Laugh at the Challenger
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
I thought LSx engines used beehive springs? Eh, well I'm sure somebody will post a link to a video of some GM powertrain guys picking the hemi apart shortly. IIRC thats where the "they just copied GM" came from.
In the overall scheme of things I would have figured the hemi heads would have been capable of substantially out flowing the LSx heads due to the canted valve arragement (forget all the typical hemi nonsense about having a round chamber and centrally located plug - well in the old hemi - its the canted valve arragement that makes the hemi a good flowing head).
In the overall scheme of things I would have figured the hemi heads would have been capable of substantially out flowing the LSx heads due to the canted valve arragement (forget all the typical hemi nonsense about having a round chamber and centrally located plug - well in the old hemi - its the canted valve arragement that makes the hemi a good flowing head).
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 195
From: chesapeake, va
I love great competition.... even if I have to fan the flames to get it started. 
I think it's safe to bet the far there won't be a 430 horsepower V8 in a base Camaro, but I think I know what you mean. The L78 isn't likely either as far as I can tell. Also, I wouldn't worry about magazine comparos. The Mustang and Camaro are shaping up to be pretty close to neck and neck in performance, so I'm betting there won't be more than a couple of tenths between them and can go either way.
Have you actually taken a look at a Hemi engine and an LSx side by side?
Have you ever taken a look at the heads?
The valvetrain?
Ever taken a look at the Hemi block and compare it to the LSx?
Or are you just parroting what some clueless individual said in typical internet herd-mentality fashion?
You don't know that Chrysler went back to pushrods because it's cheaper to produce. You also don't know the camshaft sits high up in the Hemi block in order for it to use shorter pushrods to reduce valvetrain losses. Or that Chrysler chose tougher iron over alumunum. You don't know that the Hemi uses 2 spark plugs per cylinder, and that each coil pack sends one wire to the cylinder it's over and another to the opposite cylinder to increase power on the downstroke (the reason why they put out high torque numbers) and to run cleaner, using less restrictive catalytic plates in the converter.
You obviously are clueless that the new Chrysler Hemi was the first to use cylinder deactivation in a high volume engine. You didn't know the valvesprings are beehive instead of the LSx's standard which is lighter, has less mass, and is just as durable, if not moreso.
If you ever put a Hemi next to an LSx, you'll notice the Hemi has a higher deck height. The pistons are eutectic alloy, unlike the LSx's. The crankshaft has larger counterweights than the LSx. Oh, the LSx engines don't have anything resembling a Hemispherical combustion chamber.
There's other items that make the Hemi engine resemble the LSx engine as much as the LSx engine resembles a Ford Windsor, but I think that I've made my point.
This is not to say the LSx isn't a fantastic engine. It is. GM had a huge mountain of obsticles developing that engine from seal & head gasket leaks (they dropped a bolt from the small block design to gain more intake port space for starters ), to oiling problems, to pretty bad clanging noise which still plague LS1s when cold. I have 173K on my 2002 and it's still going strong (and still sounds like a damn diesel on cold mornings), and GM powertrain got alot of power out of the thing and it's more emissions friendly than most Japaneese V6s. But Chrysler's Hemi is a marvel in it's own right..... and it doesn't owe anything to the LSx engineeringwise.
Don't trust opinions from individuals who know no better that morph into a "truth". The Hemi is an all new design that has more in common with the old Chrysler 360 and old Hemis than it does with the LSx.
Being that it's not often to look at a Hemi and LS1 side-by-side, here's some mandatory reading for you before posting anything else about the Hemi and LSx engines:
http://www.idavette.net/hib/ls1c.html
http://www.allpar.com/mopar/new-mopar-hemi.html
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...iew/index.html
I think it's safe to bet the far there won't be a 430 horsepower V8 in a base Camaro, but I think I know what you mean. The L78 isn't likely either as far as I can tell. Also, I wouldn't worry about magazine comparos. The Mustang and Camaro are shaping up to be pretty close to neck and neck in performance, so I'm betting there won't be more than a couple of tenths between them and can go either way.
