We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
Originally posted by chet@Jan 6 2003, 10:15 PM
also, the rod/stroke ratio with b18b's is awful. its not meant for high rpm's, which means it will take a built motor to rev above 7k consistently. basically, b18b blocks are less efficient at higher rpm's and cause more heat and less power. this is a problem a lot of ls/vtec guys have when consistently revving unbuilt bottom ends above 7-8k.
Originally posted by prawjEKt Cx@Jan 6 2003, 10:28 PM
how is the gsr so good up on top end, it's r/s is only 1.58 compared to the ls's 1.54
The LS. Lower CR, no vtec (so no long duration lobes to screw with the turbo), etc. I think the argument originally started over which transmission was better for boost, the ls or gsr. There's no question that the ls ENGINE is better for boost. If you want to rev-high, then the gsr is better. Personally i'd rather have torque on tap.
Originally posted by chet@Jan 7 2003, 12:28 AM
so basically, the ls motor needs to be built that much more to achieve the same numbers...
Originally posted by djextremity@Jan 7 2003, 05:17 AM
Because that imitation GSR, which is making the same power as the real GSR, will take to boost better than the GSR will. It is making the same power at lower compression also, which means lower octane fuel, and higher boost when turboed.