Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
River City Camaro Customs
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Camaro ZL1 Forum - ZL1 Specific Topics > Engine | Exhaust | Bolt-On | Drivetrain Modifications

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-17-2012, 05:13 PM   #26
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
MOARH PICS'!!!
__________________
"...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 07-17-2012, 05:15 PM   #27
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
I'm sorry if you mentioned this already somewhere else, but why are you sticking with the 1900? Will a ported 1900 flow better than a stock 2300 from ZR1? Just curious
__________________
"...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 07-17-2012, 07:21 PM   #28
1st Gen Forever
ZL1 #140
 
1st Gen Forever's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros: 68 SS, 10 2SS/RS, 12 ZL1
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 595
I'll get some better pics of those heads up tonight. Been at work today when they showed up.

I don't know if I'll stick with the 1900 long term. Figured I'd do what I can with it then maybe consider a Whipple later. I imagine KDi will release a Whipple kit sometime before too long...
1st Gen Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2012, 07:23 PM   #29
Indpowr
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Corvette C6
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 7,028
sexy
Indpowr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2012, 10:58 PM   #30
sammyv
 
sammyv's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 red Lingenfelter ZL1
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: zionsville IN
Posts: 553
Very nice!
sammyv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 12:05 AM   #31
1st Gen Forever
ZL1 #140
 
1st Gen Forever's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros: 68 SS, 10 2SS/RS, 12 ZL1
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 595
Nerdy LS head details

So here's some comparison between the stock LSA heads and the Mast medium bore LS3 heads. Mostly on the exhaust side.

Closeup of stock LSA exhaust port shape followed by angle shot of Mast exhaust ports




Horizontal diameter of stock LSA exhaust port on top and Mast on bottom




Vertical diameter of stock LSA exhaust port on top and Mast on bottom




Exhaust gasket alignment on Mast head followed by closeups of the inside of the exhaust and intake ports on the Mast head






I really like the craftsmanship in these heads!
1st Gen Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 09:04 AM   #32
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1st Gen Forever View Post
I'll get some better pics of those heads up tonight. Been at work today when they showed up.

I don't know if I'll stick with the 1900 long term. Figured I'd do what I can with it then maybe consider a Whipple later. I imagine KDi will release a Whipple kit sometime before too long...
Please - let me just say that I appreciate the way you are going. I've been wondering how far the 1900 can reasonably carry LSA. I know it's not too far, however, moreover, I'm looking to see if it's worth keeping. For example - I have a power goal in mind and had been considering pulleys and a little exhaust and intake mods' for several more pounds of boost. Now - with your project - I'm thinking it might be worth looking into better heads. I've been wanting to see some MAST stuff, and am very interested in these particular models and their splayed valve model. If I can go with something like these, and maybe a smaller upper, I might be able to keep the stealth factor and keep the smog police at bay. If I keep the boost lower, my IATs will be better, and I can just have a more efficient package.

Anyways - I love what you're doing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1st Gen Forever View Post
So here's some comparison between the stock LSA heads and the Mast medium bore LS3 heads. Mostly on the exhaust side.

Closeup of stock LSA exhaust port shape followed by angle shot of Mast exhaust ports




Horizontal diameter of stock LSA exhaust port on top and Mast on bottom




Vertical diameter of stock LSA exhaust port on top and Mast on bottom




Exhaust gasket alignment on Mast head followed by closeups of the inside of the exhaust and intake ports on the Mast head






I really like the craftsmanship in these heads!
That is all
__________________
"...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 07-18-2012, 09:49 AM   #33
RoketRdr
 
