TFS LS2 225cc vs L92 heads
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 3,647
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Friend has a 2006 LS2 powered Vette with L92 heads and a small cam (224/ .580 lift) and pulled 490+ RWHP. Car drives good down low. With those huge valves, you apparently have to watch the duration/lift. I've heard they are now offering them with smaller valves. He seems happy with the combo and uses it as his daily driver. Those heads come on all LS3 vettes - why would you think they would be "too big" for a 6L buildup ?
-- Lee
-- Lee
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,022
From: MD
And to making near 500whp with a 224 cam and L92 heads on an LS2
Don't think anyone else is going to duplicate that without a very friendly dyno. Now if the L92 heads are ported, that's another story, but by the time you port the L92s and getting them up to par you'd be better of with an aftermarket casting that has runner volumes that are 35cc 
less!
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 174
From: archbald, PA
Do you have access to the dyno chart, or can you at least give me the torque number??? I'm noticing a trend in my research, the L92's make decent top end, but are getting absolutely murdered in torque and midrange by the 225cc quality heads...From LS2 displacement all the way up to big cube strokers of 416ci and on...
One is brought to mine of a car that simply changed from L92 with L76 intake, more compression and a bigger cam vs AFR 225's with a smaller cam and less compression and the FAST 90mm...Results were +25hp and up 35tq, and the smaller heads had consistenly kept this advantage at every RPM...
However, the L92's are proving to be a great bang for your buck...Even untouched they get some decent numbers and are a pretty good choice, that is if all you care about is peak HP and don't know any better
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 174
From: archbald, PA
ETP does make a nice head, but in addition to the rocker issue, you will need to pay a LOT of attention to the valvetrain. Most people seem to have trouble setting them up, and have poor results because of it. Pretend you're building a BBC and everything will work out nicely
And to making near 500whp with a 224 cam and L92 heads on an LS2 Don't think anyone else is going to duplicate that without a very friendly dyno. Now if the L92 heads are ported, that's another story, but by the time you port the L92s and getting them up to par you'd be better of with an aftermarket casting that has runner volumes that are 35cc less!
And to making near 500whp with a 224 cam and L92 heads on an LS2
Don't think anyone else is going to duplicate that without a very friendly dyno. Now if the L92 heads are ported, that's another story, but by the time you port the L92s and getting them up to par you'd be better of with an aftermarket casting that has runner volumes that are 35cc less!And you're right about the ETP's, it's all in the details of the setup and valvetrain geometry for those heads...Every little thing is critical in choosing parts to work well together...
Which is why i still prefer the AFR heads over them, or the TFS
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 174
From: archbald, PA
Retired
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,166
From: Inside Uranus
And to making near 500whp with a 224 cam and L92 heads on an LS2 Don't think anyone else is going to duplicate that without a very friendly dyno. Now if the L92 heads are ported, that's another story, but by the time you port the L92s and getting them up to par you'd be better of with an aftermarket casting that has runner volumes that are 35cc less!
Don't think anyone else is going to duplicate that without a very friendly dyno. Now if the L92 heads are ported, that's another story, but by the time you port the L92s and getting them up to par you'd be better of with an aftermarket casting that has runner volumes that are 35cc less!Way too much compression for boost and a dyno that reads a little high I'm sure.
If that's the car I'm thinking about, it was a completely custom 224/228 cam with "test" lobes, stage II ported/milled L92 heads, and dynoed on a Dynapack, which dynos higher than a Dynojet 248 partially due to the design of having to take the wheels off of the car when you dyno.
Gotta love the internet.
Retired
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,166
From: Inside Uranus
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,022
From: MD
Plain and simple, if you're looking for good power NA or boosted, and want to do it with any kind of drivability and torque, you should look to an aftermarket head. The L92 initial purchase price is VERY misleading. In the end you're not saving anything. Again, remember, in the end the intake options for the L92 are very limited, and limiting.
Another option to add more confusion: There are several companies/porters that can make a 243 casting do things most would never believe. They are however, just as expensive as the aftermarket stuff