Have you actually taken a look at a Hemi engine and an LSx side by side?
Have you ever taken a look at the heads?
The valvetrain?
Ever taken a look at the Hemi block and compare it to the LSx?
Or are you just parroting what some clueless individual said in typical internet herd-mentality fashion?
You don't know that Chrysler went back to pushrods because it's cheaper to produce. You also don't know the camshaft sits high up in the Hemi block in order for it to use shorter pushrods to reduce valvetrain losses. Or that Chrysler chose tougher iron over alumunum. You don't know that the Hemi uses 2 spark plugs per cylinder, and that each coil pack sends one wire to the cylinder it's over and another to the opposite cylinder to increase power on the downstroke (the reason why they put out high torque numbers) and to run cleaner, using less restrictive catalytic plates in the converter.
You obviously are clueless that the new Chrysler Hemi was the first to use cylinder deactivation in a high volume engine. You didn't know the valvesprings are beehive instead of the LSx's standard which is lighter, has less mass, and is just as durable, if not moreso.
If you ever put a Hemi next to an LSx, you'll notice the Hemi has a higher deck height. The pistons are eutectic alloy, unlike the LSx's. The crankshaft has larger counterweights than the LSx. Oh, the LSx engines don't have anything resembling a Hemispherical combustion chamber.
There's other items that make the Hemi engine resemble the LSx engine as much as the LSx engine resembles a Ford Windsor, but I think that I've made my point.
This is not to say the LSx isn't a fantastic engine. It is. GM had a huge mountain of obsticles developing that engine from seal & head gasket leaks (they dropped a bolt from the small block design to gain more intake port space for starters ), to oiling problems, to pretty bad clanging noise which still plague LS1s when cold. I have 173K on my 2002 and it's still going strong (and still sounds like a damn diesel on cold mornings), and GM powertrain got alot of power out of the thing and it's more emissions friendly than most Japaneese V6s. But Chrysler's Hemi is a marvel in it's own right..... and it doesn't owe anything to the LSx engineeringwise.
Don't trust opinions from individuals who know no better that morph into a "truth". The Hemi is an all new design that has more in common with the old Chrysler 360 and old Hemis than it does with the LSx.
Being that it's not often to look at a Hemi and LS1 side-by-side, here's some mandatory reading for you before posting anything else about the Hemi and LSx engines:
http://www.idavette.net/hib/ls1c.html
http://www.allpar.com/mopar/new-mopar-hemi.html
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...iew/index.html
That was a very nice explanation. However I said block design, not material or all the other components you are mentioning especially the heads. How in God`s green earth did you read cylinder heads, material and such, ect.. from block design???
Here is where I got some of my info amongst others:
http://www.articlegarden.com/Article...e-Forums/75934
taken from the article:
The success of the LT1, LS1 and LS2 engine series has forced other auto makers to come up with competing engine packages. Chrysler introduced an all new Hemi V8 in 2003 which borrows extensively from the LS1 design. Ford has resorted to superchargers on its line of “modular” V8s to compete with the power output of the LS series GM engines.
I was also told to me by a local engine builder that the "blocks themselves" key words there, reading is fundemental, appear "almost" identical in design...Ie.. a copy w/ some minor changes such as deck height.
But thanks for all the facts on Hemi`s I feel much more enlightened now.
Also going to the article from popular hotrodding they are primarily comparing the Hemi to a old school small block chevy not an LSx series. Most likely since most motorheads know the anatomy of the old small block and is an easy to relate comparrison.
Here is an exerpt:
Like the piston, the powder metallurgy connecting rod has been designed to minimize its weight consistent with retaining the required strength. The powder metallurgy process, first used for high-performance applications by Porsche, allows for a more precision part than regular forging. This has allowed the deletion of the commonly seen balance pad, which saves a bunch of weight right off the bat. Add to this a cap bolt instead of a through-bolt, plus some thoughtful design, and the result is a 6.24-inch rod that is significantly stronger but marginally lighter than a stock small-block Chevy's much shorter 5.7-inch rod. This long rod also produces a more favorable 1.744:1 rod/stroke ratio rather than the 1.638:1 a 350 small-block Chevy has.