RoketRdr's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Duramax; 2012 CTS-V Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz28 View Post
Please - let me just say that I appreciate the way you are going. I've been wondering how far the 1900 can reasonably carry LSA. I know it's not too far, however, moreover, I'm looking to see if it's worth keeping. For example - I have a power goal in mind and had been considering pulleys and a little exhaust and intake mods' for several more pounds of boost. Now - with your project - I'm thinking it might be worth looking into better heads. I've been wanting to see some MAST stuff, and am very interested in these particular models and their splayed valve model. If I can go with something like these, and maybe a smaller upper, I might be able to keep the stealth factor and keep the smog police at bay. If I keep the boost lower, my IATs will be better, and I can just have a more efficient package.
The factory 1.9L blower is plenty capable as ADM, Hennessey, Livernois, Aspire Performance Tuning and others have already proven. Plenty of CTS-V owners that have been running 800hp on the stock blower for several years. Unless you're wanting well over that, or you're building a top speed queen, there's no need to change the stock blower. The fuel system should be more of a concern and focus than the blower.
RoketRdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 10:03 AM   #34
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoketRdr View Post
The factory 1.9L blower is plenty capable as ADM, Hennessey, Livernois, Aspire Performance Tuning and others have already proven. Plenty of CTS-V owners that have been running 800hp on the stock blower for several years. Unless you're wanting well over that, or you're building a top speed queen, there's no need to change the stock blower. The fuel system should be more of a concern and focus than the blower.
Yeah - there are a lot of builds from those guys. I think I was thinking more along the lines of balancing boost with IATs. Would it be more worthwhile to go with a 2300 and run a few pounds less boost than increase the boost several pounds on the 1900 and have to get a new HE, pump, and reservoir? Now that I say that out loud, those three things will be less than a 2300 SC, lol. But... I'm trying to consider if a pulley and heads (shoot - even cheap CNC'd GMPP LS3 heads!) would be sufficient.

Sorry - I'm all turned around this morning. Thanks for the tip. It was my understanding from Magnuson that that 1900 was good to 700-800 FWHP when the TVS was being introduced
__________________
"...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 07-18-2012, 10:15 AM   #35
RoketRdr
 
RoketRdr's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Duramax; 2012 CTS-V Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz28 View Post
Yeah - there are a lot of builds from those guys. I think I was thinking more along the lines of balancing boost with IATs. Would it be more worthwhile to go with a 2300 and run a few pounds less boost than increase the boost several pounds on the 1900 and have to get a new HE, pump, and reservoir? Now that I say that out loud, those three things will be less than a 2300 SC, lol. But... I'm trying to consider if a pulley and heads (shoot - even cheap CNC'd GMPP LS3 heads!) would be sufficient.

Sorry - I'm all turned around this morning. Thanks for the tip. It was my understanding from Magnuson that that 1900 was good to 700-800 FWHP when the TVS was being introduced
Those are good points. It really comes down to the end result that you're looking for. I'm personally going to be running a combination chiller/heat exchanger set-up so I'm not worried about the increased temps that come with boost on the 1900. And don't forget about being able to port the stock 1.9 as well. But running a 2300 at lower boost to keep the temps down is definitely something worth looking at as well. I believe KDI has some experience in this area. Going with the heads will help but keep in mind that the factory LSA heads are no slouch either. They're very good right out of the box unless you're looking for monster hp. But you can clearly see the quality and flow increase in these MAST heads so even if you didn't make 800hp+ down the road they are worth the investment.
RoketRdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 12:03 PM   #36
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoketRdr View Post
Those are good points. It really comes down to the end result that you're looking for. I'm personally going to be running a combination chiller/heat exchanger set-up so I'm not worried about the increased temps that come with boost on the 1900. And don't forget about being able to port the stock 1.9 as well. But running a 2300 at lower boost to keep the temps down is definitely something worth looking at as well. I believe KDI has some experience in this area. Going with the heads will help but keep in mind that the factory LSA heads are no slouch either. They're very good right out of the box unless you're looking for monster hp. But you can clearly see the quality and flow increase in these MAST heads so even if you didn't make 800hp+ down the road they are worth the investment.
OH - I hadn't noticed you're working on a project, too (ZL1?). If you choose to share, I'd be interested. I thought these FI OEM heads didn't flow too well because of the vains for the swirl GM wanted; I don't exactly recall flow numbers, but I thought I read they we're as good as LS3/L99/L76-type ports, even though they are very similar. I believe a 2300 is going be within a couple grand of a Maggie, KB, or Whipple, so I'm pretty apprehensive, especially considering there are probably CARB-numbers that might cover ZL1 for all three of those, while the 2300 from GMPP won't. I've been wondering which to go with, too, as far as chiller or HE, too. I was thinking maybe the chiller would be what I'd want if I'm going to spend more time on the strip whil the HE would be better for the rest. The two together would be outstanding, but I'm also really thinking about budget-conscience mods'.

