| Author | Message | ||
     Lou Addessi |
I plan on installing a Ford 3.8l engine & would appreciate any info/advise on this installation. At the moment I have a engine with the Blantons advice, A new cam shaft,forged pistons & new valve lifters. I still need a caburetor,ignition water pump,& starter. I would like to know if someone has developed a motor mount & cowling. | ||
| Anonymous |
why not use the water pump efi. and ignition on the motor. Why reinvent the wheel | ||
| Don Pugh |
I also am using a Ford 3.8 with tha Blanton reduction drive. Brantly Harrison who made the Blanton recommended modifications to my engine also modified the engine mount supplied by Wheeler Aircraft to fit this engine. He got the specifications of what mods were necessary from Wheeler. I bet the current factory folks could tell you how to modify their current mount for this engine. Don Pugh dspugh@airmail.net | ||
| Mike AuClair |
Lou, My best advise is, "Don't do it!" I've been there, done that. You will regret the auto engine decision for the life of the airplane. If you want my thoughts on the issue contact me by Email. My address is Maucl1@aol.com. Mike AuClair Express builder | ||
| James Butler |
The advice not to use an automobile engine in aircraft is probably good. However, if you decide to proceed anyway, I have a brand new, Chevy HO502 C.I.D., 450hp engine for sale. It is the same one used in the scaled down version of the Mustang. I also have the book outlining everything they do to those engines to get them ready to go into the Mustang. I was going to do a compound helicopter project but decided to build an Express instead. I am willing to make someone a very good deal on the engine. Jim Butler butler@ffni.com | ||
| Rand Conner |
Has anyone checked to see if the HO502 will fit within the Express cowling? I imagine that some weight will need to be added behind the cabin. | ||
| jday |
I looked into installing a 502 big block in the express and found the following problems… 1. Even with an aluminum block the weight up front is difficult to counter balance. And the height of the engine is awkward to work with. 2. Insurance companies will not insure the plane with an auto conversion unless you stay within the range the plane was designed for . (under 350 HP apx.) 3. Even with the series 90 tail you would have to cant the engine to the right extra heavy to use all of 450 HP at take-off. The CT style tail would be very unlikely. 4. The additional speed gain of a 450HP Big Block over a 350HP small block would be about 20kts (10 kts=1.14hp additional)(30kts=1.5hp additional). Keep in mind the express takes off find with 200HP, and with 300HP at take-off it is a rocket. 5. The 502CID big Block will probably burn over 25gal/hr at cruise. I am installing the new 346CID LS1 engine in the new series 2000RG Express. - Aluminum block (total firewall forward weight is running around 20 lbs over typical Continental 550 weight) - Dual computerized ignition and injection. - Constant speed 1.8:1 chain reduction drive. - Supercharged - MT four bladed prop with boots. Performance estimate: - 1 lb boost at 18k. ft. = 310 HP @ 3800RPM = (255-kts @ 18k) (235-kts @ 12K) - 18-20 gal/hr/ 310HP @ 3800 RPM cruise - 25 gal/hr @ 350HP @ 4250 RPM take off My progress is as follows. …completed so far are the prototype engine mount & brackets, cowling, radiator, wire harness, pulley system, supercharger, governor, exhaust, alternator, oil pan, and reduction drive. Every thing is mounted on a custom engine test stand mock up like an express firewall forward. The engine test stand includes a dynamometer and engine instruments. Presently I am working on the nose gear placement, and the dual computer system. It is a good thing I enjoy working on the plane as much as flying. Jason Day Express Builder | ||
| John Hobson |
I considered the Blanton Ford V6 many years ago and found an error in his Dyno calculations that were published in a News Letter. To come up with his quoted 260 HP it appeared that he used the rpm from the high speed and the torque from the low speed shaft. Using his torque and speed numbers the power came out closer to 160 HP. I also read some articles that indicated that the performance was no better than a Lyc IO320, which made sense based on the calculations. After finding these discrepancies I began to seriously doubt Mr. Blantons credibility and decided to stick with a proven aircraft engine for my Express. Unless someone has some good data to show that Dave Blantons numbers are correct I would not recommend the Ford V6. | ||
