im thinking of buying a gsr head for my ls, good idea?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 98TegKid &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">im thinking of buying a gsr head for my ls, good idea?</TD></TR></TABLE>

hm...another ls/vtec...i can tell you rite now that you will get a lot of ugly replies like BAN , or search is your friend or whatever. but you should have searched first, but i think u should get b16 instead of b18 cuz of better flow.
search around.

 

if you dont want it to last the go for it. if you do, you will need to do some internals like rods, pistons and getting the crank balanced.

 

try this one- https://honda-tech.com/zerosearch look up LS Vtec.. theres a thread floating around here explaining the pros/cons of LsVtec. And if you want to buy parts go to the classifieds.

 

go for it but i hope you know what your geting into
lsvtec's make great power and can be as reliable as any other honda motor thats only if it is build right

it will also cost a lot of money for a ls vtec build up and the head and block wont cost nearrly as much as all the parts and machine work

 

LS/Vtec doesnt last very long. theres a better solution... its called bored out GSR. you get the torque with more displacement, and the hp from the vtec. itll save you a load of heartache going this way instead of slapping a vtec head on a ls bottom end

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Eviloliv3 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">LS/Vtec doesnt last very long. theres a better solution... its called bored out GSR. you get the torque with more displacement, and the hp from the vtec. itll save you a load of heartache going this way instead of slapping a vtec head on a ls bottom end</TD></TR></TABLE>

Even easier without thinning the sleeves dramatically is using an LS crank in a GSR block

 

but then you wouldnt have the high revving capabilities of the gsr anymore, you are changing the shorter GSR crank for a longer LS crank, making everything not as stable.... i dont know if im puting this down right, it works in my head when i think about it

 

Ricer myth, plain and simple. There are people making over 600whp with LS cranks in GSR blocks.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Eviloliv3 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but then you wouldnt have the high revving capabilities of the gsr anymore, you are changing the shorter GSR crank for a longer LS crank, making everything not as stable.... i dont know if im puting this down right, it works in my head when i think about it</TD></TR></TABLE>

i hope you are not comparing the rod ratio of a ls and a gsr/itr
the lower rod ratio of a ls is so small and insignifficant it wont even affect the reving capabilities
the rod ratio is almost the same as a gsr and itr
that is like comparing the displacement of a ls and gsr/itr its so small
almost no difference
a b16 on the other hand is a 1.6 which will make a signifficant less torq that a 1.8 and the rr is i think 1.74 which is much higher than a 1.8 block

 

to solve the long rod/ratio problem of the ls/vtec, couldnt you replace the rods with gsr rods? wouldnt this correct the problem?

 

No. You will have 0 piston to valve clearance, unless you run a deckplate. The problem doesnt need fixing in the first place.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thrty8street &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">to solve the long rod/ratio problem of the ls/vtec, couldnt you replace the rods with gsr rods? wouldnt this correct the problem?</TD></TR></TABLE>

first this is not really a problem and it doesent need fixing like i said the rod ratio is almost the same as a b18c block.

and no you cant run gsr rods unless you want the pistons hiting the valves
you can only run gsr rods with a gsr crank

 

If you do go the LS\VTEC route, make sure your builder is competent and knows what he\she is doing.