Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Nickey Chicago
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 12-14-2008, 12:31 PM   #1
TJ91
:chevy:
 
TJ91's Avatar
 
Drives: 2LT/RS
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,511
How Much can it handle?

Hey guys, ive been hearing that Direct Injection makes tuning more difficult, and that the high compression ratio makes FI a little dangerous, how much do you think you can gain without going FI on the 3.6 DI, besides the cold air intake and exhausts?
TJ91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 02:05 PM   #2
djsnoflake
Faith Keeper
 
djsnoflake's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 Silverado LTZ, 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada
Posts: 2,791
If by FI you mean fuel injected, you would pretty much have to reprogram the ECU, wouldn't you? And like mod the engine and stuff so it goes back to old fashioned fuel injection, which ruins the point of the engine.
Last I heard, nobody has cracked the ECU on that engine yet. So then you would have to heavily retrofit the engine with a bunch of old gear that might not get you the HP that the engine had before you started mucking about. And I imagine that could end up getting close to costing you as much as it would to get an SS.
Of course I am only a computer desk mechanic, so everything i typed may be wrong.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by fbodfather View Post
.........we are far from finished.................
djsnoflake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 02:25 PM   #3
TJ91
:chevy:
 
TJ91's Avatar
 
Drives: 2LT/RS
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,511
oh sorry i meant, forced induction, like supershargers or turbos, i wanted to know what other things i could do to bump up my numbers
TJ91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 04:10 PM   #4
Shadowsong
 
Drives: 2005 Mustang
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 644
Well, You've got some people saying that the DI makes no difference in how the motor handles boost, and others saying that the high comp. isn't as big of an issue because of the DI.

Honestly, I don't think anyone knows for sure.

I'm just going to sit back and watch
Shadowsong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 04:17 PM   #5
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
1 Horsepower...

In all seriousness, I'm shooting for naturally aspirated 380 flywheel horses for under 2500 on my 3.6 DI - at least, the one I will be getting - and have a solid plan for getting there. 400 wouldn't take much more, but I don't want to sacrifice the fuel economy to get there.
- Xanthos

P.S. - In case you're interested, I'm going with a custom spectre modular air intake, ported throttle body for venturi effect, semi-full exhaust (shorty headers once somebody makes them, high flow cats, mufflers), higher ratio rocker arms, and custom tune. I'm reasonably confident this will get me to at least 380 flywheel horses, if not more, seeing how a cold air intake and cat-back with no tune netted 340 flywheel horses on the CTS with this engine. IF somebody makes a set of mild cams for the right price, and they don't seriously effect fuel economy, I might hook myself up with a set as well to hit that 400 flywheel horsepower mark. I might also advance the ignition timing a few (2-3) degrees and see where that gets me.

P.P.S - As far as DI and boost - in some ways it will help, in others it won't. You still have to worry about blowing gaskets and whatnot from the sheer pressure, but the DI has a cooling effect on the air/fuel mixture - not to mention that the droplets are smaller so will provide a more even mixture - that will burn more evenly with less chance of knock. Its like having an inherent intercooler. At least, on paper. We won't know for sure till somebody straps a turbo/super up to one.
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 04:29 PM   #6
Shadowsong
 
Drives: 2005 Mustang
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
1 Horsepower...

In all seriousness, I'm shooting for naturally aspirated 380 flywheel horses for under 2500 on my 3.6 DI - at least, the one I will be getting - and have a solid plan for getting there. 400 wouldn't take much more, but I don't want to sacrifice the fuel economy to get there.
- Xanthos

P.S. - In case you're interested, I'm going with a custom spectre modular air intake, ported throttle body for venturi effect, semi-full exhaust (shorty headers once somebody makes them, high flow cats, mufflers), higher ratio rocker arms, and custom tune. I'm reasonably confident this will get me to at least 380 flywheel horses, if not more, seeing how a cold air intake and cat-back with no tune netted 340 flywheel horses on the CTS with this engine. IF somebody makes a set of mild cams for the right price, and they don't seriously effect fuel economy, I might hook myself up with a set as well to hit that 400 flywheel horsepower mark. I might also advance the ignition timing a few (2-3) degrees and see where that gets me.