| Michael J. Unregistered guest |
I have a few naive questions regarding usage of automobile engines in experimental aircraft: 1. how do you refuel such aircraft, airports offer only av-gas, don't they ? 2. how do you solve gear reduction problem for the prop ? Is it expensive, etc ? 3. do you settle for having a solitary ignition with no backup ? That would be for now to satisfy my first curiosity. Thanks. | ||
| wayne Unregistered guest |
there is is reason they are called "automobile"engines. over the years i have read many articals on the latest/greatest conversions. then somewhere months later I find a small mention of how that xyz plane made a forced landing or they died. But then if there weren't risk takers we would all be building Wright Fliers. Me, I'm a chicken. TAY?,1. drive into the locale BP. 2. that is still being thunk over by "experts".3. you could have 2 ign systems and 2 spark plugs per cylinder. please fly your auto engine in a Lancair for a few years before you move up to an Express. | ||
| Eric Holmberg New member Username: Erich Post Number: 91 Registered: 05-2002 |
Hi Michael, I looked into an auto conversion because I despise of the price, reliability, and excessive fuel consumption of typical air-cooled aircraft engines (the FADEC systems are much better, but out of my price range). In regards to reliability, I'm talking about cracked cylinders, part recalls, etc. These are the conclusions that I came to: 1) Aircraft engines rarely fail catastrophically, so you can limp into an airport 2) Aircraft engines require a lot of TLC is you ever expect to get them anywhere close to TBO 3) Automotive engines rarely fail, but if they do, they may very well do it catastrophically because of the higher RPM's typically involved. For a practical design, I had serious problems finding the proper gearing (redrive kit). I started designing a cog-belt design, but the problems with the belt manufacturer not allowing aircraft use along with belt-speed and other limitations caused me to quit the project and go with a conventional engine at first (if I ever get my plane done, I do plan on doing an automotive conversion later once the plane is debugged and airworthy). As for all of the complaints that automotive engines always fail, that is both true and false... The problem is that most of the people that go for the automotive conversion don't do the proper due diligence and they may have gone for an automotive conversion for cost-reasons only which means they probably cut corners and they are just begging for a problem. The automotive engine itself is typically the cheap part and the redrive kit is the expensive part. In addition, getting a redrive kit that allows using a constant-speed prop is also quite difficult. As for the AV-Gas, the only problem using it is if the fuel-injection system uses an oxygen sensor because the lead in the av-gas will destroy the oxygen sensor after a while. I've never done tests on it, but from what I've heard you'll have to replace the oxygen sensor every 100 hours. As for the ignition issue, you can do a redundant system from the ignition side by using a "combiner" that is simply a spark gap (or sometimes diodes) between the dual ignition systems and the single spark plug. All-in-all, if you do an automotive conversion, you need to be willing and capable of putting together your own fuel injection system, ignition system, redrive, and cooling system. If you screw up on any one of those, you'll be dead-sticking the plane somewhere. If you do a proper job, you will end up with a much more economical plane, in my opinion. | ||
| Reinhard Metz New member Username: Reinhard_metz Post Number: 47 Registered: 03-2003 |
