![]() |
|
|
#85 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,967
|
Well that's a bummer....I would have bet money you'd of had gotten 12s last night.
I know your frustrated, but I think calling their tune support trash might be a bit much. I think that with the stock kit on an otherwise stock car, their tune is well enough. Albeit maybe not as perfect as a dyno tune could be, but it gets the job done well enough to cover most situations. I don't think the IPF tuning process was meant to cover situations like you have, where you've modified the parameters of the stock IPF kit, and you are trying to take it above and beyond in which case you really need custom dyno tuning which we all know is damn near impossible to come by for these LLTs. I think IPF has tried to work with you (at least somewhat, although I know you said getting a response lately has been tough but I do know they've gotten you some custom tunes) but it has got to be extremely difficult for the IPF tuners (there's like what...two of them?) to nail a specific tune for you based on the feedback you are giving them. So while I'm not saying IPF has been perfect by any means, I'm also giving them some credit in this area. I hope you don't get fed up and decide to sell your car and just run the GT (even though I know that would be much easier). But your V6 project is kind of the equivalent of taking the V8 up to 700 - 800 hp levels, and say your trying to get a low 10 second ET, but for some reason you just can't get there. That's how I see it anyways.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 | |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: Fastest 2010 Camaro V6 Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 3,571
|
Quote:
The LFX manifold worked well, but I need to run the car again to verify that the runs are correct. A stock LFX worked better than my Stage 4 Ported LLT one, and I don't have to worry about that filler coming out. A N/A car will probably see gains. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#87 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: '13 2LT/RS Twin Turbo Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma
Posts: 3,073
|
The track was pretty bad last night, I spun out on my second run even at my stock power level.. in the left lane that had the problem. It was down right slippery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
COTW 9/16/13
Drives: 2011 2LT/RS Camaro IOM Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Syracuse
Posts: 10,089
|
Sorry you didn't see the times you wanted but this is still great news! You say the stock LFX intake performs just as good if not better than the Stage 4 ported LLT one. Most of use N/A have the Stage 3 ported LLT so right off the bat the stock LFX should provide us with some gains. Now if one was to get the LFX intake ported by Jason I'm sure we would see some more gains. Combine that with the weight loss from swapping and I believe it is worth while. Think I'll have to start buying parts over the winter to do the conversion. I do have a quick question for you though. Is there any chance, when you have time of course, that you would be able to weigh the LFX manifold? No rush.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#89 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: Fastest 2010 Camaro V6 Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 3,571
|
Yeah, that was the lane my wife had problems and then I couldn't hook up at all either. Was total BS last night, that is why I want to do another run. At the end of the night they shut down that lane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#90 | |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: Fastest 2010 Camaro V6 Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 3,571
|
Quote:
I don't have anything to weigh it, but if you were to pick up the LLT manifold first, be careful picking up the LFX or else you will throw it through the roof. It is a huge weight difference. Also, don't get me wrong, the supercharger is great on the car but it is just the tuning that kills me. The tune is very conservative because IPF offers a warranty. It reminds me of how BAMA tuning is for Mustangs, slight gains but if you switch to MPT, you gain almost 0.5 seconds. Also, Mustang tuners allow you to change certain parameters on the tune itself when you load it, like shifting firmness and RPM shifts/idle. I wish IPF would let me use their software to make small changes to the tune to fit what I need best, I don't care if I blow my engine up and wouldn't hold them responsible for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: Fastest 2010 Camaro V6 Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 3,571
|
Some more numbers (I'm analyzing this stuff while I watch football).
My 1/8th mile trap speed was the highest ever, 86.23 mph. Previous best with the ported intake was 84.48, so almost a gain of 2 mph which is roughly 20 HP. On a stock intake my best trap was 83.14, over 3 MPH so roughly 30 HP, huge number. These numbers are the 1st and 2nd gear area, where having heat soak issues would be huge. 3rd gear my methanol had cooled the LLT manifold enough to where the it wasn't as severe. On a NA engine this gain would be all the way through, so the gains might be huge on a LLT, even maybe a 12 second run for kjkjr27. I'm going to try to go this Friday night again, see if I can get more information. |
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Drives: 2016 1LT RS Camaro; 72 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Point, OR
Posts: 5,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#95 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,967
|
I also agree...I think the LFX intake and perhaps especially the ported version would be a very sweet addition to our LLTs, as long as its not flowing so much more that the cars run dangerously lean.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
|
|
|
|
|
#96 |
|
Jan
Drives: 2010 Camaro 1LT Red Jewel tintcoat Join Date: May 2010
Location: Springfield, TN
Posts: 16,241
|
Vely interesting.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#97 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: Fastest 2010 Camaro V6 Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 3,571
|
Friday and Sunday the temps will be higher so the DA will be back to normal. I've also trying to do research on my widebands. I use 10% ethanol to resist detonation, the ststoich for that mixture is 14.06:1 (off the top of my head) where as 100% gas is 14.7:1. My wideband reads a Lambda value and converts that to AFR, but uses the 14.7 as the starting point, which means an AFR reading of 12.9 is really 12.37. I've been trying to get my AFR to 12 but on a 100% gas scale, I'm really running 11.5, way too rich for real power. I need to hit 13-13.5 to be at my correct power level. A 13.5 is 12.7, max power before problems.
This is one of the reasons this car is frustrating, small things that add up to power have to be figured out. Combined with the fact that we have Direct Injection engines, different thinking than Port Injection. Our engines need to run a lean burn, PI runs rich to cool down the piston. We are spraying fuel directly on the piston, cooling it down. If anybody is wondering, you Air-Fuel Ratio (AFR) controls how fast your mixture burns, so tuners try for 12 which is safe. They will then adjust timing as far as they can before knock, then take 2 degrees out. If your AFR isn't constant then you can lose power. Too rich and the timing is too late causing the peak pressure to be too late. Too lean and knocking happens, really bad. Heat also changes this because the higher the temps the faster the burn. It is taking a lot to figure out how to get the most power put of the IPF setup, the tunes are made to be safe, not for the most power. I'm pushing hard because I race a bolt-on Mustang V6, it has gone 13.5 @ 105 in 2500 DA, almost as fast as my Camaro and that is with a terrible 2.2 60'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#98 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Drives: Fastest 2010 Camaro V6 Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, OK
Posts: 3,571
|
Think I am going to have to recommend this intake on any LLT cars running the IPF SC. I'm in the middle of taking parts off that were used to combat the heatsoak issues of the LLT manifold and the car feels stronger. I'm switching back to the stock IAT since my current location is causing too much timing to be added.
Tomorrow looks like a good day for the final attempt at 12's. Over the winter I am going to an even smaller pulley and 3.91 gears. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|