DV: Talking of predictions, we have seen the Mustang become the car of the ’90s and the end of production of the small-block Chevy as we know it. What do you feel is likely to replace it or be the motor of the millennia in the first decade?

JM: There are a lot of great high–tech little multi–valve engines out there such as those from Toyota, Honda, Ford and the like but if we are talking big V8s then the LS1/LS6 has got to be not just one of the best two–valve engines currently made, but one of the best engines, period. Not only is the cylinder head design outstanding but also the rest of the motor top to bottom. It’s like the factory has done our homework for us so we have only the fine–tuning to do and boy do they respond to fine–tuning. The cylinder head is almost a work of art. Continuing with GM’s port shape philosophy, an experienced porter can make these heads flow some almost unbelievable amounts. I know, we have had well–known names in the industry tell us the numbers we have seen can’t be done. I’m glad they told me this after we had done it not before–I might just have taken their word for it!

DV: Sequential versus batch fire injection, seen any real difference?

JM: Not really, sequential is definitely best but the dyno rarely reads a difference of more than the odd percent or so. The main advantage with sequential seems to be in emissions and it has the edge on idle quality, more so it seems when a big cam is used.

DV: I hear you have some exciting intake manifold developments for the LS1 and LS6 motors. Want to share anything else?

JM: We have, but I don’t feel we are at the point to talk about our latest stuff. But David, rest assured GMHTP will be the first to find out about it when the time comes. As for mods to the stock manifolds, we have found some power there by cutting the bottom out of them, reworking the internals some and then epoxying the bottom back in. However I need to make it clear that GM did a great job on the manifold for the stock heads and the power level they had in mind. It only becomes a real issue when we take advantage of the heads’ outstanding breathing potential.

DV: Let’s move on to ignition, got any gems as far as say, advance curves are concerned?

JM: Sure do, a message for the street engine builder. Take care of your ignition advance curve and your big street cam will take care of you. There are just too many engines put together with big cams that drive far worse at low speed then they should and it is simply due to lack of attention to characteristics of both the centrifugal and vacuum advance. This is not so much of a problem with computer controlled engine management systems but it is with carbureted motors. These really need a programmable ignition system such as the Holly or Electromotive deals. It’s pretty much a documented fact that an ignition system delivering optimal timing under any circumstances will allow as much as another ten degrees of cam to be used. At the end of the day the ignition/cam combination can be worth 30–40 hp more for a given drivability.

It is a big, big, mistake for the street performance guy to emulate the advance characteristics of a race machine. With nothing mattering much under 5000 rpm a fixed advance will often deliver within a percent or so of maximum over the rpm range used. But what is given up under 5000 for a street motor can amount to a bunch and then some.