I'm with Wayne on this one. The part about auto engines that has always bothered me that nobody seems to mention is that for a given horsepower rating, the auto engine typically is designed to deliver that only a small percentage of time, and otherwise loafs along at 10-30% hauling a car. Running it at 75% full time is higher stress than typically deigned for. If you don't believe it, look at the thickness of pistons, size of pushrods, and robustness of crank bearings in an airplane engine compared to a car engine, and it will be in-your-face clear. On my panel is a placard that says : "In God and Lycoming we trust" And as far as reaching TBO, there are some engines, like the Lycoming O320 and O360 that easily get there, if not often go 50% beyond TBO. | ||
| Eric Holmberg New member Username: Erich Post Number: 92 Registered: 05-2002 |
Reinhard does have a point about the power output. When automotive engines are converted for marine or industrial use, they are de-rated. Industrial engine suppliers often have tables that assume a constant engine life (in hours) and then they will give you the power output. The exact same engine can vary wildly from 150 HP to 1000 HP depending upon the duty cycle. While working at the Munich BMW plant, I did a rotation that included a week in engine testing. We took production engines off of the line and hooked them up to a dyno. After running various tests on the engine, we would run the thing at full throttle and maximum horsepower (approximately 75% of maximum RPM) overnight. The next day, we would disassemble the entire engine and measure all of the parts. The engine looked like new after those tests and there were no visible signs of wear. The only thing non-stock about the operation is that we had a very big cooling system. For heavy duty-use, adequate cooling is one of the main requirements, because if you don't get rid of the waste heat, your engine will melt a piston, etc. As a wild guess, here are some basic calculations that will give us some very rough figures. For my car, the engine is rated at 167 HP @ 6,800 RPM. I know from experience, that the car can run 140 mph for several hours at a time at which point the engine is at full throttle. At this speed, I have no idea how long the car will last, but I do know that I could expect the engine to last at least 200,000 miles (it actually has 218,000 as I write this and the compression is still within range of the factory spec) if I drive it at 70 mph as I do around here. So, given this data point of 167 HP at 140 mph, what is my HP output at 70 mph at which I expect the engine to last at least 200,000 miles? I’ll assume that the power required is proportional to the velocity squared. 167 HP @ 140 mph P = k*v2 167 = k*1402 k=167/1402 k = 0.00852 ? HP @ 70 mph P = 0.00852*702 P = 41.75 HP So, from this, I can see that the engine is developing approximately 42 HP at 70 mph on level ground. I know that the engine will last a long time at this rate and that the number or hours at 70 mph required to reach 200,000 miles is 200,000 / 70 = 2,857. The power output of 42 HP is 25% of the maximum power output, for a de-rating factor of 4. Therefore, for a TBO of at least 2,000 hours means that we can operate the engine at more than 42 HP, but much less than the rated 167 HP. To be as powerful as a 250 HP aircraft engine at 75% power, we need to be able to produce 250*0.75 = 187.5 HP. Using the overly conservative de-rating factor of 4, we would need an automotive engine capable of 187.5*4 = 750 HP to operate at the same power output as the 250 HP aircraft engine operating at 75% power. So, once again, more items to take into consideration and it gives you a rough idea of what sort of de-rating factor to apply to the engines. | ||
| Michael Jastrzebski New member Username: Michal Post Number: 12 Registered: 03-2004 |
I’ll assume that the power required is proportional to the velocity squared. Eric, Actually the power is proportional to the cube of speed since power is equaly force x speed. | ||
| Eric Holmberg New member Username: Erich Post Number: 93 Registered: 05-2002 |
OOops, let me correct the equations there (the squares didn't come out right). ^2 denotes "to the 2nd power" 167 HP @ 140 mph P = k*v^2 167 = k*140^2 k=167/140^2 k = 0.00852 ? HP @ 70 mph P = 0.00852*70^2 P = 41.75 HP Once again, these are very rough calculations and as Michael pointed out, they may be off by a few powers :P | ||
| Jerry Sjostrand New member Username: Jerry Post Number: 52 Registered: 08-1999 |