No LSx engine has ever been 350 cubes.Nor does the LS1 have a 5.7 inch rod. It has a 6.1 inch rod. I would hope the new Hemi is a better design than a engine that was first built in the 1950`s...
Take it for what you will, I`m not here to argue or change your mind. I`ve said my peace.
Last edited by GMRULZ; Feb 26, 2008 at 10:37 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
That was a very nice explanation. However I said block design, not material or all the other components you are mentioning especially the heads. How in God`s green earth did you read cylinder heads, material and such, ect.. from block design???
Here is where I got some of my info amongst others:
http://www.articlegarden.com/Article...e-Forums/75934
taken from the article:
The success of the LT1, LS1 and LS2 engine series has forced other auto makers to come up with competing engine packages. Chrysler introduced an all new Hemi V8 in 2003 which borrows extensively from the LS1 design. Ford has resorted to superchargers on its line of “modular” V8s to compete with the power output of the LS series GM engines.
I was also told by a local engine builder that the "blocks themselves" key words there, reading is fundemental, appear "almost" identical in design...Ie.. a copy w/ some minor changes such as deck height.
But thanks for all the facts on Hemi`s I feel much more enlightened now.
Also going to the article from popular hotrodding they are primarily comparing the Hemi to a old school small block chevy not an LSx series. Most likely since most motorheads know the anatomy of the old small block and is an easy to relate comparrison.
Here is an exerpt:
Like the piston, the powder metallurgy connecting rod has been designed to minimize its weight consistent with retaining the required strength. The powder metallurgy process, first used for high-performance applications by Porsche, allows for a more precision part than regular forging. This has allowed the deletion of the commonly seen balance pad, which saves a bunch of weight right off the bat. Add to this a cap bolt instead of a through-bolt, plus some thoughtful design, and the result is a 6.24-inch rod that is significantly stronger but marginally lighter than a stock small-block Chevy's much shorter 5.7-inch rod. This long rod also produces a more favorable 1.744:1 rod/stroke ratio rather than the 1.638:1 a 350 small-block Chevy has.
No LSx engine has ever been 350 cubes.Nor does the LS1 have a 5.7 inch rod. It has a 6.1 inch rod. I would hope the new Hemi is a better design than a engine that was first built in the 1950`s...
Take it for what you will, I`m not here to argue or change your mind. I`ve said my peace.
Here is where I got some of my info amongst others:
http://www.articlegarden.com/Article...e-Forums/75934
taken from the article:
The success of the LT1, LS1 and LS2 engine series has forced other auto makers to come up with competing engine packages. Chrysler introduced an all new Hemi V8 in 2003 which borrows extensively from the LS1 design. Ford has resorted to superchargers on its line of “modular” V8s to compete with the power output of the LS series GM engines.
I was also told by a local engine builder that the "blocks themselves" key words there, reading is fundemental, appear "almost" identical in design...Ie.. a copy w/ some minor changes such as deck height.
But thanks for all the facts on Hemi`s I feel much more enlightened now.
Also going to the article from popular hotrodding they are primarily comparing the Hemi to a old school small block chevy not an LSx series. Most likely since most motorheads know the anatomy of the old small block and is an easy to relate comparrison.
Here is an exerpt:
Like the piston, the powder metallurgy connecting rod has been designed to minimize its weight consistent with retaining the required strength. The powder metallurgy process, first used for high-performance applications by Porsche, allows for a more precision part than regular forging. This has allowed the deletion of the commonly seen balance pad, which saves a bunch of weight right off the bat. Add to this a cap bolt instead of a through-bolt, plus some thoughtful design, and the result is a 6.24-inch rod that is significantly stronger but marginally lighter than a stock small-block Chevy's much shorter 5.7-inch rod. This long rod also produces a more favorable 1.744:1 rod/stroke ratio rather than the 1.638:1 a 350 small-block Chevy has.
No LSx engine has ever been 350 cubes.Nor does the LS1 have a 5.7 inch rod. It has a 6.1 inch rod. I would hope the new Hemi is a better design than a engine that was first built in the 1950`s...