P.P.S - As far as DI and boost - in some ways it will help, in others it won't. You still have to worry about blowing gaskets and whatnot from the sheer pressure, but the DI has a cooling effect on the air/fuel mixture - not to mention that the droplets are smaller so will provide a more even mixture - that will burn more evenly with less chance of knock. Its like having an inherent intercooler. At least, on paper. We won't know for sure till somebody straps a turbo/super up to one.
Doesn't D3 have a cts with a supercharger on it?
Shadowsong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 04:52 PM   #7
CamaroSpike23
Mr. Nitpicky
 
CamaroSpike23's Avatar
 
Drives: anything I can get my hands on
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: anywhere and everywhere
Posts: 22,860
Send a message via Yahoo to CamaroSpike23
wow... why do I feel a sense of deja vu?


oh thats right....

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...rect+injection

5 lbs non intercooled, 6+ intercool or run against the clock.

direct injection should make tuning easier. as well as FI as you dont have to worry about the air/fuel mixture preigniting as much as you used to.

and there is a s/c alread for the v-6


Quote:
D3's latest project is a supercharger for the direct-injected 3.6L V-6 powering the 2009 Cadillac CTS that should make around 400 hp and will slot neatly between the stock 300-hp engine and the 556-hp 6.2L V-8 of the CTS-V.
__________________
Never race anything you can't afford to light on fire and push off a cliff
Quote:
Originally Posted by BowtieGuy View Post
Nobody makes CamaroSpike happy. You just disgust him a little less than other people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogwinters View Post
Read that link that Spike posted, it'll tell you everything you need to know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WheelmanSS View Post
Post count is truly an accurate measure of how cool someone is on the Internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Norris View Post
I piss excellence
and fart awesomeness
Quote:
Originally Posted by BowtieGuy View Post
Nobody makes CamaroSpike happy. You just disgust him a little less than other people.
"You can think I'm wrong, but that's no reason to quit thinking.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overflow View Post
But not all people were born awesome like you, Spike.
CamaroSpike23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 05:27 PM   #8
SS4EVER
Camaro Convert...
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt SS Supercharged
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Metro Detroit, Mi
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowsong View Post
Honestly, I don't think anyone knows for sure.

I'm just going to sit back and watch
Yeah, until the Camaro comes out and the aftermarket vendors get their hands on it all we can do is speculate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
1 Horsepower...

In all seriousness, I'm shooting for naturally aspirated 380 flywheel horses for under 2500 on my 3.6 DI - at least, the one I will be getting - and have a solid plan for getting there. 400 wouldn't take much more, but I don't want to sacrifice the fuel economy to get there.
- Xanthos

P.S. - In case you're interested, I'm going with a custom spectre modular air intake, ported throttle body for venturi effect, semi-full exhaust (shorty headers once somebody makes them, high flow cats, mufflers), higher ratio rocker arms, and custom tune. I'm reasonably confident this will get me to at least 380 flywheel horses, if not more, seeing how a cold air intake and cat-back with no tune netted 340 flywheel horses on the CTS with this engine. IF somebody makes a set of mild cams for the right price, and they don't seriously effect fuel economy, I might hook myself up with a set as well to hit that 400 flywheel horsepower mark. I might also advance the ignition timing a few (2-3) degrees and see where that gets me.
Reasonably with all of the mods you mentioned you probably could get 70-80hp out of the V6 w out going F.I. but I would predict that to be at most.

But with what you just mentioned, that's probably easily 3-4k in mods, if not more. I guess doing it over a period of time may not be soo bad, but for around the same price you may be able to just convert to F.I. and get better power... Maybe, Maybe not....

With just full bolt-ons probably a 30-40hp increase.

Again there's no way of really telling until the Camaro is out....
__________________
4 life!
Currently Driving: 2006 Cobalt SS Supercharged

Last edited by SS4EVER; 12-15-2008 at 01:02 AM.
SS4EVER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 05:53 PM   #9
theholycow


 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 GMC Sierra, '80 Lesabre
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: RI
Posts: 2,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
the DI has a cooling effect on the air/fuel mixture - not to mention that the droplets are smaller so will provide a more even mixture - that will burn more evenly with less chance of knock. Its like having an inherent intercooler. At least, on paper. We won't know for sure till somebody straps a turbo/super up to one.
Volkswagen's latest 2.0 turbo engine is DI, I'm pretty sure. IIRC, the great thing about DI is that you can change when the fuel is injected, so you don't have to worry about knock; DI should be better than SFI for FI.

