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

Camaro ZL1 Forum - ZL1 Specific Topics Camaro ZL1 specific topics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-23-2012, 02:29 PM   #51
hognutz


 
hognutz's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 ZL1
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: tangent or
Posts: 2,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbosh View Post
Why doesn't anybody follow breakin procedures? Do any of the people who dyno their cares really have any knowledge of the reason for breakin? Please have people who can tell GM that it is not necessary too break in all the parts of the car. Who is the expert that can tell me if the various bearings in the car need any breakin! Having a grade 8 bearing worth 800 USD hours. It's a good thing transmissions don't contain any bearings or the blower either! Gears also don't need any breakin either. Why did Scott get on this thread and warn people about a breakin? Hasn't Scott always been truthful about every subject on this forum? Take heed unless you know more than GM,tell Scott and myself what you know about bearings and how hot they get on the first hours of running. The company I worked for used an infrared camera to monitor new bearings for heat buildup.
So it's your car do what you want.
I would love to see real data on wich componet supposedly needs 1500 miles.

It is not the engine because that is in the CTs-v and did not requre it. It is not the tranny because the tr-6060 is in other cars and does not need it. it is not the rear end as I have seen no gear manufacturer call this out. The mag ride in other cars does not call it out.

I think you see people avoiding it becasue nodody understands the logic to it.

Until I see some kind of engineering reason to break something in for 1500 miles I am not going to follow it.
__________________
2013 ZL1
2013 Dart
2013 Megacab 8" lift 38"mt's
hognutz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 02:33 PM   #52
Russell James


 
Russell James's Avatar
 
Drives: '12 SS/RS LS3 IBM
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 3,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooslow View Post

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.
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.
Russell James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 02:45 PM   #53
Drake Heminger


 
Drake Heminger's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Stingray Z51
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Stafford, VA
Posts: 2,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankzl1 View Post
that's why I am driving all over town
+1 LOL
__________________
"What a coincidence, Drake returns and brings
brand new ZL1's with him...." - CAM....ZL1
Drake Heminger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 03:04 PM   #54
Meister@Torq

 
Drives: 2001 Crown Vic
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Miami
Posts: 1,030
Send a message via AIM to Meister@Torq Send a message via MSN to Meister@Torq
Quote:
Originally Posted by hognutz View Post
I would love to see real data on wich componet supposedly needs 1500 miles.

It is not the engine because that is in the CTs-v and did not requre it. It is not the tranny because the tr-6060 is in other cars and does not need it. it is not the rear end as I have seen no gear manufacturer call this out. The mag ride in other cars does not call it out.

I think you see people avoiding it becasue nodody understands the logic to it.

Until I see some kind of engineering reason to break something in for 1500 miles I am not going to follow it.
The rear end is what we are told as the major component for break-in miles. Even when we install the 9.5" LPE rear end they have us put 500 miles on said components before beating on it
Meister@Torq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 03:09 PM   #55
Meister@Torq

 
Drives: 2001 Crown Vic
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Miami
Posts: 1,030
Send a message via AIM to Meister@Torq Send a message via MSN to Meister@Torq
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell James View Post
Sounds like these cars are really going to benefit from a CAI and good 93 octane. Has there been any thought to relocating the IAT?

Maybe then someone who wanted to keep their 100K factory warranty, they could just go with addressing the intake cold air and IATs but keep the tuning stock. Or would the stock tuning really need to see that actual IAT at the MAF to prevent detonation?

Since this car is going to have high underhood temps, maybe a ceramic coated intake tube going to a sealed off CAI box and front scoop might be the ticket to lower IATs. A standard black intake tube is going to be getting quite a bit of heat soak.
As we have seen there is a benefit in going with just a tune but these cars, and save with CTS-V's really benefit from intake improvements so a CAI will be a nice gain and we have already seen some impressive results with fabricated units

