2010 camaro with broken lsx 454 block. "HOW TO BUILD AND MODIFY GM LS-SERIES ENGINES"

[IROCanSS]

Originally Posted by danhr

I love 99.9% of your posts. You come up with some off the wall stuff!

My questions for Spike and GTA... why even bother trying to reason with this guy? Just put this one to bed. MILK will get over it.

[Hopper]

Originally Posted by jrhaus76

I love 99.9% of your posts. You come up with some off the wall stuff!

My questions for Spike and GTA... why even bother trying to reason with this guy? Just put this one to bed. MILK will get over it.

[nl12]

The guys who are the real experts on LSX motors are too busy building motors to write books on the subject. I am no expert and I could have told you the 454 was a less than ideal starting point. That being said, I would be upset too, but the engine was designed for a particular purpose and was being used outside of those parameters.... even though the armchair experts said it would be fine.

[Milk 1027]

The reason I reopened it, is because I realized all his other threads are closed.
Now, I don't agree with anything he is doing or is attempting to do. I believe he should've gone about this a different way. But I also beleive that he has the right to vent and give his opinions, (which he asked to do so respectfully) and I beleive he just wants this to be over with, like the rest of us.
Obviously, we won't let him try to use this forum as leverage. (which he can't do now, due to legal action).
But I think he deserves a place to vent, and we should all step back if we don't agree with it. I'll still keep a close eye on this thread, as will the other mods most likely.
I think this is a good opportunity for us all to learn something.

[PoleCat2SSRS2010]

Originally Posted by fastfaster

the book titled "HOW TO BUILD AND MODIFY GM LS-SERIES ENGINES" states on page 41 "race-boost compression ratios hover in the 10 to 1 to 11 to 1 compression ratio"
my destroyed lsx454 crate motor was 11 to 1 on c-16 with a vortech intercooler.

Getting back to the topic:

What does the author say about the minimum cylinder wall thickness of the block?
Is there anything about rod to stroke ratio?

Seems like especially with FI that the two together are critical at some point since the thrust side of the cylinder will be taking more of a beating with the smaller ratios.

[fastfaster]

my block will be sonic tested soon.
although my race car shop took a measurement of the wall thickness of the piece that blew out and it varied from .250 to .185 in just 1 inch diameter of material! i can only imagine the results from a full sonic testing!

[PoleCat2SSRS2010]

Originally Posted by fastfaster

my block will be sonic tested soon.
although my race car shop took a measurement of the wall thickness of the piece that blew out and it varied from .250 to .185 in just 1 inch diameter of material! i can only imagine the results from a full sonic testing!

Wall castings will vary. It is to be expected on cast products. There is tighter control on the variance if sleeved since sleeves have a different manufacturing process and have the advantage of being hand picked before install.

So what does the author say about the limitations of cyclinder wall thickness and r/s ratios? There must be something.

The smaller the r/s ratio the more stress on the thrust side of the bore. This is due to the change in mechanical geometry.

[GJG]

Originally Posted by fastfaster

my block will be sonic tested soon.
although my race car shop took a measurement of the wall thickness of the piece that blew out and it varied from .250 to .185 in just 1 inch diameter of material! i can only imagine the results from a full sonic testing!

are there any GM spec's available to the public, on what the minimum wall thickness should be at that location????

[mike25]

Originally Posted by fastfaster

the book is published by motorbooks.
About the Author

Joseph Potak is a professional LS-series engine specialist and technician. He works for Texas Speed and Performance, catering to the performance needs of owners of all LS-Series engine equipped vehicles. His work has appeared in numerous magazines and can also be spotted at the dragstrip, powering various LSX based setups he has helped build throughout the years, including building the quickest naturally aspirated stock shortblock LS1 (9.66@131mph). In his free time, Joseph volunteers as a Forum Director within the LS1Tech.com Community, and contributes articles to the PlanetLSX.com scene. Ironically, and despite his "LSX-Only" mindset, he recently built and races a street-legal, 9-second turbo Mustang.

Then since it incoming from gm it's relevancy is extremely low...

[paul2010]

I was wondering why you would use C-16 since it has such a high lead content v VP109 unleaded? I always heard that leaded was not good to use in these.

[Late Model Racecraft]

The engine wasn't designed for boost. Anybody with any sense isn't going to build a boosted lsx with a 4.185 bore.


4.185 bore is wayyyyyyyyyyy to thin for boost. We make 44 to 50lbs boost evey pass but the bore is only 4.125. Some of the early blocks are known for core shift, combine that with a large bore, and well the pictures show it. Do you know if this was a early block or a later block?

Also, I suggest you take your next build to a professional that has built LSX combinations before so they can spec you out a combination that best fits your needs/goals without having to worry about something breaking. This could have been easily avoided by talking to the right people.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by jrhaus76

I love 99.9% of your posts. You come up with some off the wall stuff!

My questions for Spike and GTA... why even bother trying to reason with this guy? Just put this one to bed. MILK will get over it.

Becasue we moderate this site as a team.

If a mod makes a decision we back him up.

Milk has he reasons. As such we back him up.

[the rich dude]

Originally Posted by paul2010

I was wondering why you would use C-16 since it has such a high lead content v VP109 unleaded? I always heard that leaded was not good to use in these.

Absolutely nothing wrong with lead.... C16 also has a higher octane rating.

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by jrhaus76

I love 99.9% of your posts. You come up with some off the wall stuff!

My questions for Spike and GTA... why even bother trying to reason with this guy? Just put this one to bed. MILK will get over it.

for 1. its actually a very stimulating conversation. 2. Milk will get over it...lmao

but seriously,

Originally Posted by fastfaster

my block will be sonic tested soon.
although my race car shop took a measurement of the wall thickness of the piece that blew out and it varied from .250 to .185 in just 1 inch diameter of material! i can only imagine the results from a full sonic testing!

just keep in mind with your measurements of the walls that metal can and does stretch under extreme pressures. meaning that when it blew out, I can guarantee you that the metal stretched and flattened some.


for instance... and this isnt with metal, but the same physical properties apply

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...ight=fireworks

I had two 5" shells that did not "lift" properly and subsequently blew up in the tube. I can take a micrometer out to those tubes and guarantee you that the wall thicknesses will vary considerably starting at the edges of the breaks to the middle of the flayed sections.

that being said, I await the results. hopefully they'll bring good news for you.