Take it for what you will, I`m not here to argue or change your mind. I`ve said my peace.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 195
From: chesapeake, va
I guess the supercharger on Mod motors to keep up gotcha...Lol.. My 386rwhp LS2 vette has been 11.9. Your Cobra 12.7 w/ 454rwhp. I`d say there statement is accurate in that respect, comparing our 2 cars at least. And yes I know my car is lighter but not 800lbs lighter. But it is written on a GM oriented site so I concede it could be fluff. Google is your friend if you want to find more.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 881
From: Jacksonville Florida
I own both a Hemi 5.7 AND a LS1 (apparently, one of few quiet ones). And I can say that they are BOTH masterpieces. The power delivery in both is quite different. The Hemi heads are apparent in the upper revs. While the LS1 delivers better off idle torque. (or maybe it's the 500ish pounds difference between the Charger and the Trans Am). I love them both. As far as mods go, the LS1 is much easier to mod. Chrysler isn't as mod friendly. Never the less, the 6.1 Hemi is a beast and should be respected. And there are rumors of a 6.4 500hp version in the pipeline.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 195
From: chesapeake, va
My point was that what the article said is true on average, that 4.6`s need the blower to keep up w/ LSx`s on average, not exceptional setups such as you have put together. The above guy didn`t like that and called it fluff, he had a blown 4.6 so i put 2 and 2 together. If I was wrong about his intention then I apologize. My vette is DEFINETLY not set up to drag race. Stock suspension, no weight reduction, no gears ect...
So why ya hanging out here anyways, looking to get a new Camaro or just to antogonize Scott? Lol...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 195
From: chesapeake, va
I would just like to state for the record I do like the Hemi engine. I wish my Durango had one instead of the 4.7. I`m not bashing the Hemi at all. On the contrary I just said the "block design" apears to be similar to the LSx. Which in my opinion is a good thing. Now if Dodge had made the Challenger 3700lbs no heavier, had decent aftermarket support & A/M tuning plus I could buy it for MSRP like I will be able to on the Camaro, (I have a deposit holding a spot on a MSRP only list), then I would not wait for the Camaro I would get the Challenger now.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 439
From: upstate New York
[QUOTE=Rice Killer87;5177916]I dont know why anybody is laughing yet. I personally think that the car looks way better than the Camaro as they went the right direction w/ the "retro look" and they DIDNT F it up. I think GM managed to ROYALLY screw up a perfectly fine 69 Camaro body to make the new Camaro and so far find is quite gross....QUOTE]
Not to mention that the retro craze that was started a couple years ago by the original show cars has almost run it's course- The retro mustang has been out for a couple years, appears to be selling well, the Charger is here, and looks pretty good to my 50-year-old eyes, and the Camaro is still a year away- If I was in the market, I could drive that Dodge right now with no appologies to anyone-
Once again, history repeats- GM will come out 3 years later, just as the muscle car/retro theme becomes passe- sorry-
Not to mention that the retro craze that was started a couple years ago by the original show cars has almost run it's course- The retro mustang has been out for a couple years, appears to be selling well, the Charger is here, and looks pretty good to my 50-year-old eyes, and the Camaro is still a year away- If I was in the market, I could drive that Dodge right now with no appologies to anyone-
Once again, history repeats- GM will come out 3 years later, just as the muscle car/retro theme becomes passe- sorry-
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
The very first thing I said was have you ever looked at the 2 side by side. The Hemi block is made of iron, is taller, the camshaft sits higher, and the blocks resemble each other the way Catherine Zeta-Jones resembles Rosie O'Donnell.
You're beating a face saving retreat.
Here is where I got some of my info amongst others:
http://www.articlegarden.com/Article...e-Forums/75934
taken from the article:
The success of the LT1, LS1 and LS2 engine series has forced other auto makers to come up with competing engine packages. Chrysler introduced an all new Hemi V8 in 2003 which borrows extensively from the LS1 design. Ford has resorted to superchargers on its line of “modular” V8s to compete with the power output of the LS series GM engines.
http://www.articlegarden.com/Article...e-Forums/75934
taken from the article:
The success of the LT1, LS1 and LS2 engine series has forced other auto makers to come up with competing engine packages. Chrysler introduced an all new Hemi V8 in 2003 which borrows extensively from the LS1 design. Ford has resorted to superchargers on its line of “modular” V8s to compete with the power output of the LS series GM engines.