Try to sell an Express (or other homebuilt) with an automotive engine!!! Resale, amongst other things, (of course most important is safety) should be a primary consideration. Jerry | ||
| Eric Holmberg New member Username: Erich Post Number: 94 Registered: 05-2002 |
Okay, Michael is absolutely right and I made a classic mistake of force vs. power calculations... <sigh> 167 HP @ 140 mph P = k*v^2 167 = k*140^3 k=167/140^3 k = 6.086E-5 ? HP @ 70 mph P = 6.086E-5*70^3 P = 20.875 HP So that changes everything quite a bit and may still be wrong... I'll have to go over it sometime else, as I'm out of time here... P.S. Jerry has another good point... If you don't plan on keeping your plane forever, resale with an automotive engine will be difficult. I know for one, that I would not buy most of the automotive conversions out there and I quite like the idea. | ||
| paul mikaelsen New member Username: Pmikaelsen Post Number: 12 Registered: 07-2002 |
I for one hope an auto engine will work in an Express. It's a stock Chevrolet LT1 350 out of the crate. Engine prop combination has been run over 40 hours on the airframe most of the time with tempratures over 100 degrees F. The plane is in a container on it's way to Arlington WA and should be there by the 12 of July. I have one wing + to finish and hope to have it flying soon. Will try to upload a couple of PICS.   | ||
| Eric Holmberg New member Username: Erich Post Number: 95 Registered: 05-2002 |
Looks good, Paul  I just finished helping a friend replace the valve-guide seals on a LT1 in his boat this weekend It's an easy engine to work on. P.S. That main landing gear looks like it might cause a bit of excessive drag | ||
| Chris Unregistered guest |
Here's a few more things to consider... 1) When the auto engine or PSRU breaks 1,800 miles away from home, no A&P will touch the thing, so you're on your own for fixing it. 2) After you figure out what busted, where are you going to get replacement parts? The local auto store? Try again. Most high-output auto conversions use mostly proprietary parts (especially on the PSRU), so you're at the manufacturers mercy to supply you parts at their leisure (as opposed to having a world-wide distribution chain for Lycomming & Continental parts)... providing they're even still in business. 3) See what the difference in insurance premiums are with the auto engine. Might suprise you. 4) Since most (if not ALL) of the conversion programs have never had an engine make 1,000 -2,000 hours (or anywhere near their projected TBO), you have no real demonstrated service & reliability history. Are you willing to put your life (and those of your passengers, family, friends, etc) on the line for something cheaper but unproven? Best to answer that before you're 10,000' over mountains, the engine or PSRU fails catastrophically and you're going down... fast. 5) Most auto conversions are heavier than their certified counterparts, so CG, W&B and useful load can be dramatically affected. Maybe not that critical in the Express, but still an issue for most airplanes. Personally, the idea of more inexpensive powerplants is appealing, but until they really demonstrate service & reliability, I'll stick with something more proven. Just a couple more thoughts to ponder... - Chris | ||
| Jason Day New member Username: Jday Post Number: 1 Registered: 01-2003 |
Hello Michael, Eric, Paul, and all Some of my notes... Concerning AVGAS: I have set up my LS1 V8 to run AVGAS. Basically you have to program the computer without O2 sensors or use a carburetor. Concerning the PSRU: I manufacture my own PSRU using HyVo chain. It has hydraulic/constant speed prop. capability. 1.5 -2.0:1 ratio. It uses "off the self" parts and is easy to rebuild. very safe 2000 hr TBO. $3500.00 Concerning the dual computer: My computer has full redundancy from the pick-up to the cockpit. There is an instant change from Comp#1 to Comp#2 with a switch just like mags. You don't need redundancy for the injectors, coils, or spark plugs. There is one of each for each cylinder and the engine will run and get you home on 5 cylinders. Concerning reliability: The LS1 V8 engine is being used at 110% continuous HP. Just because the auto industry is driving down the road at 40% continuous HP doesn't mean that the engine wasn't designed to handle