Sorry about the vagueness. I'd apologize for the heavy use of acronyms too, but that was necessary. You know, I could type a couple dozen more characters to spell out "forced induction", "direct injection", and "sequential fuel injection"...or I could type out this long-winded explanation instead. I mean, really, what would you do?
__________________
Removing weight has surprisingly little effect on fuel economy
Engine break-in procedure | Gear ratios
2002 GMC Sierra 4x4 5.3 (190,000 miles and going strong)
1980 Buick Lesabre family heirloom with 36,000 miles
2008 Volkswagen Rabbit 2 door I5-2.5 5spd DD lease
Quote:
Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23 View Post
she really underestimates the damage i would do to her reproductive organs
http://allOffTopic.com is the place for all the naughty stuff you can't get away with on this forum...
theholycow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2008, 01:06 PM   #10
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by SS4EVER View Post
Yeah, until the Camaro comes out and the aftermarket vendors get their hands on it all we can do is speculate.



Reasonably with all of the mods you mentioned you probably could get 70-80hp out of the V6 w out going F.I. but I would predict that to be at most.

But with what you just mentioned, that's probably easily 3-4k in mods, if not more. I guess doing it over a period of time may not be soo bad, but for around the same price you may be able to just convert to F.I. and get better power... Maybe, Maybe not....

With just full bolt-ons probably a 30-40hp increase.

Again there's no way of really telling until the Camaro is out....
Well, We already know that the LLT nets just about 40 flywheel horses from intake and catback alone, with no tune. My intake will be quite a bit more sophisticated than the one D3 used, so I expect to net about 5 more horses on top of that from the intake. Drop 5 horses because I'm not changing out the pipes, just the mufflers, as far has "cat-back" goes. At about 3 horses per high flow cat, we're looking at 10 for that. It seems pretty much the common conclusion that a tune would net 15 horses or so. That means that headers AND rocker arm swaps would need to net me 15 horses, with the tune, for me to hit my 380 mark. Doesn't seem unreasonable at all to me, and thats not even including the cam swap.

As far as prices being 3-4k? I don't know where you did your math, but let me show you mine:

Custom Intake - $150 - Made/Installed by me.
Mufflers - $200 - Installed at local exhaust shop
High Flow Cats - $400 - Installed at local exhaust shop
Headers - $300 - Installed at local exhaust shop
Throttle Body Port - Free - Done by me.
Rocker Arms - $500 - Installed by me/my step-dad.
Tune - $500

Total - 2050 before you talk labor at the exhaust shop, and my exhaust shop is really fair on they're labor prices. How you got 3-4k is beyond me.
- Xanthos

P.S. - D3's supercharged caddy was still in prototype phases, last I checked. I haven't been following it avidly though, because I'm more of a turbo or naturally aspirated guy.
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2008, 02:20 PM   #11
Vash


 
Drives: 00 Blazer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowsong View Post
Well, You've got some people saying that the DI makes no difference in how the motor handles boost, and others saying that the high comp. isn't as big of an issue because of the DI.

Honestly, I don't think anyone knows for sure.

I'm just going to sit back and watch
Aye all this inspector gadget stuff is lolerz...

Some of these people.... it's like inspector gadget...

If your gonna spend big bucks go v8. Half the fun is at the stoplight when it's rumbling. No offense to the V6 and V6 modders but it's like

"omg can it accept noobian hyperdrive motovators??"... etc. etc.. overkill.
Vash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2008, 02:45 PM   #12
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
hmpf. There's more to life than 8 cylinders.

j.k., of course
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 01:46 AM   #13
ZYAL8R

 
ZYAL8R's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS/RS
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: In my garage
Posts: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vash View Post
Aye all this inspector gadget stuff is lolerz...

Some of these people.... it's like inspector gadget...

