hacker-pschorr

Since the Vette vs 928 topic comes up all the time, thought this might interest the group:

http://popularhotrodding.com/enginem...ck/0504em_ls7/

pewter82

Randy, I didn't know you were a fellow MSHP trooper?

jason

93GTS

FBIII

Dam, looks like just another run of the mill cast iron 327 to me.......................

Thanks for sharing that. Pretty neat stuff for just a "pushrod Chevy V8." Used to be you could take later better stuff from a smallblock and put it on a much earlier engine. It appears those days are long gone.

sublimate

Have you seen any dimensions or side-view pictures of the oil pan? Suposedly the LS1/2/6 engine won't fit in a 928 due to interference w/ the crossmember. I wonder if the LS7 with that dry sump might fit.

Not a huge fan of transplants in general but for a LS7 I might think twice. 500hp w/ a 12 month/12,000 mile warranty for $13.5k would be nice.

Normy

gm might even have a glimmer of hope; they have devoted a special assembly plant in Wixom to build this and other "specialty" engines. Now, if they can only discover that pushrods are really kind of backwards...

N!

PS: It isn't wise to pick fights with the boss....

hacker-pschorr

If you have been watching my sig over the last 3 weeks, its on going. All in good fun.

Fogey1

ENGINE PHILOSOPHY
A disclaimer - to me the magic parts of the 928 are the balance, chassis, cockpit and capacity.

FBIII Wrote, "Pretty neat stuff for just a "pushrod Chevy V8."



Are pushrods bad? Are S- & DOHC's good? Do they both do the job? Is a lighter, cheaper engine with a lower center of gravity and a bottomless well of performance parts better or worse?

Do you "prefer" the M-16 or AK-47? The pencil or the space pen? Double barrel, pump or auto?

http://blogs.msdn.com/methylamine/ar...02/414022.aspx

K27

hrrm, only 7 litres ?

FBIII

I was being a wee bit sarcastic. I have been a lifelong fan of chevy V8's. I get a real kick out of people thinking 4 valve double overhead cam engines are state of the art when in fact their origins design dates back to the teens, as in early 1900's.

m21sniper

"Do you "prefer" the M-16 or AK-47?"

Are you kidding me?

The M-16, definitely.

Fogey1

M21Sniper wrote:
" "Do you "prefer" the M-16 or AK-47?" "
"Are you kidding me?"
"The M-16, definitely."


It sounds like I misunderstood FBIII. Good for him.

As for the M-16, it's a great weapon, doubtless even better now than when I was a user, but ...

I once saw our scout pick a completely rusted-shut AK off the chest of a six month old corpse (?guesstimate), beat the safety to full auto with edge of his helmet, hold it above his head and pull the trigger.

We all ducked because we expected it to blow up, but it cycled the entire magazine flawlessly. A very impressive demo of the utility of Comrade Kalashnikov's design. I doubt an M-16 would have done as well.

Tools are tools, some more sophisticated or elegant than others. I "prefer" Snap-On to Craftsman, quite a bit, but both do the job, one more cheaply, which means you can spend the $$ elsewhere. OTOH, I don't "prefer" any other Can Am car to the Chaparral, even though it was probably cheaper than some of it competitors.

NickT

Wasn't that engine originally designed by Lotus Engineering?

m21sniper

That's the one thing you can really say about the AK...it will always go bang when you pull the trigger.

The M-16A2/4 has literally 3-4x the range though.

m21sniper

"Wasn't that engine originally designed by Lotus Engineering?"

The motor from the ZR-1 was(LT-5?), but no, the LS series are GM designs.

markscott

RE: "Go bang"
Ah, yes, while enjoying my time in VN I ended up carring an AK-47 for just that reason. As a medic with a good boss I was able to tote whatever. I did this after rather unfortunate experiences with the early M-16 non chromed chamber jams!