I'm sorry for going a little off-topic. I just wanted to give a better idea where I was coming from. The more I think about it, though, the more heads appeal. I've been watching for MAST product reviews, so I can't wait to see how this turns out
__________________
"...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 07-18-2012, 12:28 PM   #37
Andy@Livernois

 
Andy@Livernois's Avatar
 
Drives: 1987 Buick Regal Turbo-T
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Grand Blanc, MI/Dearborn Heights, MI
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz28 View Post
OH - I hadn't noticed you're working on a project, too (ZL1?). If you choose to share, I'd be interested. I thought these FI OEM heads didn't flow too well because of the vains for the swirl GM wanted; I don't exactly recall flow numbers, but I thought I read they we're as good as LS3/L99/L76-type ports, even though they are very similar. I believe a 2300 is going be within a couple grand of a Maggie, KB, or Whipple, so I'm pretty apprehensive, especially considering there are probably CARB-numbers that might cover ZL1 for all three of those, while the 2300 from GMPP won't. I've been wondering which to go with, too, as far as chiller or HE, too. I was thinking maybe the chiller would be what I'd want if I'm going to spend more time on the strip whil the HE would be better for the rest. The two together would be outstanding, but I'm also really thinking about budget-conscience mods'.

I'm sorry for going a little off-topic. I just wanted to give a better idea where I was coming from. The more I think about it, though, the more heads appeal. I've been watching for MAST product reviews, so I can't wait to see how this turns out
Typically a stock LSA head is about 30 CFM down compared to a stock LS3 head. However, our CNC ported LSA head is within 2-3 CFM of our CNC ported LS3 head while providing a superior casting for FI builds.
Andy@Livernois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 12:38 PM   #38
RoketRdr
 
RoketRdr's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Duramax; 2012 CTS-V Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz28 View Post
OH - I hadn't noticed you're working on a project, too (ZL1?). If you choose to share, I'd be interested. I thought these FI OEM heads didn't flow too well because of the vains for the swirl GM wanted; I don't exactly recall flow numbers, but I thought I read they we're as good as LS3/L99/L76-type ports, even though they are very similar. I believe a 2300 is going be within a couple grand of a Maggie, KB, or Whipple, so I'm pretty apprehensive, especially considering there are probably CARB-numbers that might cover ZL1 for all three of those, while the 2300 from GMPP won't. I've been wondering which to go with, too, as far as chiller or HE, too. I was thinking maybe the chiller would be what I'd want if I'm going to spend more time on the strip whil the HE would be better for the rest. The two together would be outstanding, but I'm also really thinking about budget-conscience mods'.

I'm sorry for going a little off-topic. I just wanted to give a better idea where I was coming from. The more I think about it, though, the more heads appeal. I've been watching for MAST product reviews, so I can't wait to see how this turns out
Its gonna take some time but I will be posting results of my findings. I'm a road racer and drag race just for fun so my focus is to have the chiller working 100% of the time and the HEX set-up for emergency back-up and WOT. I will be keeping the stock 1.9L blower and just add porting and 102mm TB. Going to stay with the factory heads initially but if I run into any issues then I will look at another set of heads like the MAST units.
RoketRdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 12:43 PM   #39
RoketRdr
 
RoketRdr's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Duramax; 2012 CTS-V Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy@Livernois View Post
Typically a stock LSA head is about 30 CFM down compared to a stock LS3 head. However, our CNC ported LSA head is within 2-3 CFM of our CNC ported LS3 head while providing a superior casting for FI builds.
Andy, did you guys port the 1.9L on the 9 second car? Can't recall reading that you did but just assuming so.
RoketRdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 12:47 PM   #40
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoketRdr View Post
Its gonna take some time but I will be posting results of my findings. I'm a road racer and drag race just for fun so my focus is to have the chiller working 100% of the time and the HEX set-up for emergency back-up and WOT. I will be keeping the stock 1.9L blower and just add porting and 102mm TB. Going to stay with the factory heads initially but if I run into any issues then I will look at another set of heads like the MAST units.
I'll be watching

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy@Livernois View Post
Typically a stock LSA head is about 30 CFM down compared to a stock LS3 head. However, our CNC ported LSA head is within 2-3 CFM of our CNC ported LS3 head while providing a superior casting for FI builds.
Is there more than the vain the is a flow obstruction?