If your gonna spend big bucks go v8. Half the fun is at the stoplight when it's rumbling. No offense to the V6 and V6 modders but it's like

"omg can it accept noobian hyperdrive motovators??"... etc. etc.. overkill.
HUH?!
ZYAL8R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 02:32 AM   #14
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
If your gonna spend big bucks go v8. Half the fun is at the stoplight when it's rumbling. No offense to the V6 and V6 modders but it's like

"omg can it accept noobian hyperdrive motovators??"... etc. etc.. overkill.
First off, I've driven V8 cars before - plenty of them. And I don't think I'm going to miss out on the rumble at the stoplight thing just because I'm buying a V6. My car will rumble too - in fact, once its done I would be surprised if most people would mistake it FOR a V8.

If I wanted the horsepower potential to be higher, then yes, I'd be getting the V8 instead of the V6. But I don't. The V6 will easily get to the amount of power that I want and I don't want any more than that. Plus, insurance will be loads cheaper, payments will be cheaper, gas mileage will be better, and I can honestly say I would enjoy the car more. With the V8 I would be tempted to line it up at the stop light. This way I won't.

And, I'm eventually going to turn my car into a road race car - maybe some autocross too. So, I'll be getting the V6 for its lighter weight and superior weight distribution. Also, if I can get my car to 380 horses and pull the 100 lbs I would like to drop, I'll have a 9.6 to one power to weight ratio, compared to the V8's 9.3 to one - close enough for what I want, seeing how I'm shooting for a 13 second 1/4. Plus, fuel economy will be better, and the price will be cheaper overall. Total price for the way I want my car is going to come up to just under 26,000 - thats 5,000 worth of mods and its still 5,000 less than the V8's MSRP. And it'll be close enough in speed to be able to take an average driver. Maybe even more because I'll be swapping the suspension too, which should make up for that .3 to one power to weight difference.

I understand that all of this probably means absolutely nothing to you V8 guys, but what it means to me is that I don't give a rats a$$ what you think my car should be. I know how I want my car to be - run, sound, look - and I will have it just like that. And I will be happy with it just the way it is.

So, don't come over here to the V6 forum tooting your own horn about how the V8 is so much better than the V6. Go to the V8 forum for that. Those of us over here know what we want just like you know what you want and you don't have to be a dick just because they aren't the same thing.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 02:26 PM   #15
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
1 Horsepower...

In all seriousness, I'm shooting for naturally aspirated 380 flywheel horses for under 2500 on my 3.6 DI - at least, the one I will be getting - and have a solid plan for getting there. 400 wouldn't take much more, but I don't want to sacrifice the fuel economy to get there.
- Xanthos

P.S. - In case you're interested, I'm going with a custom spectre modular air intake, ported throttle body for venturi effect, semi-full exhaust (shorty headers once somebody makes them, high flow cats, mufflers), higher ratio rocker arms, and custom tune. I'm reasonably confident this will get me to at least 380 flywheel horses, if not more, seeing how a cold air intake and cat-back with no tune netted 340 flywheel horses on the CTS with this engine. IF somebody makes a set of mild cams for the right price, and they don't seriously effect fuel economy, I might hook myself up with a set as well to hit that 400 flywheel horsepower mark. I might also advance the ignition timing a few (2-3) degrees and see where that gets me.

P.P.S - As far as DI and boost - in some ways it will help, in others it won't. You still have to worry about blowing gaskets and whatnot from the sheer pressure, but the DI has a cooling effect on the air/fuel mixture - not to mention that the droplets are smaller so will provide a more even mixture - that will burn more evenly with less chance of knock. Its like having an inherent intercooler. At least, on paper. We won't know for sure till somebody straps a turbo/super up to one.
Does the LLT have rocker arms? I thought that the cams acted directly on the valves like most (all?) DOHC engines.
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 02:49 PM   #16
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grape Ape View Post
Does the LLT have rocker arms? I thought that the cams acted directly on the valves like most (all?) DOHC engines.
The cams push down on rocker arms which pivot, and push down the valves. It looks similar to an OHV engine's setup, except the rockers are ancored at one end, touch the valve on the other end, and get pushed by the cam in the middle. I don't think any OHC engines act directly on the valve stems...I could be totally wrong, though.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 04:05 PM   #17
Flighttester
 
