Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
B&M
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Camaro V6 LLT Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons

Camaro V6 LLT Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-26-2009, 04:44 PM   #51
Michael
World's Oldest Newbie???
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS (On order)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 15
Are you sure these can be tuned? No ones been able to tune the new style PCMs on the Pontiacs yet. At least, no one in the Grand Prix sites I frequent.
Michael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 05:12 PM   #52
Warpick
 
Drives: Rust bucket and a jalopy
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central florida
Posts: 52
Piggy backs are out in Australia not my preferred method, but stand alone engine management systems are available now.

Piggybacks are the start of new ECU's.
Warpick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 06:08 PM   #53
MadMaxx
Master of the V6
 
MadMaxx's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 1LT/RS
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
Are you sure these can be tuned? No ones been able to tune the new style PCMs on the Pontiacs yet. At least, no one in the Grand Prix sites I frequent.
Anything can be tuned, it all comes down to $$$. With such a robust featured stock ECU, it's going to be hard(er) for an aftermarket full blown standalone to come along. Pigguback systems are going to be the norm for a while -- and honestly, probably will work just fine. I've got a feeling the transmission and rest of the driveline will become a problem long before the engine does
MadMaxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 06:15 PM   #54
UsedTaHaveA68
 
UsedTaHaveA68's Avatar
 
Drives: Hyundai Sonata
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warpick View Post
This.

With out overextending too much the DI means that you're not taking air and fuel on the intake stroke. It's just air. So carbs are like air/fuel mixing centers port injection is shooting atomized fuel with the air and compressing it all on the compression stroke.

Fuel is a liquid and can't be compressed as much as air. So with direct injection. You have nothing but air being compressed and as the air is compressed you have all that pressure in the chamber and THEN the fuel is injected and ignited.

Compression needs to be payed attention to, but it's not as important on carb or port injection methods. Which is why you can run such a high compression. It's all air being compressed. The only thing you really need to worry about is can the internals handle all the energy happening in the combustion chamber.

This seems to be a very common misconception. Fast foward to 0:25. You will notice that fuel is sprayed into the cylinder on the intake stroke. If it were sprayed at the top of the compression stroke, it wouldn't be very effective in cooling the intake charge. That and it would probably spontaneously ignite, causing the engine to "diesel."

EDIT: Why can't I ever get these damn videos to embed?!! Here's the link:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/03...ect-injection/
UsedTaHaveA68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 06:47 PM   #55
ssrsheaven
 
ssrsheaven's Avatar
 
Drives: 92 firebird,2010 camaro
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Indianapolis,In
Posts: 361
Nice keep us up to date.
ssrsheaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 08:32 PM   #56
SomeGeoffGuy
 
SomeGeoffGuy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 SS/RS M6 Convertible
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 213
Here is a shot of the PE vs Time table from my GTP. There is one table for base at 12.4, then another table lowers it as a function of time and RPM. You can see how easy it would be to get into the 10.X range on a 1/4 mile run.

-Geoff
Attached Images
 
__________________
'12 2SS RS Convertible - No mods yet.
SomeGeoffGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 09:35 PM   #57
rays
V6 - It just isn't normal
 
rays's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2LT M6, F250 7.3L Diesel
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NH
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsedTaHaveA68 View Post
This seems to be a very common misconception. Fast foward to 0:25. You will notice that fuel is sprayed into the cylinder on the intake stroke. If it were sprayed at the top of the compression stroke, it wouldn't be very effective in cooling the intake charge. That and it would probably spontaneously ignite, causing the engine to "diesel."

EDIT: Why can't I ever get these damn videos to embed?!! Here's the link:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/03...ect-injection/
Your right but there may be more to this than you think.

* Ultra lean burn mode is used for light-load running conditions, at constant or reducing road speeds, where no acceleration is required. The fuel is not injected at the intake stroke but rather at the latter stages of the compression stroke, so that the small amount of air-fuel mixture is optimally placed near the spark plug. This stratified charge is surrounded mostly by air which keeps the fuel away from the cylinder walls for lowest emissions. The combustion takes place in a toroidal (donut-shaped) cavity on the piston's surface.[citation needed] This technique enables the use of ultra-lean mixtures impossible with carburetors or conventional fuel injection.
* Stoichiometric mode is used for moderate load conditions. Fuel is injected during the intake stroke, creating a homogeneous fuel-air mixture in the cylinder. From the stoichiometric ratio, an optimum burn results in a clean exhaust emission, further cleaned by the catalytic converter.
* Full power mode is used for rapid acceleration and heavy loads (as when climbing a hill). The air-fuel mixture is homogeneous and the ratio is slightly richer than stoichiometric, which helps prevent knock (pinging). The fuel is injected during the intake stroke.

