Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Grabiak Performance Center
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Camaro ZL1 Forum - ZL1 Specific Topics


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-23-2012, 04:25 PM   #57
c4maroboy
[HOONIGAN]
 
c4maroboy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 ZL1 #1848[The HOONIGAN MOBILE]
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 640
__________________
2012 ZL1 BLack M6 ECF
c4maroboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 04:43 PM   #58
lakersftbl69

 
lakersftbl69's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 camaro 1ss/rs
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: kingston ma.
Posts: 1,413
I still don't understand why there is a 100 hp loss from motor to tires I thought on average stuff like that was suppose to be about a 17% loss only
__________________
ordered dec 15 2008 picked up on june 8 2009.
upgrades kooks 1 3/4" LTH w/ deleted cats, corsa exhaust, Mm catch can, hurst short throw shifter stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears ecs kit blower, meth injection, upgraded axles, drive shaft, McLeod rxt clutch, 634rwhp 537 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 04:49 PM   #59
tooslow
Banned
 
Drives: 4 Wheels, Gasoline Engine
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell James View Post
The engines are not broken in at the factory.

They have minimal run time from a couple of tests, then some time moving the cars around. The actual break in occurs over the first couple thousand miles of driving.

As proven by the gain in hp after a couple thousand miles. If they were already broken in, they would have max power at delivery. Not the case, when a car is new many things are quite tight... such as piston to bore clearance. After some miles the clearances will be better and also better ring sealing = more power.
I can see that. So that would be the case with any engine then, right, not just the LS series? Not sure why this even matters.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ddavis View Post
Spraying before the intercooler would be a bad idea. Seems like it would eat the intercooler alive more so then just not getting the full benefits. I would bet theres some good benefits for spraying it after the intercooler. I havent pulled apart a zl1 yet ,so not sure how possible it is and if theres a good outlet to tap into, but meth has plenty of benefits especially for a heat soak happy engine (more consistent pulls, added fuel, lower temps...).
Definitely it has it's benefits. Even if you're now lowering IAT's, you still get the ability to run more advanced timing on pump gas tunes. I was simply commenting on its effect on reducing intake temps.
tooslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 04:57 PM   #60
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooslow View Post
Not unless you place the nozzles to spray after the air charge has passed through the intercooler, otherwise the incoming meth-cooled air would actually be heated up by passing through the factory setup. If there were any cooling benefits, they would be minimal, at best.



You do know that all the LSA engines are broken in at the factory before they are ever placed in the chassis, right? Little chance of any engine bearing failure due to not following the recommended break-in procedure. And last I checked, Scott is not a mechanical engineer.
I don't believe Scott is either, however, there are reasons for the break-in proceedures GM outlines. While you can argue both sides, which side do you think GM will take if they can prove there was a failure as a result of incorrect break-in?

I also don't believe these engines are broken in, let alone fired. I know LS9s and LS7s are run on natural gas to check for correct sealing and pressures (after other previous oil and coolant pressure checks - and these, unlike LSA, are hand-assembled in Wixom, MI; not Mexico - last I checked...). I'm almost positive these aren't broken-in any more than other 6.2s, outside of LS9. However - I am on the fence as to correctly break a motor-in; I've heard and engine dyno' is best, since in a new car, you have other powertrain and chassis considerations to worry about.

Scott is only making sure the customers are aware of how GM recommends the proceedure to be. Everyone is on their own otherwise.
__________________
05 Hummer H2 SUV on OEM Air Ride
Forged 11.1:1 408 LQ4 (K1 crank & rods; Mahle pistons)/CPP LS3 CNC heads/BTR Stage IV LS3 cam and valvetrain/home ported L92 intake manifold/ported 90mm TB/custom Volant CAI/mid-length headers/AFE dual 3" CB/Corvette Servo/el cheapo lift/Cognito UCAs/e'fan conversion/aluminum radiator/Moroso catchcan/HPTuners by me/LED exterior lighting/Pioneer AVH-5600BHS/Pioneer GM-9601/2-Pioneer TS-W310D4/Obcon Labyrinth dual-12 box/lots of other stuff
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 08:39 PM   #61
actireman
 
Drives: 2011 denali hd2500
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: clarkston, mi
Posts: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakersftbl69 View Post
I still don't understand why there is a 100 hp loss from motor to tires I thought on average stuff like that was suppose to be about a 17% loss only
Isn't 17% of 580 HP 98.6?
actireman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 08:59 PM   #62
lakersftbl69

 
lakersftbl69's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 camaro 1ss/rs
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: kingston ma.
Posts: 1,413
Stock zl1 here said 476rwhp multiply that 476 x .17=80.92 we will say 81 so add the 81 to the 476 and you get 557 which to me seems more like these are the same as the ctsv
__________________
ordered dec 15 2008 picked up on june 8 2009.
upgrades kooks 1 3/4" LTH w/ deleted cats, corsa exhaust, Mm catch can, hurst short throw shifter stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears ecs kit blower, meth injection, upgraded axles, drive shaft, McLeod rxt clutch, 634rwhp 537 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 09:03 PM   #63
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 1LE...Drove: 2012 ZL1
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 27,866
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Great read, Torq!!