Drives: 2008 Audi A4 3.2 MT S Line
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJ91 View Post
Hey guys, ive been hearing that Direct Injection makes tuning more difficult, and that the high compression ratio makes FI a little dangerous, how much do you think you can gain without going FI on the 3.6 DI, besides the cold air intake and exhausts?
The only reason direct injection might make tuning more difficult would be because it just might already be wound as tight as practical. Other than that, direct injection has no negative effects except that it is costly to offer. The fact that the engine apparently runs well on regular fuel tells me that Forced induction (turbocharging or supercharging) is well within the limits of the stock engine if Premium fuel is used and room for such hardware is available in the engine compartment. If it is, I wouldn't be too amazed if a blown Northstar couldn't make more HP and torque than a pushrod Chevy V-8.

I wouldn't want it, even if it becomes available but, I would never dis direct injection.

It is certainly the state-of-the art and probably the future for all cars, except perhaps the most price sensative models.
Flighttester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 04:12 PM   #18
Flighttester
 
Drives: 2008 Audi A4 3.2 MT S Line
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
The cams push down on rocker arms which pivot, and push down the valves. It looks similar to an OHV engine's setup, except the rockers are ancored at one end, touch the valve on the other end, and get pushed by the cam in the middle. I don't think any OHC engines act directly on the valve stems...I could be totally wrong, though.
Indeed, you are wrong.

My '00 DOHC Mazda Miata has solid, direct acting bucket cam followers that are mounted directly above the valve and the cam lobe is directly above that. The valve lash is set by measuring the clearance and replacing removeable shims till the lash is within limits.

Many high-reving engines are made like that and many european race engines incorporate that design since it is about as low-mass as it is possible to get. It does make setting the lash more difficult but it is also possible to have hydraulic (self adjusting) cam followers with that design. Early Miata's did just that. The mechanical type was better and actually more reliable long-term though.

But, because of the difficulty setting lash, many OHC engines do use rocker arms, just for the ease of setting lash. I don't like it but it does make for more simple maintenance, even if it does increase the mass of the reciprocating parts.

I wouldn't even want the push rod V-8, even if it was cheaper, just because the V-6 has a better induction system and a much better valve train. You really can beat cubic inches. It just takes technology.
Flighttester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 07:54 PM   #19
CamaroSpike23
Mr. Nitpicky
 
CamaroSpike23's Avatar
 
Drives: anything I can get my hands on
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: anywhere and everywhere
Posts: 22,860
Send a message via Yahoo to CamaroSpike23
wow....

some of the arguments posted make me want to
__________________
Never race anything you can't afford to light on fire and push off a cliff
Quote:
Originally Posted by BowtieGuy View Post
Nobody makes CamaroSpike happy. You just disgust him a little less than other people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogwinters View Post
Read that link that Spike posted, it'll tell you everything you need to know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WheelmanSS View Post
Post count is truly an accurate measure of how cool someone is on the Internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Norris View Post
I piss excellence
and fart awesomeness
Quote:
Originally Posted by BowtieGuy View Post
Nobody makes CamaroSpike happy. You just disgust him a little less than other people.
"You can think I'm wrong, but that's no reason to quit thinking.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overflow View Post
But not all people were born awesome like you, Spike.
CamaroSpike23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 08:25 PM   #20
TheClassicCarKid

 
TheClassicCarKid's Avatar
 
Drives: V45
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flighttester View Post
Indeed, you are wrong.

My '00 DOHC Mazda Miata has solid, direct acting bucket cam followers that are mounted directly above the valve and the cam lobe is directly above that. The valve lash is set by measuring the clearance and replacing removeable shims till the lash is within limits.

Many high-reving engines are made like that and many european race engines incorporate that design since it is about as low-mass as it is possible to get. It does make setting the lash more difficult but it is also possible to have hydraulic (self adjusting) cam followers with that design. Early Miata's did just that. The mechanical type was better and actually more reliable long-term though.

But, because of the difficulty setting lash, many OHC engines do use rocker arms, just for the ease of setting lash. I don't like it but it does make for more simple maintenance, even if it does increase the mass of the reciprocating parts.