I read it on the internet, it must be true

Seems like to tune this would be pretty complicated especially when you add in the variable valve timing. With so much computer controls on this thing I wonder if it would mostly just tune itself? Just add more air. Which may be why a CAI and exhaust improve this thing so much.

Diesel by the way (at least my engine) uses a two phase injection on compression where the first(small) charge starts the burn and the main charge is then delivered. Compression is much higher (upwards of 24:1) for diesel.

Ok just food for thought. Like I said I'm no tuner but I do understand the basics. I've been studying this engine for a while and.... me likey
__________________

2LT RS M6 RJT Black leather
4/29/2009 Ordered
6/24 6000 Delivered
rays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 10:09 PM   #58
Wesman
 
Wesman's Avatar
 
Drives: Trans Am
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsedTaHaveA68 View Post
Hahah yeah we're seeing the same one. Sorry, wasn't too clear. I was commenting on how incredibly flat that torque curve is. Because of this, I think that GM's next V-8 that they develop should be a Direct Injected VVT DOHC motor so we can get awesome mileage, great power, and ridiculous torque curves like the one put up by the V-6.
GM's next generation of the LS series V8 will still be a pushrod design. The block and heads are already designed to be OHV, not OHC.

I think I'd rather it be OHV anyway. With a pushrod valvetrain, you get better low end torque and power. Most OHC V8's lack the low end grunt that a pushrod V8 has. Not only that, but GM's LS series is much more compact in dimensions than a comparable DOHC V8, just look how enormous Ford's DOHC Modulars are. And because of that, the LS series weighs less, has less rotating parts, and is easier to do valvetrain upgrades in. And one of the best parts about the LS engines is the fuel economy. The Corvette LS3 is rated at 16MPG city 26MPG highway - thats awesome for a 6.2L, 430HP V8, and most competitors can't match that, even with smaller V6 engines. Hell, look at the new Lancer Evolution - with a gutless 2.0L DOHC 4 banger, it only matches the Corvette in city driving, and it gets a pathetic 22MPG highway.

However, I do agree about adding DI. It would improve both fuel economy numbers as well as horsepower and driveability, there are no downsides. They would just need to redesign the cylinder heads to accommodate the injectors.
Wesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 10:23 PM   #59
Super83Z
 
Super83Z's Avatar
 
Drives: 1999 Z28 1983 Z28
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: City of Champions,MA
Posts: 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warpick View Post
with a thousand pound weight difference.

.


__________________
Current cars:
1983 Z28
1999 Z28
201x Z28?
Super83Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:00 AM   #60
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warpick View Post
Got a link for a stock cobra to see the differences or at least what RPM the abruptness started? Also a GTP I'd be curious at seeing the differences in A:F. If it's jus a measure to keep it from leaning out at the top end and cause detonation.

The reason I ask is because if it's running this rich it might not be a complete burn of the fuel. So residual fuel would be accumulating to a point.
I cant find mine, but I have one where an intake/catback cobra (stock tune) goes from ~12 @ 4500 rpm and dips down to 10.8 @ 5000 and ends at ~11.2 @6500 rpm.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 06:36 AM   #61
Super83Z
 
Super83Z's Avatar
 
Drives: 1999 Z28 1983 Z28
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: City of Champions,MA
Posts: 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N View Post
I cant find mine, but I have one where an intake/catback cobra (stock tune) goes from ~12 @ 4500 rpm and dips down to 10.8 @ 5000 and ends at ~11.2 @6500 rpm.
Forced Induction has different A/F requirements. Its better to be a little fat when boost is present. All these cars are dynoing rich because of the break-in tune they are running on.
__________________
Current cars:
1983 Z28
1999 Z28
201x Z28?
Super83Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 12:52 PM   #62
HotWire
 
Drives: 2008 Redline, 2004 Dale Jr MC
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: hawaii
Posts: 67
Aloha Everyone....

Well I thought I would let everyone know that there has been alot of advances on the DI 4 banger used in Saturn Skys in the last couple years and alot can be learned by crusing over to our forums. My wife has a redline version (turbo DI motor) and its freakin crazy. There is an unfortunate thing with ECU in the kappa platform (too many nannys) But its starting to get worked out. But there is ECU's out there or atleast Im sure the same people selling the 4 banger DI ECU's may have already started working in the V6 ECU's. From my experience so far with our redline these motors are great and love FI. For me anyway if I choose the v6 model a turbo would be a requirement. But jsut as a little side note. People have been pushing 20-22 psi with stock engine with our factory turbos for over a year now without any problems. I cant wait untill someone throws on a turbo on one of these V6's.