more. Take for example the Marine industry that uses the same Chevy V8 at the same 50%-75% Continuous HP as an aviator would use. Also the ASA racing network is using the LS1 V8 at 6000-8000 RPM (+110%). I talked to a GM engineer that stated the LS1 V8 was put through a destruct test of 100% HP(5600 RPM) for 900+ hrs. The test ended with the engine still running and requiring only ring, valve, and bearing replacement. The TBO of the new LS1 engine is the same as an Aviation engine (1400-3000hrs). There is no magic to reducing ring, valve, and bearing wear. In comparing a LS1 V8 and a IO-550 or IO-540 you would find the total piston distance traveled over 2000 hours to be the same. The metallization is the same. The crank shaft journals of the LS1 are much heavier. The Liquid Cooling is superior. The V8 is much smoother. There is no more thermal shock problem. Just like and aviation engine the TBO will depend on lubrication and EGT. If you like to push you engine hard and don’t make 2000hr TBO….then don’t worry, no problem……. keep in mind that you can buy new cylinder heads for $1500.00/set and change them at 800 hrs. just like you do on the Continental for $12000/set. We are talking about a compression check and a bank check$ and not a catastrophic reliability problem or failure. Concerning accidents: so far, I have only been able to find 4-5 NTSB reports that involve an V8 auto engine( NTSB lists 2397 reports over 15 years of experimental accidents). None of them had anything to do with the V8 engine itself, but were the cause of pilot/mechanic error and the PSRU. One operator had left a towel in the induction system after inspection. One operator left a temporary plug in the cylinder head vent. One pilot was doing "barrel rolls" at 50 ft. and crashed. One had a PSRU(universal) #FTW00LA106 with a failure caused by a lack of a self centering spline. Ray Ward sells a book about his experience. One had A PSRU (Northwest) failure #LAX01LA108 with no details(probably the same lack of self centering spline). I believe the PSRU that Paul Mikaelsen uses is a Geschwender PSRU with a self centering spline and 30 year of proven flight in many aircraft. (Nice work Paul!!). My PSRU is a relative of the Geschwender design and uses a self centering spline also. Both HyVo designs are rock solid. I challenge anyone to produce a NTSB accident report that indicates a failure with the Chevy V8 engine itself. I hear lot of stories but no one has a NTSB # to back it up. Anyway….what is so safe about an aviation engine!!! They are fragile, expensive, with terrible harmonics and power pulses, and awful thermal shock problems. FAA Mechanics state they are “proven”! In my mind the only thing they have “proven” is that they are unreliable. You will never see a Chevy V8 with a cracked crank shaft or a cylinder head so fractured that it is about to fall off the block. I have owned four certified aircraft and I still feel nervous every time a get behind a Continental or Lycoming. You can still get killed if you have a bad mechanic!!!! Concerning cost: You can buy a LS1 V8 360HP(4500RPM) for $4500 at any Chevy parts counter. This is GM's high production engine( 120,000/month)..Therefore you will always be able to buy parts and get technical help. You will burn about 3-4 gal/hr per HP than and air cooled aviation engine. Your rebuild cost are about $600-$4500 depending on how much work you want to do yourself. After 2000 hrs of use, a builder can save an estimated $80,000.00 taking into account the upfront cost, fuel savings, and rebuild cost. Also note.... if you put a Supercharger on the LS1 you can get 290HP cruise at 18k ft. This would be 25HP more than the $70,000.00 TSIO-550 will deliver. Concerning Insurance: Insurance companies will want the builder to layout a testing program. They usually require 40hrs over the field and 100 hrs before you can get hull insurance. So far I have seen price quotations to be about the same as with an aviation engine. Concerning the popularity of auto conversions: I expect the LS1 V8 conversion will become a very popular alternative engine installation and there will be a large network of builders and many vendors. There are hundreds of pilots installing the Chevy V8 and more and more are airborne every year. Like the Subaru revolution the Chevy V8 will prove to be very safe, very powerful, and very affordable. After all isn't that what the EAA is all about..making safe flying affordable. I have not found any unsolvable problems Call me anytime 908-238-9522 Jason | ||
