TWISTERSS Posted June 26, 2003 Report Share Posted June 26, 2003 Just food for thought . . . Let's say theoretically I have connections with GM and can get them to put the 8100 Big Block and Allison tranny in an otherwise stock SS. And theoretically, I put a supercharger on it and do mild suspension upgrades all at the dealership and sell it as a limited edition model. Price would be just under $50K and horsepower/torque would hover around 550/625. It would blow away a Ford Lightning and be squarely aimed at the new Ram SRT-10. But AWD and the extended cab would give it a huge advantage. Think of it as a Corvette that seats 5 and tows. Ya know . . . theoretically. Would there be a legitimate market for this truck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChevelleBoy Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 Zippy would certainly want one....but that still may not be enough ponies for him <grin> I like your theory, I'd want one for sure, but it would be a little out of my "practical" price range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcairns Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 It's a little late to tempt me But it does sound interesting. I don't know if I would go for a larger engine or not, though. The MPG factor starts to weigh in on the larger engines, and this is my daily driver. But the tire melting potential of a supercharged 8.1..... Would you retain the xfer case to keep the AWD? And what about beefing up the differential(s) in either case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heldonss Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 The Allison would need to be reworked for better performance....my 03' 3500 with the 8.1 and Allison takes way to long to shift to be melting tires....the extra HP would help though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTex Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 I would rather see a stock 6 liter block with forged pistons and rods at 9:1 compression with an intercooled supercharger. There are several LS1 cars with forged internals making that kind of power with forced induction. The 8.1 sounds like a great motor, but I've never seen one run worth a darn. On the other hand, my little 5.3 in my 99 excab Z71 could get into the 12s with a conservative dose of nitrous. I can only imagine what it would do if I were able to run a dual stage system on it. I didn't mean to shoot you down, but its my opinion that these GEN III engines are the best motors ever to see the light of day. GM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 believe it or not, i'd rather have the 6.0 liter. the 8.1 with even with it's extra weight would be nice but would require the 4L85e pretty much (allison won't fit in a non-hd frame as that's the reason for it's 2 inch taller frame) and the 4L85e trans to me is terrible for street driving. ChevelleBoy is right though, never too much hp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luvmySS Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 The MPG factor starts to weigh in on the larger engines, and this is my daily driver. I'm with Dave on that one. The MPG's are bad enough with the 6.0 liter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 The MPG's are bad enough with the 6.0 liter. ....and even more intolerable @ $2.19/gallon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgar Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 I'm with BigTex on this one. You don't need a lot of displacement to make a powerful engine. The main reason I wouldn't want an 8.1 L engine would be the poor gas mileage and the added weight. These trucks with a 6 L engine are already heavy enough. One thing I think GM should consider for next year is a supercharged 6L with an aluminum block! BigTex, just wondering, why would you want to lower the compression ratio from 10:1 to 9:1 on the 6L? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcairns Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 For supercharging purposes, lower compression ratios are better. You can make more power with boost than with compression. Not sure about these new fangled motors, but in the old days, an 8:1 compression ratio was good for supercharging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creaker Posted June 27, 2003 Report Share Posted June 27, 2003 8:1 compression is still a widely used number and one I hear quoted most often. Higher compression ratios mean higher engine temps, among other things, and that adversely affects supercharging (as well as lowering the longevity/reliability of the engine). Running 10:0 compression will limit your boost, unless you just don't care how long the engine lasts. Lowering it to 9:1 would enable a higher boost and keep most of the benefits. Even lower compression would allow for even higher boost but then you run into the problem of going from extremely low power (during no boost) to overkill power (during boost) and little in between. An intercooler is used to allow for a higher compression while keeping temperature in check (and having colder/denser air doesn't hurt either). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSilverado60 Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 Swap out the Allison for a 4L85E, put in the 9.5" rear and the 9.2" front diff. and if it had those power numbers id buy it. Im a big block guy. Id be there in a second Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTex Posted June 28, 2003 Report Share Posted June 28, 2003 Take a look at this dyno: THis is from an Fbod with an all bore, stock stroke 383 LS1 engine. I am just using this as a quick example, but that is some awesome power. Notice the 350 TQ at 2500 rpms. This is NA, so add a little nitrous to test the limits of the AWD transfer case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aellis Posted July 1, 2003 Report Share Posted July 1, 2003 Why not just use the 5.7 LS6 ZO6 engine @ 405hp thats already proven. It would be much more fuel effecient the the 8.1 and is a currently in production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTex Posted July 1, 2003 Report Share Posted July 1, 2003 The LS6 doesn't have the torque needed to get the truck out of the hole. I think the goal of this thread is to give the SS an engine that would strain the AWD system and make it king of the road. The LS6 won't cut it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.