I wouldn't even want the push rod V-8, even if it was cheaper, just because the V-6 has a better induction system and a much better valve train. You really can beat cubic inches. It just takes technology.
6.2>3.6
The bigger V8 will always have more potential
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1320junkie View Post
All of the stang guys in one thread..wow..lol
.
TheClassicCarKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 10:06 PM   #21
Mr Twisty


 
Mr Twisty's Avatar
 
Drives: the 2nd amendment home
Join Date: May 2008
Location: OK
Posts: 14,380
Never under-estimate a man with a 6cyl and something to prove
(Deep pockets help too)
This thread reminds me of when the LS1 first came out, it was so new no one knew what to do with it. I followed the musings of a man that thought he could always improve just about anything, and he usually did. His name was John Lingenfelter, RIP dude.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it was a wicked fast 4-banger that started his downhill slide, among other unfortunate circumstances.

Unrelated video, but don't discount the 6, cuz it might just bite ya in the buttocks.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Great Racing Quotes

"Never run out of real estate, traction and ideas at the same time."
"I was doing fine until about mid-corner when I ran out of talent."
"Don't brake until you see God, just don't meet him"
Mr Twisty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2008, 10:42 PM   #22
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
The cams push down on rocker arms which pivot, and push down the valves. It looks similar to an OHV engine's setup, except the rockers are ancored at one end, touch the valve on the other end, and get pushed by the cam in the middle. I don't think any OHC engines act directly on the valve stems...I could be totally wrong, though.
I'd always heard it called a finger lifter. Is anyone curently offering a higher ratio part? It seems to me that you'd need some sort of adapter to move the pivot. And between the high compression ratio and the VVT, it doesn't seem like you could add too much lift before the valves start interfacing with the pistons.

I am also curious about the porting you want to do to the TB. The only venturi effect I know of is the one that makes carbs work, but I can't figure out how it could help the LLT make more power.

I'm asking because I'm trying to decide which engine to get.
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2008, 12:12 AM   #23
BryGo
Moving up in the world...
 
BryGo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Cadillac CTS, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 202
"omg can it accept noobian hyperdrive motovators??"... etc. etc.. overkill.[/QUOTE]



Will noobian overdrive motovators make my Camaro go faster?

That was funny. +1 to you! As funny as "transduction modificator port."

Heres one: The Eludium Pew Thirty Six Explosive Space Modulator----Marvin the Martian

BryGo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2008, 03:27 AM   #24
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
The venturi effect is used in carburetors, yes, but its a general term used to describe the increase in velocity that a fluid (such as air) experiences when passing through a tube that is decreasing in area. Basically I would leave the area by the throttle blades the same width, and then port it out till I get to the outer edge. This would cause a slight increase in air velocity, which will help keep the engine from starving in the upper RPMs. Won't make a big difference in the total air flow, but it should help noticably reduce pumping loses, in the way that a short ram intake reduces pumping loses in order to make power.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2009, 12:26 AM   #25
SS4EVER
Camaro Convert...
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt SS Supercharged
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Metro Detroit, Mi
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flighttester View Post
I wouldn't even want the push rod V-8, even if it was cheaper, just because the V-6 has a better induction system and a much better valve train. You really can beat cubic inches. It just takes technology.
Sorry but a better induction system and a "much better valvetrain" doesn't = more potential.

A V8 will always have more potential than a V6.

For performance the V8 will be better than the V6. Now there's some exceptions like the Supra, which back in it's day the tt 2JZ, was taking on the C4 ZR1.

But sorry guys. If you buy the V6 Camaro, nothing against it but if you're buying it with any bit of performance in mind (exception being light mods for sound or a little better performance over stock) let me tell you right now you're better of spending the extra few k for the SS.
__________________
4 life!
Currently Driving: 2006 Cobalt SS Supercharged
SS4EVER 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
Challys 6-Speed Tranny only capable of 450 ft. lbs torque, what about the Camaro? Muscle Master General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 9 10-18-2008 02:28 AM
Shifter Handle MCMLXIX Cosmetics and Lighting Modification Discussions 6 09-25-2008 09:50 PM
Think the Z/28 could Handle this MISTA 618 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 16 07-06-2008 09:34 PM
This girl knows how to handle balls to the wall. Mindz Off-topic Discussions 11 06-27-2008 05:20 PM
LS3 Specs, and Descriptions Mr. Wyndham Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 5 11-06-2007 02:04 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:05 PM.


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