| Jason Day New member Username: Jday Post Number: 2 Registered: 01-2003 |
Hello All; I forgot to add... Concerning weight: The LS1 V8 weights 348 lbs out of the crate and by the time you add a typical PSRU, Radiator, ...ETC the system falls into the same weight and space evelope as an IO-550 or IO-540 installation (500-600 lbs). If you add an air conditioning compressor, second altinator, second supercharger, and intercoolers, this is no problem. A battery or two in the tail solves all balancing problems. With the new Express Wing the extra weight is not an issue. Its not really an issue with the old wing either. Jason | ||
| michal Unregistered guest |
Jason, All, This is all great info, good thread. It is all interesting (and probably controversial). Jason - assuming someone doesn't want to dirty his hands and do all this clever installation - is there a one-stop source for all such automobile-engine/PSRU specialty work ? And then follow-up technical support ? Some people point out correctly I fly into an airport, have some engine problem and where do I go for help - nearest car mechanic ? | ||
| Eric Holmberg New member Username: Erich Post Number: 96 Registered: 05-2002 |
After my experiences, I won't even trust my aircraft engine to an aircraft mechanic... If you build your own system, I would highly suggest you learn how to repair and maintain your engine as most of your problems will probably be accessory related and not engine mechanicals and only you will know how those work. The best scenario would be to have an extra engine sitting at home and if you get into a bind, get it shipped out by truck and you should be back in business in a week. I've never been able to get a certified plane in and out of the shop in less than a week for anything but an oil change. If you do proper maintenance every 100 hours or sooner, then you should be fairly certain that you won't have any severe problems. | ||
| Jason Day New member Username: Jday Post Number: 3 Registered: 01-2003 |
Hi Michael; The answer is (Yes very controversial,) Yes, Yes, and No. I “sword play” with critics all the time. I will sell parts or full systems. Technical support is no problem. It would be difficult to get the plane into the car mechanics shop. ..… and when you break down away from home you would be carrying three or four manuals in your baggage compartment. Installation manual, Maintenance/Operation manual, repair/rebuild manual, parts list, and Chevy LS1 engine manual...etc. A day time Tel # is open for technical help. "In a pinch" Such a mechanical emergency repair could then be performed in the field by any FBO or yourself. Off the self parts for this LS1 system would be available probably by UPS worst case if not down the street at Chevy or PEP boys. PS: ...I am also developing 77" four and three bladed hydraulic composite props tuned to the LS1 engine and mapping out the harmonic and torsional vibrations. Cost of props is $4500 or $5900 each Four aircraft in process now. The Express RG(best plane in the world) is my aircraft. Oshkosh booth 132 call or email me for details 908-238-9522. jason | ||
| Michael Jastrzebski New member Username: Michal Post Number: 14 Registered: 03-2004 |
Jason, You write Concerning the PSRU: I manufacture my own PSRU using HyVo chain. It has hydraulic/constant speed prop. capability. 1.5 -2.0:1 ratio. It uses "off the self" parts and is easy to rebuild. very safe 2000 hr TBO. $3500.00 If the above is true then you may be some sort of a pioneer. I actually managed to get a hold of an article in the FLYING mag. as well as extensive discussion about using auto engines in planes on another forum - homebuilts - where a username "orion" who runs his own small airplane design shop seems extremely well versed on the subject. Well - both these sources agree that auto engine itself is fine and there is nothing wrong with it on the plane but the lack of reliable 'redrive' (per orion's terminology) is what is holding this business back. So if you solved this problem then this could indeed open the floodgate for auto-engine conversions. | ||
