Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Absolutely! But let's consider how GM intended this engine to be used- as a fuel efficient alternative to the 350. They decided to set this motor up as a low rpm, lugging slug. They just forgot that it was an ultra high compression, over square design. So the injection pump tuning (peak fuel at 1800rpm), tiny constantly spooled turbo, weak valve springs sufficient for low boost and rpm, were what the carpet walkers wanted.Hey, you know them Corporate Beancounters, @Will L. !
Exactly the issue I was facing with my motor…weak springs further compounding the bad valve issues.As far as the spring deal goes, the stock spring has never changed, they are aspirated specs, now with turbos there is a lot of back pressure pushing on the back of the valves that makes a already weak spring worse, my customers deserved better so here we are ..
Copy that.Pushrod length, if the block and heads haven't been shaved then stock length would be a good guess, but knowing for sure will require measuring, I recommend holding off and use a length checker to know for sure.
I'm not debating. Technically speaking 2 oz. of column load causes more deflection than 1 oz. of column load, so I get it. I was just commenting that +1/8" wall thickness is thick in comparison to others I have seen.As for pushrods, stronger is better.
I'm open to comments, which is why I posted on the open forum.A .010" thicker will net just under 1 point. You will get some for and against lower vs higher compression, so it depends on who you choose to listen to.
Why not on a put around truck?If I were building a 6.5 to work hard every day (dually w/loaded gooseneck), it would be 18:1, not 20:1.