Mahalo

Ed
HotWire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 12:55 PM   #63
fdjizm
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2008 Mustang GT/CS
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,429
Dyno seems a bit low, whats the drivetrain loss on this thing? for 304 hp i would expect to see dyno's in the 280's
fdjizm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 12:56 PM   #64
Brokinarrow


 
Brokinarrow's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 Honda NC700x
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Indianola, IA
Posts: 5,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by rays View Post
Your right but there may be more to this than you think.

* Ultra lean burn mode is used for light-load running conditions, at constant or reducing road speeds, where no acceleration is required. The fuel is not injected at the intake stroke but rather at the latter stages of the compression stroke, so that the small amount of air-fuel mixture is optimally placed near the spark plug. This stratified charge is surrounded mostly by air which keeps the fuel away from the cylinder walls for lowest emissions. The combustion takes place in a toroidal (donut-shaped) cavity on the piston's surface.[citation needed] This technique enables the use of ultra-lean mixtures impossible with carburetors or conventional fuel injection.
* Stoichiometric mode is used for moderate load conditions. Fuel is injected during the intake stroke, creating a homogeneous fuel-air mixture in the cylinder. From the stoichiometric ratio, an optimum burn results in a clean exhaust emission, further cleaned by the catalytic converter.
* Full power mode is used for rapid acceleration and heavy loads (as when climbing a hill). The air-fuel mixture is homogeneous and the ratio is slightly richer than stoichiometric, which helps prevent knock (pinging). The fuel is injected during the intake stroke.

I read it on the internet, it must be true

Seems like to tune this would be pretty complicated especially when you add in the variable valve timing. With so much computer controls on this thing I wonder if it would mostly just tune itself? Just add more air. Which may be why a CAI and exhaust improve this thing so much.

Diesel by the way (at least my engine) uses a two phase injection on compression where the first(small) charge starts the burn and the main charge is then delivered. Compression is much higher (upwards of 24:1) for diesel.

Ok just food for thought. Like I said I'm no tuner but I do understand the basics. I've been studying this engine for a while and.... me likey
aaaand my head hurts... who knew this stuff was so complicated?
__________________
Brokinarrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:08 PM   #65
Koru
 
Koru's Avatar
 
Drives: 201? Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: MD
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMaxx View Post
Manual transmission, no listing of ambient temp... dynapack historically read higher than mustang, etc. etc.

Mustang dyno's are known as the "hearbreakers" for a reason I'd rather know my as-close-to-real-world-as-possible numbers.
Those numbers don't appear very "real-world"...they are still way low, that's like a 23% drivetrain loss...

Like that CTS, it should be hitting at least ~260 at the wheels with the SAE certified 300+ rating.
__________________
Koru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:10 PM   #66
fdjizm
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2008 Mustang GT/CS
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koru View Post
Those numbers don't appear very "real-world"...they are still way low, that's like a 23% drivetrain loss...

Like that CTS, it should be hitting at least ~260 at the wheels with the SAE certified 300+ rating.
hmmm i dynoed at 276 to the wheels stock 300hp
fdjizm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:17 PM   #67
trudawg660

 
Drives: 2006 Dodge Charger / 2SS IOM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdjizm View Post
hmmm i dynoed at 276 to the wheels stock 300hp
you have to back up what you say. where's your slips
trudawg660 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:23 PM   #68
Brokinarrow


 
Brokinarrow's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 Honda NC700x
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Indianola, IA
Posts: 5,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by trudawg660 View Post
you have to back up what you say. where's your slips
screenshot or it didn't happen!
__________________
Brokinarrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:25 PM   #69
fdjizm
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2008 Mustang GT/CS
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by trudawg660 View Post
you have to back up what you say. where's your slips
thats like standard.. lol google it.

here is 280 stock s197
http://allfordmustangs.com/forums/20...yno-today.html



here is 278 stock s197



i can find more if you want? any questions?
stock s197 dyno #'s = 270-280 on average

Last edited by fdjizm; 05-27-2009 at 01:40 PM.
fdjizm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:39 PM   #70
MadMaxx
Master of the V6
 
MadMaxx's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 1LT/RS
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koru View Post
Those numbers don't appear very "real-world"...they are still way low, that's like a 23% drivetrain loss...