I was also told to me by a local engine builder that the "blocks themselves" key words there, reading is fundemental, appear "almost" identical in design...Ie.. a copy w/ some minor changes such as deck height.
A Ford Windsor appears "almost" identical to an LT1 block except for minor changes like it's deck height too.
Also going to the article from popular hotrodding they are primarily comparing the Hemi to a old school small block chevy not an LSx series.
If you want to quote a Popular Hot Rodding article, how about using David Vizard's article on the Hemi:
"A section through Chrysler's cross-bolted-mains Hemi block shows it to be a precision casting. This means that for its 5.7-liter (345ci) displacement, it is lighter than a typical comparable displacement engine, even though it has a deck height 225 thousandths taller than a small-block Chevy's 9.025 inches....a fully-dressed unit is well over 100lbs. lighter than a traditional small-block Chevy.
Assuming the 5.7 Hemi is at least on a par with the LS6 in every other respect, then its advantage over the LS6 is that it has a valve and port configuration that will, size for size, always out flow the LS6's parallel valve design.
Cognizant of the fact that longer strokes mean greater inertia loads, Chrysler's engineers made a conscious effort to design a lightweight heavy-duty piston. The finalized cast eutectic (just less than 12percent silicon) alloy slipper-style piston has more in common with a race piston than what is normally perceived as a heavy-duty truck piston.
Moving on down to the crank case, we find a crank that appears to cater strongly to minimizing main bearing loads by having the inner counterweights larger than on a small-block Chevy where they are typically too small. This has not resulted in an unduly heavy crank because the counter weights balance out a smaller mass due to the lighter weight of the piston/rod assembly.
To minimize the pushrod length required to operate the rockers in a taller Hemi-style head, the cam was located high in the block, thus eliminating the traditional V8 lifter valley.
Unless there is something that has been under-/over-estimated or overlooked, it seems that this new Hemi has evolved into something as high-tech as the LS6 engine.
The bottom line here we think is that even in today's world, the Hemi, a year after its introduction, has got more going for it as a hot rod motor than perhaps the small-block Chevy did in 1956... We're avid Chevy fans and have owned many Chevy vehicles over the years, but this 5.7 Hemi has totally convinced us our next truck just has to be a Hemi-powered Dodge.
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...iew/index.html
Again, like Christian pointed out and I mentioned before, the LSx engine is a great engine. It had a troubled development, and GM Powertrain did an outstanding job in overcoming all the challenges they had making the think work dependably while packing a heap of power. In the process they created a fantastic engine.
However, Chrysler's new Hemi is a completely different bird. It looks nothiong like an LSx save being a pushrod engine. It has the latest performance tricks and Chrysler essentially overengineered it compared to the LSx. It's a marvel of an engine in it's own right.
Last edited by guionM; Feb 27, 2008 at 10:25 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 195
From: chesapeake, va
Gonna call BS on that.
The very first thing I said was have you ever looked at the 2 side by side. The Hemi block is made of iron, is taller, the camshaft sits higher, and the blocks resemble each other the way Catherine Zeta-Jones resembles Rosie O'Donnell.
Reread the context of that article. Although it's all fluff, it's about creating engines that put out the horsepower. It states clearly that Ford "resorted" to using superchargers on it's engines as well as Chrysler coming out with the Hemi. It does not state that the Hemi is based on the LSx just like it doesn't state the modular engine at Ford was based on the LSx.
Appears "almost" identical except "minor" changes except deck height?
Riight!
A Ford Windsor appears "almost" identical to an LT1 block except for minor changes like it's deck height too. :lol
So, why are you using this article to compare a Hemi to an LSx????