We have already tested a few components to drastically lower IAT's while maintaining an OEM or Race look. Reducing IAT's will allow for greater power output as well as consistent results on the street or track.
Meister@Torq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 03:22 PM   #56
ddavis
boostalicious
 
ddavis's Avatar
 
Drives: Blown Ls3
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bay Area SF
Posts: 1,029
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..
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...).
__________________
*Powered by Maggie**553rwhp 541rwtq*
ddavis is offline   Reply With Quote
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: 1,373
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/ high flow cats, roto fab cai, corsa exhaust, rx catch can, hurst short throw shifter. stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears 445rwhp 410 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 04:49 PM   #59
tooslow
I'm not a "Dude"
 
tooslow's Avatar
 
Drives: 4 Wheels, Gasoline Engine
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 957
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: 13,039
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.
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
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: 187
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: 1,373
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/ high flow cats, roto fab cai, corsa exhaust, rx catch can, hurst short throw shifter. stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears 445rwhp 410 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 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,786
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 Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
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: 734
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: 1,373
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/ high flow cats, roto fab cai, corsa exhaust, rx catch can, hurst short throw shifter. stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears 445rwhp 410 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 10:14 PM   #66
showstopper
Showstopper Accessories

 
Drives: 2010 RS/SS
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,812
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
1st State Chevy supporter
 
PQ's Avatar
 
Drives: Hybrid SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 36,725
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
Ist State Chevy Supporter
 
Bad@ssCamaro's Avatar
 
Drives: 1SS/1LE...in 2014
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Western MA
Posts: 4,914
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%
__________________
Former Camaros: (gone but not forgotten)
1976 LT Black/Black 305 V8 (Bone Stock)
1976 LT Black/White 305 V8 (Bone Stock) except for Cragar chrome rims (yep - #2)
1985 Z-28 Black/Black 305 L69 M5(Bone Stock) I know: slow

Next Camaro:
CRT 1SS/RS/1LE

Quote:
Originally Posted by fbodfather View Post
CAFE STANDARDS! Get used to them or vote our electeds in Washington out of office...........
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: 249
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: 5,660
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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 08:28 AM   #71
lakersftbl69

 
lakersftbl69's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 camaro 1ss/rs
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: kingston ma.
Posts: 1,373
Lol idk then I thought I was just trying to figure something out
__________________
ordered dec 15 2008 picked up on june 8 2009.
upgrades kooks 1 3/4" LTH w/ high flow cats, roto fab cai, corsa exhaust, rx catch can, hurst short throw shifter. stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears 445rwhp 410 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 08:46 AM   #72
rmyers
 
rmyers's Avatar
 
Drives: Both American Made
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 734
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
I think it would be consistent. 17% of 580 is 26 more than 17% of 426.
__________________

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 04-24-2012, 08:52 AM   #73
fbodfather


 
fbodfather's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros................
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Grosse Pointe Farms, MI (suburban Detroit)
Posts: 4,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooslow View Post


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.
You are correct - I am not a mechanical engineer.

You are incorrect in that the LSA engines are not broken in at the factory before they are placed in the automobile. That is why we have a section in the owner's manual that talks specifically to the break-in period. You will note that we didn't do this for the Gen III naturally aspirated engines.

I'm strongly suggesting that owners of the ZL1 follow our suggested break-in period.
__________________
fbodfather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 08:53 AM   #74
lakersftbl69

 
lakersftbl69's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 camaro 1ss/rs
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: kingston ma.
Posts: 1,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmyers View Post
I think it would be consistent. 17% of 580 is 26 more than 17% of 426.
I see now I just guess I was looking at it differently thanks guys
__________________
ordered dec 15 2008 picked up on june 8 2009.
upgrades kooks 1 3/4" LTH w/ high flow cats, roto fab cai, corsa exhaust, rx catch can, hurst short throw shifter. stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears 445rwhp 410 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2012, 08:54 AM   #75
lakersftbl69

 
lakersftbl69's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 camaro 1ss/rs
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: kingston ma.
Posts: 1,373
Idk I just inside of me I feel like still it shouldn't be that big of a loss
__________________
ordered dec 15 2008 picked up on june 8 2009.
upgrades kooks 1 3/4" LTH w/ high flow cats, roto fab cai, corsa exhaust, rx catch can, hurst short throw shifter. stage 3 comp cam, 3.91 gears 445rwhp 410 rwtq all installed and dyno tuned from slowhawk performance.
lakersftbl69 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 05:52 AM.


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