| J.D. Unregistered guest |
For those interested in auto-conversions, an interesting article was published in this month's Custom Planes about Predator Aviation's LS1 V8 package. FMI - http://www.predatoraviation.com It will be nice if/when some of these conversion projects finally prove themselves for reliability and stability. Until then though, I'm still favoring the more established powerplants (Lyc/Cont). JD | ||
| Jim Oyler New member Username: Midniteoyl Post Number: 86 Registered: 07-2003 |
I dont see how the 'LS-1' from Predator develops 375hp@ 4400RPM... Unless they severly modify it. The LS-1 as in the Camero was rated at 325HP@ 5600RPM The LS-1 as in the 'Vette is rated at 350HP@ 5200RPM - http://www.gmbuypower.com/vehicleHomePage.bp?make=Chevrolet&model=Corvette&makeI d=001&modelId=030&year=2004&subModelId=63&subModel=Coupe&categoryName=Performanc e&lowerPrice=&higherPrice= The LS-6 in the Z06 option is rated at 405HP@ 6000RPM - http://www.gmbuypower.com/vehicleHomePage.bp?make=Chevrolet&model=Corvette&makeI d=001&modelId=030&year=2004&subModelId=65&subModel=Z06&categoryName=Performance& lowerPrice=&higherPrice= - However, at 4500RPM, it produces only 350HP stock. I would rather not have a 'modified' auto motor flying in front of me as 99% of all mishaps with these engines come from 'modifications'. I plan on following the example of the Robinson SeaBee and leave it stock but limit power to 350HP - http://www.v8seabee.com/ Jim | ||
| Michael Jastrzebski New member Username: Michal Post Number: 15 Registered: 03-2004 |
Went to this SeaBee site and was a little shocked by their prices. Their conversion runs well into $30,000 - quite a few times the price of the original engine. | ||
| Jason Day New member Username: Jday Post Number: 4 Registered: 01-2003 |
Hello Jim; The HP and Torque data on the GM web site is Rear Wheel HP. If you add about 30HP you will be closer to the HP of the Engine at the Crank. There are ways to boost the power a little in the computer, exhaust system, and induction system without modifying the engine. Predator is fairly close on their measurement and I am sure they are not changing the stock configuration. If you wanted to do heavy modification, there are stroker kits and superchargers available that can boost the LS!/LS6 engine up to 450HP @ 4500RPM. Anyway...Who cares what the take off HP is ..The Express will climb like a Rocket with 300HP(not to mention 400HP with just a supercharger). The important thing is cruise!!!! If you want to be conservative, you can set up the ratio (1.5:1) for a 300HP take off and a cruise 225 HP At 3200 RPM burning 10 GPH (auto gas @ $1.70-$2.00/gal). Hello Michael; Concerning cost... If you want to design/engineer/fabricate your own system the cost would be as follows...... LS1$4500-5000, PSRU $3500, Computer/wire harness $1500, radiator system $500, Misc(alt, starter, flywheel, pulleys, belts, oil cooler ETC...) $1200, fuel pump system $500, exhaust system $500, Misc steel & aluminum $500. Total=+$13,000. I have a LS1 mount and cowling for the Express. I can help you if you call me off-line. When I get a chance to update, I will be posting more photos on my web site. WWW.VestaV8.com Jason | ||
| Jim Oyler New member Username: Midniteoyl Post Number: 87 Registered: 07-2003 |
Michael: True, its expensive, but then ALL such FWF kits are. The thing about Robinson is that, like Jason here, they are willing to help you through your own conversion - thus bringing down the cost. Jason: True thing about GM rating RWHP, and about opening the exhaust to increase HP, however none of the actual modifications are listed and Predator implies 'stock' on thier site. So taking a stock LS-1, running headers into an open exhaust, no modifications of the induction (other than eliminating the cramped intake tube), and supression of EPA codes in the ECU, I still dont see 375hp @ 4400. Maybe at a higher RPM than 4400, say 4800 - 5000 (I'm guessing  ) Correct on the T/O vs Criuse. Although being able to pull near vertical at the end of the runway is just wayyy to cool  . But I planned on more along the lines of your thinking and setting up for Cruise, though with a higher reduction ratio. Jim |