggressive because its cammed

Again with the cammed...as previously stated you aren't going to need an excessive amount of lift or duration to get to 500 hp.

Power delivery would go initially to the lsx,

Correct.

but after the quarter of a second of lag

Quarter of a second??? C'mon chunks, you know that aint right.

....that being an issue on maybe an auto cross or road course track ...

or drags or ...wherever else you race it.

and don't feel like doing an engine conversion, you keep the 7m.

That, is the sole advantage of the 7m with regard to performance.

... Im not posting any dyno charts because its pointless...

Pointless???
Then why do people dyno their cars?
If you're right... than a lot of people have wasted a lot of time and money.

Not to mention dynos are horrible for showing spool up time...

You mean the "quarter of a second" you mentioned earlier?


Here's a thought:

I don't see anyone swapping a 7M into a Corvette.




:icon_bigg

 

[Ma70.Ent]

Happy holidays everyone.

Closed.