HOW MUCH POWER IS THE LS3 ROD MOD REALLY WORTH? 427 LS3 STROKER INTAKE TEST-STOCK LS3 VS ROD MOD 

The whole engine is amazing. The ls3 is the best na ls they made in my opinion.

@@Skubasteph Id argue for the LS7 myself.

@@Skubasteph How do you all feel about "LT", some are showing "LT" results exceeding LS3/LS7, but up until that time I was personally seeing better LS3/LS7 results.

@@dennisrobinson8008 I think the LT motors are more difficult to make big power with. Folks are making 2000+ with the newest l8t iron block, but with aftermarket fueling and run like an Ls engine. LT engines really shine stock and supercharged, with constant variable valve timing and direct injection. Cvvt adds tons of power and driveability under the curve. Most cams from what i can see remove the cvvt, which defeats some of the purpose of running the higher tech engine. DI seems pretty expensive to upgrade, so port injection is probably better, which basically puts you back to a fancy LS

@@Saddedude ehh there really expensive rare engine that like to drop valves. so id always go for the ls3 over the ls7.

Nah. It's the modern equivalent of flipping the lid on a Gen 1 SBC. I hate coolant crossovers.

It's the enthusiast equivalent of a 'tornado' - which is hilarious considering how enthusiasts mock the 'tornado' lol

We ran the CNC ported LS3 TFS head to allow us to run the LS3 intake tests. They flow more than enough to support the tested power level.

@@richardholdener1727 for sure, gotta have LS3 heads to test LS3 intakes. Just saying it's an odd combo, in most cases of you were going to the trouble of the big bore, you wanna take advantage of it!

we ran ls7 heads too

Sweet, can't wait to see the results!

would be odd if it worked better on a less powerful motor

@@richardholdener1727aye the don’t lie. We did back to back runs on the same day under the same conditions.

@@Its_Mike_Myke My LS2 with Mast Ls3 heads stock LS3 intake vararam and a healthy cam 624/615 243/250/114 made 477/418 I shaved the heads from 66cc to 63 cc and a .045 headgasket got an X-air air intake and the Rodmod and the car made 522/467🤗

There’s a few uncontrolled variables going on when it comes to the placement of the rods within the LS3 intake manifold. Different companies use different techniques and Rod size/placement. As always, love the channel and the effort y’all put in for the data🤙🏼

@@richardholdener1727 That manifold was not designed be used on a big inch stroker. If on LS3 or l77 or l77 stock cubic inch yes makes power up to about 6,600 rpm.

GPI has already done that test with their Intake shootout

@@justinw6448 got a link only one I found from gpi made like 610

@@Smithtobewith This is the GPi intake test video on stock bottom end LS3 (376ci vs 427ci in this video), ported OEM heads (vs TFS aftermarket heads in this video) and a different cam. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but you can compare the deltas with no other changes made. It's possible the GPI engine was using an OEM water pump as well. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-LnAO1rKg7Lg.html

not sure where you get the notion of 4 extra hp

​@@richardholdener1727 I think he's using a hyperbolic statement, seems like he's suggesting that compared to other can designers/manufactures, BT likes to push exhaust duration more than most, for little power gain at a cost of a lot of driveability. At least that's what I think he's saying?

"he likes to push exhaust duration more than most for little power gain at the cost of driveability," said no knowledgeable individual ever. Take care with generalities...or just look at the success of the Truck Norris cam. Much to be learned

Explain how a NA LS3 making 650+ HP _deficient ?_

@@richardholdener1727 I'm just older now and milder cam timing guy now. The "it's not that serious" phase. lol

THIS WAS A GPI ROD MOD

@@richardholdener1727 He never said it wasn't or was anybody else that did the mod. But a good way to deflect I guess.

​@richardholdener1727 my man...test oem vs rod mod on a stock LS3. Proven time and time again at the track. That being said, I'm surprised at these results. I expected better.

@@SilverSurfer77 wrong engine combo for this test should been done on ls3 with smaller cam.

I would use something bigger on a 1000-hp draw through (PD blower) combo-we always see vacuum and power with 102 at 1000 hp

@@richardholdener1727 We only see 1-2" of pressure drop across a 102/103 at 1000 hp PD setup. Small enough to really not care, especially given how much harder it is to fit the 112 underhood on many LS setups due to belt drive issues/clearances. By comparison, a stock 87mm throttle body was seeing 5-6" of drop at 800 whp PD setup.

and a 700-hp na motor sees sizable gains stepping from a 90mm throttle body to a 102 or bigger

don't look for power in connecting rods

Unless you're David Vizard. He looks for power in everything. 😎

he finds it too

yep!

we tested other intakes-see the other vids

The LSXR LS3 intake has never shown much power

@@richardholdener1727 What about a Fast LSXR LS7 intake with a 102mm throttle body? Reason is I have one and I am replacing a blown up LS7 with a 427 stroker LS3.

@@Gearbhallno one uses lsxr if anything highram ported or msd ported

Fast LS7 is good-MSD LS7 is better, but these were all LS3 based intakes-not LS7

@@richardholdener1727 Thanks! I am glad I can stick with the one I already have. I expect the MSD intake probably isn't worth the extra money over the one I already have if its good.