I do like the MASTS run 12* valve angles.
__________________
"...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 07-18-2012, 03:14 PM   #41
Andy@Livernois

 
Andy@Livernois's Avatar
 
Drives: 1987 Buick Regal Turbo-T
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Grand Blanc, MI/Dearborn Heights, MI
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoketRdr View Post
Andy, did you guys port the 1.9L on the 9 second car? Can't recall reading that you did but just assuming so.
Actually no, unmodified blower, and unmodified blower snout, just a 90mm TB, cai, and our stage 2 heads were the only airflow improvements

Quote:
Originally Posted by radz28 View Post
I'll be watching



Is there more than the vain the is a flow obstruction?

I do like the MASTS run 12* valve angles.
Typically a 15* head is actually better for this type of build since the rotated valve angle makes the head favor the intake port even more so then it already does. Don't get me wrong better flow is better flow, but it usually hurts the exhaust rotating the angle over, and since it's a blower it needs more help on the exhaust side then the intake anyways. Again, the intake improvement is always beneficial.

It will be interesting to see the results.
Andy@Livernois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 03:17 PM   #42
1st Gen Forever
ZL1 #140
 
1st Gen Forever's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros: 68 SS, 10 2SS/RS, 12 ZL1
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 595
I like the discussion guys!

Rad, I'm not experienced in this like the shops that have been doing it a while but from my research, if I were looking for a stealth solution, I would do the following at a high level:
-Port the stock heads
-Port the supercharger
-Go with a mild step up in cam/springs
-Change the lower pulley only (9.55 maybe)
-Larger fuel injectors
-Better heat exchanger
-Tune

Beyond the above, leaving the stock exhaust and intake would offer the best stealth look but you'll be limiting flow. If you add exhaust and a CAI with the above you should be looking at a solid 600 to 640HP to the wheels, not spend a whole lot, (maybe $8k) and look mostly stock under the hood.
1st Gen Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 03:46 PM   #43
1st Gen Forever
ZL1 #140
 
1st Gen Forever's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros: 68 SS, 10 2SS/RS, 12 ZL1
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 595
Andy,

I'm wondering what the results will be myself!

The Mast does see a better improvement on the intake than the exhaust for sure even though both improve going off flow numbers alone. I deliberated a lot over getting the Mast vs porting the stock LSA heads and in the end 2 reasons made me lean toward the Mast. First, I can stick my stock heads on the shelf and have something to go back to if I don't like the way this turns out. And 2nd, part of my goal is not to spin the blower too hard because even though a better heat exchanger can cool IAT2s better, the blower bearings still experience the increased heat and stress when you spin it fast so I'm going with the logic of removing as much restriction to airflow as possible from the CAI, through the throttle body, blower and into the combustion chamber to allow that blower to be as effective at lower speeds as possible.

Then obviously I've done what I can with the exhaust side (custom cam, headers) with the exception of full open exhaust. I might experiment with with different header sizes, full 3" exhaust, etc later but out of the gate I'm going 1 7/8", high flow cats, and stock the rest of the way back.

It's all theory but I'm hoping to preserve a little life out of the blower by not driving it too hard but still get good gains in rwhp. 700HP with great torque everywhere will make me happy...

BTW- Can you educate me on how your Fuel pump for the ZL1 differs from stock? I haven't solved all of my fuel needs yet...
1st Gen Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 03:58 PM   #44
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy@Livernois View Post
Actually no, unmodified blower, and unmodified blower snout, just a 90mm TB, cai, and our stage 2 heads were the only airflow improvements



Typically a 15* head is actually better for this type of build since the rotated valve angle makes the head favor the intake port even more so then it already does. Don't get me wrong better flow is better flow, but it usually hurts the exhaust rotating the angle over, and since it's a blower it needs more help on the exhaust side then the intake anyways. Again, the intake improvement is always beneficial.

It will be interesting to see the results.
AH!... Thanks for the input. That makes sense You guys are the experts

What are your thoughts on a splayed-valve? Big blocks ran these, and seems more like it would be more in line of what valve angle fits that particular valve alignment.

Thanks Andy - it's all very interesting

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1st Gen Forever View Post
I like the discussion guys!