Lots of great modification threads coming out, now. I'm enjoying them all!

Quote:
Originally Posted by radz28 View Post
I don't believe Scott is either, however, there are reasons for the break-in proceedures GM outlines. While you can argue both sides, which side do you think GM will take if they can prove there was a failure as a result of incorrect break-in?

I also don't believe these engines are broken in, let alone fired. I know LS9s and LS7s are run on natural gas to check for correct sealing and pressures (after other previous oil and coolant pressure checks - and these, unlike LSA, are hand-assembled in Wixom, MI; not Mexico - last I checked...). I'm almost positive these aren't broken-in any more than other 6.2s, outside of LS9. However - I am on the fence as to correctly break a motor-in; I've heard and engine dyno' is best, since in a new car, you have other powertrain and chassis considerations to worry about.

Scott is only making sure the customers are aware of how GM recommends the proceedure to be. Everyone is on their own otherwise.


He's not making this stuff up - so the "mechanical engineer" comment was quite off-base. Call him the messenger, if you will...

You certainly don't have to obey the recommendations....but I am.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Twice Before You Post.
...Anxiously waiting to order a silver "Z"...

Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 09:58 PM   #64
rmyers

 
rmyers's Avatar
 
Drives: Both American Made
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 762
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakersftbl69 View Post
Stock zl1 here said 476rwhp multiply that 476 x .17=80.92 we will say 81 so add the 81 to the 476 and you get 557 which to me seems more like these are the same as the ctsv
Since you are trying to measure a "loss" consumed by the drivetrain, you would multiply the crank horsepower x .83 which would be the equivalent of subtracting 17% from the total. That gives you 481.4.
__________________

2012 ZL1 #213 M6 Black on Black
2013 ZL1 #2638 Convertible Auto
2010 Chevrolet Suburban
2011 GMC Seirra HD Denali
rmyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 10:12 PM   #65
lakersftbl69

 
lakersftbl69's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 camaro 1ss/rs
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: kingston ma.
Posts: 1,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmyers View Post
Since you are trying to measure a "loss" consumed by the drivetrain, you would multiply the crank horsepower x .83 which would be the equivalent of subtracting 17% from the total. That gives you 481.4.
still though i feel its still a big hp loss compared to the amount we lost on our ss
__________________
ordered dec 15 2008 picked up on june 8 2009.
upgrades kooks 1 3/4" LTH w/ deleted cats, corsa exhaust, Mm catch can, hurst short throw shifter stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears ecs kit blower, meth injection, upgraded axles, drive shaft, McLeod rxt clutch, 634rwhp 537 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 10:14 PM   #66
showstopper

 
Drives: 2010 RS/SS
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbodfather View Post
a word of caution - please note 'break-in' period as described in your owner's manual.
They were serious about that?
__________________
showstopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 12:45 AM   #67
PQ
Booooosted.
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Supercharged SS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,718
Send a message via Yahoo to PQ
Wow. Homepage sponsor thread?
__________________
PQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 01:09 AM   #68
Bad@ssCamaro
Rogers' Rocks :-)
 
Bad@ssCamaro's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 1SS/1LE
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Western MA
Posts: 5,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakersftbl69 View Post
Stock zl1 here said 476rwhp multiply that 476 x .17=80.92 we will say 81 so add the 81 to the 476 and you get 557 which to me seems more like these are the same as the ctsv

580 SAE hp at crank
-476 rwhp
= 104 hp drive train loss

104/580= 17.93%
__________________
2015 CRT 1SS/1LE RS/Recaro's/NPP/Nav/Rear vision pkg./BA speaker upgrade.

Bad@ssCamaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 01:59 AM   #69
doc7000
 
Drives: 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lomita,CA
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakersftbl69 View Post
still though i feel its still a big hp loss compared to the amount we lost on our ss
Different dyno, differeny car, different day....

you really can't compare your dyno run to any other dyno runs out there, I have seen ZL1 Dynos report around 510RWHP on youtube somewhere.

Where dynos are useful is seeing what your gains are (where you started and where you ended up at). Though in this day and age a car with 20% loss is a bit on the heavy side, I would expect this car to really be in the 10-15% range.

Though from the first post it sounds like they were seeing a good drop from the heat. So really a 580BHP engine could have been running at around 560BHP on that day in that condition.

So many variables and not enough info to real make such a judgement call that you are making.
doc7000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 03:33 AM   #70
KILLER74Z28
MOD SQUAD
 
KILLER74Z28's Avatar
 
Drives: 2G1FT1EW9A9100666
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 5,730
mmmmm popcorn...
__________________

Who cares about the Blue Oval crowd and their little Ponys? We're getting our Camaro back-and it'll be Supercharged!-MDAII
Team LS3
KILLER74Z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.