It was bigger than need be-but it comes into play with other intakes tested

we have Hi Ram, PD, Pro Flo and BTR intakes coming up

@@richardholdener1727 Bless you Richard Holdener

VVT deletes is silly

@@richardholdener1727seriously curious why you don’t like vvt deletes

@@anthonywoodall8854 VVT gives you a lot of midrange torque with ZERO effort. For street driving where you don't rev it out completely, the VVT gives you what you want with stock cams. Another benefit of VVT is the weight of the phasers dampening the system. There are a lot of reasons to leave VVT engines bone stock and simply enjoy their greatness. -- The reason I chose to delete VVT is because this engine is going to see a lot aggressive changes in engine speed. This isn't a drag car. It's a naturally aspirated drift/road race car. Where a drag car does a 3500 RPM dig and then runs for 15 seconds, I'm gonna rip the handbrake, hold it floored on the 8100 limiter and side-step the clutch. -- Another thing. This car has a bit of axle tramp under braking. So, if I son't want to upshift on a straight because I have a turn coming up, and I get on the brake enough to make it tramp, then that shock goes back into the engine because I have that solid hub 6-puck clutch. I have to use that clutch, because the lower weight makes the transmission shift better. Plus, when this car gets airborne cresting a hill in 4th gear, it's gonna bounce off the limter, the hook dead hard on landing. Again, that shock has to fight the weight in the VVT system.

@@anthonywoodall8854 -- The momentum in the valvetrain pulls the chain guide into the tensioner and then it slaps back out. VVT adds more weight, thus a harder hit. If the chain guides break or wear unevenly, this can cause problems. -- On a smooth setup, VVT is nice. Ride in an S550 on a stock resonator and muffler delete. They're smooth and sound so sweet. -- I think this is why BBC's and LS engines dominate offroad. They don't have tensioners. Okay, LS engines do have tensioners, but there's way less slack on those than any other OHC setup. -- This might also be why the RB-26 and 2JZ are so good. They don't use chain guides. They use tensioners, which are simpler and stiffer.

If the manifold does not show gains on a bigger, more powerful motor, usually it shows even less on a milder, smaller motor

@@richardholdener1727 thanks for the reply and well disappointment hits haha

me too

start thinking heat and pressure

Agreed-there is something sketchy about a direct back to back dyno test that shows actual results and not what you wanted to happen.

smaller throttle body never ads low speed torque

😂

They all run silly combos anyways.

I'm sure Rick Crawford is crying.

feel free to test on the motor you like

@@richardholdener1727 i have but with a dynojet thanks

fast LS3 doesn't add much over stock LS3

coming today

@@richardholdener1727 your the best lol would be interesting to see in future video if you do 8 widebands on it to see what different runner lengths does

Which size XS intake and throttle body?

I just have the 101 with stock 90mm tbody

this had 8 wide bands on it

we did not run a MAF

e85

@@richardholdener1727 can you confirm the compression ratio please? Thanks

it's not

It wasn't amazing in the previous test. I doubt a couple more cubic inches would make all the difference given how it performed. Given everything I've looked at, including Richard's extensive testing the FAST is most at home on a cathedral port LS.

@@emperorbobarino in the intake test the motor was just stock ls3 with a mild cam pushing just 52x hp. This one flowing more air would have shown if the intake opening really is a restriction or not. Fast performs same as ls3 intake except for it having 102mm opening vs the 90mm. Testing 90 vs 102mm throttle body is not as helpful since opening is restricted.

@@clueless4wat322 It pretty much doesn't matter. Watch the performance design test. The biggest gain was 11HP for TB/TB opening. The difference on a 427 CID engine between a 90 and a 102 was 6 HP. 6 HP on an engine this big, making this much power.

@@emperorbobarino good to know, I'll take a look at that also. I thought it might be closer to 20hp on a good run but even then I could never justify the cost of it. Thanks for the info!

@@clueless4wat322 Sure thing. Factory LS3 manifold is really, really hard to beat on stuff less than 7L/427 cid, is LS3 headed and under 7k rpms. Doesn't hurt that it comes with the motor and has the best hood clearance either.

other intakes with the 90mm made much more power-'not that

@@richardholdener1727 I would like to see that

remote dyno pump but Meziere has electric and remotes for sale

Awesome! , I'll look into it , thanks again for the response 😁

to go to 102mm opening you need to intersect the o-ring channel

@@richardholdener1727 I have a gasket with my 102

I can see the rounded top of the new Performance Design XS LS3 intake in the background.

that test coming today

turbulence?

@@richardholdener1727 isn’t the purpose of the rodmod to straighten out turbulent air?

just to improve airflow into the port

not restrictive

@@richardholdener1727 tanks for the feed back alway 110% true stuff....merci

we did

@@richardholdener1727 what was the result?

that vid is up

@@richardholdener1727 I watched it that's more my style thanks buddy

agreed-it provided data

He mentioned there being some port matching so I’d assume that they did.

Looked like some minor porting around the inlet, but I'd be interested to know if the runners were ported as well. GPI, as well as people doing A-B testing on them on dynos, pretty consistently shows 6-8 HP on stock engines and 12-15 HP with a decent cam for the *ported rod mod*. Typically the mid-range torque also picks up double digits as well.

@@thebradnoyes I did hear him mention they ported it to handle the bigger throttle body I must have missed if he talked about them poting the rest of the intake.

We did NO additional porting to the intake other than what came with the Rod Mod modifications-Also, it was not matched to the larger throttle body (the mismatch was shown in the video).

Remember people reading this comment, he had no idea about the setting on the gun or the experience of the guy yielding the tool

I like Coyotes and have tested them, but an na coyote is bus lengths behind a 700-hp 427.