Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com

Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com (https://www.camaro5.com/forums/index.php)
-   Camaro V6 LLT Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons (https://www.camaro5.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   V6 Camaro Dyno numbers are in!! (https://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24205)

THE EVIL TW1N 05-26-2009 02:32 AM

Where did they put the o2 sensor for the dyno run? if they put it at the tailpipes, it will always read leaner because of the cats.

Hemlawk 05-26-2009 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warpick (Post 518096)
With nothing but bolt on's.

With stock tires.

10-11 second twin turbo cars in the future?

Doesn't the v6 motor have to high compression for TT's?

Gentry78 05-26-2009 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemlawk (Post 518900)
Doesn't the v6 motor have to high compression for TT's?

if your going TT then your replacing the pistons to low cr pistons anyways so your all good

but yeah the cr is gonna be high in a DI engine

MadMaxx 05-26-2009 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N (Post 518841)
Where did they put the o2 sensor for the dyno run? if they put it at the tailpipes, it will always read leaner because of the cats.

Yes, in the pipes -- and it should have correction for it being down stream.

When my headers arrive from australia, I'm adding an extra bung for my WB. We'll get solid numbers pre-cat before doing any forced induction.


So much for the "don't mod it" warning from my wife LOL

MadMaxx 05-26-2009 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemlawk (Post 518900)
Doesn't the v6 motor have to high compression for TT's?

The DI motor does have a high static CR, but you got to remember that it's making those numbers on 87 octane. The DI bit pushes the normal CR boundaries quite a bit, even under turbo applications.

Static CR itself isn't the problem, it's the ability to fine tune that defines how well a forced induction system runs. Lowering the CR gives you more of a safe-zone for screw ups vs. running right on the edge of a FI+high CR situation. Hell, I've seen some 12:1 CR port injection motors w/ full turbos put out insane numbers and still be well within limits -- it's all in the tune. One major advantage (as I see it) is the hardware already present from a computer standpoint...the Motec ME9. This little bastard is capable of a super high degree of monitoring and correction, especially compared with older technologies. It's like Atari vs. Xbox360 man, crazy stuff. That was the biggest problem w/ DI up until the last few years -- having an ECU with enough power to control the system, and still be commercially cost effective.

From a mechanical standpoint, the V6 bottom end is forged, pistons are aluminum w/ heat coating to deal with the stress of DI. They also have factory oil squirters :thumbup: ...

Now, if they'd only come out with the 7.2L V12 engine... that would be a hellova lot of fun to tune.

Gentry78 05-26-2009 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadMaxx (Post 519126)
Now, if they'd only come out with the 7.2L V12 engine... that would be a hellova lot of fun to tune.

:headbang: that would be fun :bow:

Warpick 05-26-2009 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadMaxx (Post 519126)
The DI motor does have a high static CR, but you got to remember that it's making those numbers on 87 octane. The DI bit pushes the normal CR boundaries quite a bit, even under turbo applications.

Static CR itself isn't the problem, it's the ability to fine tune that defines how well a forced induction system runs. Lowering the CR gives you more of a safe-zone for screw ups vs. running right on the edge of a FI+high CR situation. Hell, I've seen some 12:1 CR port injection motors w/ full turbos put out insane numbers and still be well within limits -- it's all in the tune. One major advantage (as I see it) is the hardware already present from a computer standpoint...the Motec ME9. This little bastard is capable of a super high degree of monitoring and correction, especially compared with older technologies. It's like Atari vs. Xbox360 man, crazy stuff. That was the biggest problem w/ DI up until the last few years -- having an ECU with enough power to control the system, and still be commercially cost effective.

From a mechanical standpoint, the V6 bottom end is forged, pistons are aluminum w/ heat coating to deal with the stress of DI. They also have factory oil squirters :thumbup: ...

Now, if they'd only come out with the 7.2L V12 engine... that would be a hellova lot of fun to tune.

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.

Morepwr 05-26-2009 09:31 AM

Cool to see these numbers. Interesting how they are getting good mileage with the rich tune. I wonder what a good tune will do for for MPG's as well as power?:popcorn:

KJS 05-26-2009 10:25 AM

The Tranny...
 
What about the transmission with these mods? What do you guys think will need to be done?

MadMaxx 05-26-2009 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJS (Post 519320)
What about the transmission with these mods? What do you guys think will need to be done?

Depends on power numbers. Obviously the 6L50 has a lower input limit than the 6L80.... maximum gearbox toque rating was around the 480lbs mark.

Tranny coolers are always cheap insurance. No one has an aftermarket stall listed for the 6L50, and I believe it uses a smaller TC than it's 80 cousin...

The asin 6spd on paper has a low tq rating, but I believe it's just a rehashed version of the R154 internals w/ an additional gear. I'll have to dig out the specs.

SomeGeoffGuy 05-26-2009 11:15 AM

Those A/F numbers look like it is already tuned for boost! I would like to see what kind of power it would make at 12.5.

Also, the way the AF curve slopes down, it might have a "PE vs. Time" table that keeps on adding fuel the longer you are in it. I had that on my 04 GTP and it was a bear to tune.

-Geoff

THE EVIL TW1N 05-26-2009 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SomeGeoffGuy (Post 519460)
Those A/F numbers look like it is already tuned for boost! I would like to see what kind of power it would make at 12.5.

Also, the way the AF curve slopes down, it might have a "PE vs. Time" table that keeps on adding fuel the longer you are in it. I had that on my 04 GTP and it was a bear to tune.

-Geoff

+1

Thats the way the cobra's are, except it's more ubrupt.

PieNsky 05-26-2009 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warpick (Post 518221)
G-bodies are also solid axles with a thousand pound weight difference.

But you are right, the 3800 is an old, old design.

GM first came up with this engine in the '60s. Sold it to Kaiser who put it in some Jeeps. AMC bought Kaiser and later sold the design back to GM:confused0068:

Warpick 05-26-2009 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N (Post 519514)
+1

Thats the way the cobra's are, except it's more ubrupt.

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.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.