Like that CTS, it should be hitting at least ~260 at the wheels with the SAE certified 300+ rating.
306*.82 (which is 18% loss, ) = 249.28

Within ~3hp of average loss on a automatic, which is 18%. Humidity, dyno type and the age of the engine *DO* play a large role. Also, the super-rich condition of the run doesn't help the total numbers either. The ECU may still be learning, so again...take everything w/ a grain of salt.

Just so we're clear, the caddy 261rwhp mark was done through a manual on a dynajet if memory serves

Anyone who claims they dyno'd 276rwhp (That is 8% driveline loss...pretty much a miracle) on an engine rated at 300bhp is either:

1) lying
2) had a dyno operator who didn't know what they were doing

Cheers
MadMaxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 01:43 PM   #71
fdjizm
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2008 Mustang GT/CS
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMaxx View Post
306*.82 (which is 18% loss, ) = 249.28

Within ~3hp of average loss on a automatic, which is 18%. Humidity, dyno type and the age of the engine *DO* play a large role. Also, the super-rich condition of the run doesn't help the total numbers either. The ECU may still be learning, so again...take everything w/ a grain of salt.

Just so we're clear, the caddy 261rwhp mark was done through a manual on a dynajet if memory serves

Anyone who claims they dyno'd 276rwhp (That is 8% driveline loss...pretty much a miracle) on an engine rated at 300bhp is either:

1) lying
2) had a dyno operator who didn't know what they were doing

Cheers
well i guess that miracle is pretty much standard then lol it's been done and has become normal.
fdjizm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 02:00 PM   #72
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMaxx View Post
306*.82 (which is 18% loss, ) = 249.28

Within ~3hp of average loss on a automatic, which is 18%. Humidity, dyno type and the age of the engine *DO* play a large role. Also, the super-rich condition of the run doesn't help the total numbers either. The ECU may still be learning, so again...take everything w/ a grain of salt.

Just so we're clear, the caddy 261rwhp mark was done through a manual on a dynajet if memory serves

Anyone who claims they dyno'd 276rwhp (That is 8% driveline loss...pretty much a miracle) on an engine rated at 300bhp is either:

1) lying
2) had a dyno operator who didn't know what they were doing

Cheers
The 4.6 in the mustang is not SAE Certified, so it is possible to be underrated some.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 02:03 PM   #73
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdjizm View Post
thats like standard.. lol google it.

here is 280 stock s197
http://allfordmustangs.com/forums/20...yno-today.html



here is 278 stock s197



i can find more if you want? any questions?
stock s197 dyno #'s = 270-280 on average
I'd hardly count that dynapak one because of the spike.

But I do agree in that I've seen the average right around 270 as well though.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 02:53 PM   #74
MadMaxx
Master of the V6
 
MadMaxx's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 1LT/RS
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdjizm View Post
well i guess that miracle is pretty much standard then lol it's been done and has become normal.
No, it isn't. 8% loss is greater than any production car, ever.

f you want to compare apples to apples... at 8% driveline loss, an SS camaro @ 426bhp should be damn near breaking the 400rwhp mark out of the box (392rwhp at 8%). As well all know, it doesn't

Feel free to find me examples of this though...provided you actually understand the metric of which you are posting...which as of right now, you don't seem to be getting.
MadMaxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 03:04 PM   #75
Brokinarrow


 
Brokinarrow's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 Honda NC700x
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Indianola, IA
Posts: 5,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMaxx View Post
No, it isn't. 8% loss is greater than any production car, ever.

f you want to compare apples to apples... at 8% driveline loss, an SS camaro @ 426bhp should be damn near breaking the 400rwhp mark out of the box (392rwhp at 8%). As well all know, it doesn't

Feel free to find me examples of this though...provided you actually understand the metric of which you are posting...which as of right now, you don't seem to be getting.
maybe the cars HP is underrated?
__________________
Brokinarrow 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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
V8 Camaro Performance Upgrades List Milk 1027 Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 85 11-11-2013 12:48 PM
Camaro Laws ChevyNut Off-topic Discussions 102 06-06-2011 10:34 PM
Camaro SS 2010 on dyno makes 364 whp & 371 rwtq !! Vid inside UCF w00t Camaro Photos | Spyshots | Video | Media Gallery 128 03-20-2011 10:27 PM
GM memo to dealers Moose 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 41 02-04-2010 07:33 PM
Car and Driver drives V6 Camaro! Xanthos 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 63 08-26-2008 09:21 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.