The very first thing I said was have you ever looked at the 2 side by side. The Hemi block is made of iron, is taller, the camshaft sits higher, and the blocks resemble each other the way Catherine Zeta-Jones resembles Rosie O'Donnell.
Reread the context of that article. Although it's all fluff, it's about creating engines that put out the horsepower. It states clearly that Ford "resorted" to using superchargers on it's engines as well as Chrysler coming out with the Hemi. It does not state that the Hemi is based on the LSx just like it doesn't state the modular engine at Ford was based on the LSx.
Appears "almost" identical except "minor" changes except deck height?
Riight!
A Ford Windsor appears "almost" identical to an LT1 block except for minor changes like it's deck height too. :lol
So, why are you using this article to compare a Hemi to an LSx????
How would this be misunderstood?
"Chrysler introduced an all new Hemi V8 in 2003 which borrows extensively from the LS1 design"
You provided the popular hotrodding link yourself to support your argument, so I guess you should ask yourself that question. It certianly had me scratching my head when they were comparing the Hemi to a small black vs an LSx...But again YOU provided the link.
Have you seen both of the bare blocks side by side? I have not.The engine builder I`m friends with who has built BOTH engines (not at the same time) thinks they look similar in some respects. There are some distinct similarities but not an exact copy of the block. Again we are only talking block design here not what is made out of or any internal/ external components. Obviously no engine is going to be exactly the same even amongst the same manufacturer. The builder I know thinks some of the ideas were borrowed from GM. It`s done all the time in the auto industry. You see a good idea you copy some of the better things about it.
Now can we agree to disagree and get back to discussing the new Camaro. I don`t enjoy arguing for arguments sake. With 11k posts and being a member for several months less than me here, you obviously have much more time to argue if you want than I.
Last edited by GMRULZ; Feb 27, 2008 at 11:01 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 195
From: chesapeake, va
I agree w/ this. I guess you missed this post:
I would just like to state for the record I do like the Hemi engine. I wish my Durango had one instead of the 4.7. I`m not bashing the Hemi at all. On the contrary I just said the "block design" apears to be similar to the LSx. Which in my opinion is a good thing. Now if Dodge had made the Challenger 3700lbs no heavier, had decent aftermarket support & A/M tuning plus I could buy it for MSRP like I will be able to on the Camaro, (I have a deposit holding a spot on a MSRP only list), then I would not wait for the Camaro I would get the Challenger now.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
I guess the supercharger on Mod motors to keep up gotcha...Lol.. My 386rwhp LS2 vette has been 11.9. Your Cobra 12.7 w/ 454rwhp. I`d say there statement is accurate in that respect, comparing our 2 cars at least. And yes I know my car is lighter but not 800lbs lighter. But it is written on a GM oriented site so I concede it could be fluff. Google is your friend if you want to find more.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Bob, we all know your cars are far from stock in apereance and setup. Hence why you are always the fastest in your category. Wasn`t your 99 the fastest bolt on cobra in the Country?
My point was that what the article said is true on average, that 4.6`s need the blower to keep up w/ LSx`s on average, not exceptional setups such as you have put together. The above guy didn`t like that and called it fluff, he had a blown 4.6 so i put 2 and 2 together. If I was wrong about his intention then I apologize. My vette is DEFINETLY not set up to drag race. Stock suspension, no weight reduction, no gears ect...
So why ya hanging out here anyways, looking to get a new Camaro or just to antogonize Scott? Lol...
My point was that what the article said is true on average, that 4.6`s need the blower to keep up w/ LSx`s on average, not exceptional setups such as you have put together. The above guy didn`t like that and called it fluff, he had a blown 4.6 so i put 2 and 2 together. If I was wrong about his intention then I apologize. My vette is DEFINETLY not set up to drag race. Stock suspension, no weight reduction, no gears ect...
So why ya hanging out here anyways, looking to get a new Camaro or just to antogonize Scott? Lol...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 195
From: chesapeake, va
The vette is my first manual car. I`ve been to the track 3 times. I doubt I`m the best driver out there as well. Now Bob C is one hell of a manual driver. I`ve not met many that can drive like him. You and I probably on the same skill level in that category.
