Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Vararam
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Forced Induction - V8


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-24-2015, 10:25 AM   #29
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by grocerygetter View Post
Just curious...why did you buy a ysi kit vs a 1500? Ecs stock 1500 kit should make 10 psi on your combo. Or close.

Had the ECS-YSi kit for a bigger LS block I'm building but it will be a while before I can finish it.... In the meantime wanted to grow this setup to +650 for another year or two then put The the L99/6L80 drive train in a 70 Camaro which will also be a while to finish....
__________________
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2015, 01:48 PM   #30
stevieturbo

 
Drives: it changes
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 1,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderSS View Post
Tuner and I both agree the MAF seemed restricted and he saw the logs were it was spiking erratically... I thought because of ducting but he said it was more than that but I don't see how unless something small went bad during install.
MAF's are very particular about smooth airflow, post a picture of the setup.

And anyone who says a YSI cant work at low boost is full of shit. Yes there may be better options out there if it's a dedicated low boost setup, but the YSi will still work superbly.

I first used my YSi on a totally standard ( aside from headers ) 5.7 LS1 10 years ago.
This was with 8.25" crank and 4" blower pulley. And it was superb everywhere ! and made about 10psi at 6000rpm on that build.

But as per other thread, if the MAF was showing spikes and erratic behaviour, it should be blatantly obvious it is not happy with how airflow is passing through it. If the tuner doesnt understand that, that alone should raise concerns

Find a new tuner who can either tune correctly, or diagnose correctly.
stevieturbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2015, 02:12 PM   #31
Pro Stock John
Writer
 
Pro Stock John's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS / 1967 Camaro
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 7,216
IMO if you are buying parts with an eye to a big build in the future, I would just fix the tune and be satisfied with soft results.

Blowers shift up the power band but you are running lifters and valve springs that won't support that.
__________________
PROJECT HEAVY CHEVY
Camaro Now: Mods for the Masses Part I | Part II
13.15@106 1.95 | 100% Stock
12.37@112 1.85 | + Kooks Headers/Cats + 20" 555R + CAI + BW TB + UDP + Tune
12.06@113 1.70 | + CD 3200 + 18" NT05R + RCR Intake + NE OTR + GPI Tune
11.84@115 1.59 | + 3.91s + Race Star 17x7 Fronts
10.90@125 1.47 | + GPI VVT Cam + BW Ported Heads + CD 3800
Pro Stock John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2015, 02:40 PM   #32
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pro Stock John View Post
IMO if you are buying parts with an eye to a big build in the future, I would just fix the tune and be satisfied with soft results.

Blowers shift up the power band but you are running lifters and valve springs that won't support that.
Thats almost where I am now except I would like to spin it up a but more and maybe try a waste gate...
__________________
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2015, 02:04 PM   #33
grocerygetter
instigator
 
grocerygetter's Avatar
 
Drives: 2020 6.2 Trail Boss, 2022 XC90
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: 72034
Posts: 3,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderSS View Post
Thats almost where I am now except I would like to spin it up a but more and maybe try a waste gate...
If you want to raise the rpm limiter or target upper 500whp or higher (ysi=both of those)..I would change lifters.
__________________
-John S.
grocerygetter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2015, 09:04 PM   #34
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by grocerygetter View Post
If you want to raise the rpm limiter or target upper 500whp or higher (ysi=both of those)..I would change lifters.
The limiter is lowered because of stock lifters. They are being replaced as soon as engine builder can get me in....probably late spring
__________________
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2015, 09:16 PM   #35
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
Made a pressure tester and found some leaks....
At the bottom of the red silicone reducer was a huge boost leak at the charge tubbe
At the pcv spout on drivers side crank case with a real fine vac leak at the break booster T
Attached Images
 
__________________
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2015, 09:20 PM   #36
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
After fixing those the pressure held up to 30psi when I plugged the crank case vent tube that's feeds back into ecs filter....

When unplugged it slowly bled off air, that should be the case correct?
Attached Images
 
__________________
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2015, 09:29 PM   #37
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
So if that was my Issue the boost will be higher than what it was tuned for... will call tuner to see if that safe. I've got dual aeroforce gauges in route to read boost on the way but will have to wait to start car.
__________________
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 05:15 AM   #38
stevieturbo

 
Drives: it changes
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 1,126
I'd highly doubt the leaks are the problem.

New tuner.
stevieturbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 06:14 AM   #39
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
The leak was a huge gap between silicone reducer and charge tube after the MAF before the throttle body.... I'm sure it was a big part of the problem causing no port velocity. Blower was moving air but the gap prevented this big ass manifold from pressurizing. Also found a substantial vac leak.

I have seen cars from this tuner set records at wanna go fast he knows what he is doing but if fixing these issue still doesn't get car to 500hp minimum with the current 3.47 pulley, I will have another tuner look at his work....
__________________

Last edited by RaiderSS; 01-26-2015 at 06:38 AM.
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 07:41 AM   #40
stevieturbo

 
Drives: it changes
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 1,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderSS View Post
The leak was a huge gap between silicone reducer and charge tube after the MAF before the throttle body.... I'm sure it was a big part of the problem causing no port velocity. Blower was moving air but the gap prevented this big ass manifold from pressurizing. Also found a substantial vac leak.

I have seen cars from this tuner set records at wanna go fast he knows what he is doing but if fixing these issue still doesn't get car to 500hp minimum with the current 3.47 pulley, I will have another tuner look at his work....
If there is a leak around the MAF, then that will screw things up.

But then that goes back to what I said about the erratic MAF readings. When the tuner seen this why were they not investigated ?

As for causing no port velocity...LOL

Air leaks are never good, small leaks on the pressure side, not a major issue.

Air leaks after a MAF, always an issue, but then you said the tune went MAFLess in which case the leak would have less of an impact.

Either way, it sounds like shoddy work.
stevieturbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 05:52 PM   #41
RaiderSS
 
RaiderSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS2 DeadBLK
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 481
After fixing all the air leaks car has a lot more power and low end torque back. Trying to get tune adjusted Friday or Saturday I think I found the source of the super low numbers....

Thanks to those who actually suggested troubleshooting techniques.....
__________________
RaiderSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 05:52 PM   #42
Rdunn
Really, Really Fast
 
Rdunn's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: St.Louis,Mo
Posts: 686
I run a F1X on my stock l99. No problems at 16psi and 800+whp
__________________
Procharger F1X, TH400, E85, CBI Street Cars, DSX Tuning, 1300whp
Rdunn is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 03:44 AM.


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