Rad, I'm not experienced in this like the shops that have been doing it a while but from my research, if I were looking for a stealth solution, I would do the following at a high level:
-Port the stock heads
-Port the supercharger
-Go with a mild step up in cam/springs
-Change the lower pulley only (9.55 maybe)
-Larger fuel injectors
-Better heat exchanger
-Tune

Beyond the above, leaving the stock exhaust and intake would offer the best stealth look but you'll be limiting flow. If you add exhaust and a CAI with the above you should be looking at a solid 600 to 640HP to the wheels, not spend a whole lot, (maybe $8k) and look mostly stock under the hood.
Of course - thanks for your comments and input. I think you're seeing what I'm thinking. I really only want to get to a little more than 600 RWHP, because I need to pass a sniffer, too. What you're posting is really just increasing efficiency, which is what I was thinking would be for the best for me. My exhaust would strictly be CARB-shorties (ARHs) and maybe an X-pipe, so I'm a little handicapped. I might have to cheat on my CAI though... I don't know what you're spending on porting the blower, but I was thinking that would be worth a set of GMPP CNC'd heads, and I wouldn't have to really add too much more boost. I wouldn't go much more than an LS9 cam, but I really would like to keep from digging into the short block.

I'm sorry - just split-balling and can't wait to see what you come out with. I'm really looking forward to seeing the blower, because the snout looks OUTSTANDING!!! OMG!!! Are there any identification marks or machining on the outside of the heads, like below the exhaust ports or on the front or rear? Like I mentioned - I need stealth

Thanks for all your comments
__________________
"...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 07-18-2012, 04:22 PM   #45
1st Gen Forever
ZL1 #140
 
1st Gen Forever's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros: 68 SS, 10 2SS/RS, 12 ZL1
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 595
The Mast heads would not be stealth. They're 3/4" taller and say MAST on the front. And for a little over 600rwhp, I think Mast heads would be wasting your money honestly. You might be able to do 600rwhp leaving the heads and cam stock if you do all the other bolt-ons (both pulleys, CAI, headers, injectors) and port the blower. But to stay stealth on the outside (stock air intake) you'll probably need to do 'something' to help make up for what the stock air intake is restricting.
1st Gen Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 05:02 PM   #46
RoketRdr
 
RoketRdr's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Duramax; 2012 CTS-V Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1st Gen Forever View Post
The Mast heads would not be stealth. They're 3/4" taller and say MAST on the front. And for a little over 600rwhp, I think Mast heads would be wasting your money honestly. You might be able to do 600rwhp leaving the heads and cam stock if you do all the other bolt-ons (both pulleys, CAI, headers, injectors) and port the blower. But to stay stealth on the outside (stock air intake) you'll probably need to do 'something' to help make up for what the stock air intake is restricting.
This is what I was getting at earlier radz28. The factory LSA heads and blower can take you past 600rwhp easily. So if you were just looking for that power range there's no need to mess with em. Like Aaron said just port the blower, snout, throw your bolt-ons and a tune at it and you're good to go.
RoketRdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 05:09 PM   #47
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoketRdr View Post
This is what I was getting at earlier radz28. The factory LSA heads and blower can take you past 600rwhp easily. So if you were just looking for that power range there's no need to mess with em. Like Aaron said just port the blower, snout, throw your bolt-ons and a tune at it and you're good to go.
Point taken Thank you
__________________
"...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 07-18-2012, 05:45 PM   #48
Andy@Livernois

 
Andy@Livernois's Avatar
 
Drives: 1987 Buick Regal Turbo-T
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Grand Blanc, MI/Dearborn Heights, MI
Posts: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1st Gen Forever View Post
BTW- Can you educate me on how your Fuel pump for the ZL1 differs from stock? I haven't solved all of my fuel needs yet...
Our pump is a drop in unit that utilizes 2 OEM quality pumps, and a bucket designed for those pumps as opposed to an aftermarket creation. We design and manufacture it to be a true drop in solution needing no wiring changes, module, or line changes. It is the same pump we used in ours to run 9's in it.
Andy@Livernois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 05:54 PM   #49
1st Gen Forever
ZL1 #140
 
1st Gen Forever's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros: 68 SS, 10 2SS/RS, 12 ZL1
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 595
So are they just a pair of pumps that flow more than the stock ZL1 pumps? Cause the ZL1 assembly from.the factory is a dual pump setup unless I'm mistaken.

Thanks!
1st Gen Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 06:04 PM   #50
Andy@Livernois

 
Andy@Livernois's Avatar
 
Drives: 1987 Buick Regal Turbo-T
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Grand Blanc, MI/Dearborn Heights, MI
Posts: 437
Actually, that was a big blunder mis-print in the GMPP catalog. The ZL1 pump is just a single pump.
Andy@Livernois 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 09:25 AM.


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