6.77 @ 102.95 mph with an internally stock LQ4
12-02-2008, 06:53 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6.77 @ 102.95 mph with an internally stock LQ4 Met this adjunct professor in my school who says he is a self-made LSx guru. He owns a stock interior'ed 93 Camaro which was formerly a V6 powered car as well as a "stripper model" because it came with no power accessories. He was able to keep the A/C and heater even as he had it when he bought it new back in 93. 
Told me just about everything he had in his motor set up which was a stock bore, internally stock LQ4 6.0L block with dished pistons, LS6 intake, a mild cam that happens to be a Comp XR281HR with the correct springs. His heads of choice were 317 truck heads CNC ported flowing 300 cfm. He milled the heads to achieve 11:1 compression on pump gas. He was also using a BBK 80mm TB. As he claims, he said his car weighs in the neighborhood of 3200 lbs with him in it. And that is also with a GM 12 bolt 3.73 geared rear end with a built 4L60E paired with a 3000 rpm Yank converter for daily drivability. As I recall correctly, he said his this set up puts him at about 480 rwhp with a very mild cam thru an automatic. Showed me 8 timeslips of his which all had over 100 mph trap speeds with with a few "terrible" 7.0x runs. He said he had a lot of dyno sessions and used HP tuners to tune his car for optimum performance. This set up would equate to a car that gets 25-30 mpg on the highway and potentially run 10s in the quarter.
Now with the trap speeds, would you think it was just the head work and the cam alone that helped the car perform this well? How possible are these times and traps with such a mild cam? Seems to me that this is a lot of power coming out of this daily driven LQ4 powered Camaro. He said he has been running this combo now for about 2 years and has had pretty much no problem since then, except for the time his radiator blew on a road trip coming back from a swap meet. As he has said over and over during our conversation, he says he highly recommends it to anyone who doesn't desire as radical of a set up for the street. I'm now kind of leaning this way as to what I'd like to build for my C4 Corvette. Any comments???
Told me just about everything he had in his motor set up which was a stock bore, internally stock LQ4 6.0L block with dished pistons, LS6 intake, a mild cam that happens to be a Comp XR281HR with the correct springs. His heads of choice were 317 truck heads CNC ported flowing 300 cfm. He milled the heads to achieve 11:1 compression on pump gas. He was also using a BBK 80mm TB. As he claims, he said his car weighs in the neighborhood of 3200 lbs with him in it. And that is also with a GM 12 bolt 3.73 geared rear end with a built 4L60E paired with a 3000 rpm Yank converter for daily drivability. As I recall correctly, he said his this set up puts him at about 480 rwhp with a very mild cam thru an automatic. Showed me 8 timeslips of his which all had over 100 mph trap speeds with with a few "terrible" 7.0x runs. He said he had a lot of dyno sessions and used HP tuners to tune his car for optimum performance. This set up would equate to a car that gets 25-30 mpg on the highway and potentially run 10s in the quarter.
Now with the trap speeds, would you think it was just the head work and the cam alone that helped the car perform this well? How possible are these times and traps with such a mild cam? Seems to me that this is a lot of power coming out of this daily driven LQ4 powered Camaro. He said he has been running this combo now for about 2 years and has had pretty much no problem since then, except for the time his radiator blew on a road trip coming back from a swap meet. As he has said over and over during our conversation, he says he highly recommends it to anyone who doesn't desire as radical of a set up for the street. I'm now kind of leaning this way as to what I'd like to build for my C4 Corvette. Any comments???
12-02-2008, 08:45 PM
#3
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would assume that the launch had to be good to run that good of an ET and trap, unless he's just not telling me he is spraying. As I recall his 60' times were in the low 1.7s. Anyways, I'm really digging this combo. Seems extremely pleasing for just a mild 6.0L. A Chevy 350 in a 3200 lb car could only dream about running this good of an ET with 0 power adders. My C4 weighs under 3000 lbs with all the weight reduction I've since done on it. I could certainly could use more cam and a smaller 9" converter for a harder hit off the line, but then I'll be taking my stock rear end into the danger zone the moment I put on some sticky drag radials. Glad to see how well the Gen3 motors perform with such seemingly basic heads+cam mods... This makes working on sport compacts sound like friggin rocket science! 
12-02-2008, 10:21 PM
#5
Launching!
iTrader: (35)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tallapoosa, GA
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW.. Just to give you an idea of my mods
Raceweight is 3540
2001 LQ4 6.0L Stock bottom end w/arp rod bolts
-Stock unported unmilled 317 casting heads with ARP head bolts, PRC dual springs and tit. retainers, Futral Motorsports F13 cam 230/232 .595.585 114
-HP tuners speed density tune
360rwhp 360rwtq on dynojet through TH350 w/3000 stall and 3.42 geared stock 10 bolt
NA it runs 1.73 60 ft 7.75 1/8 mile @ 92 12.04 1/4 @ 114
150 shot runs 1.54 60ft 6.84 1/8 mile @ 101 10.74 1/4 @ 126
200 shot runs 1.45 60ft 6.71 1/8 mile @ 101 10.54 1/4 @ 128
I guess if you took my 7.75 NA 1/8 mile added ported heads, the higher compression, the lower 3.73 gear, and the lower 1st gear ratio of the 4L60, it would be close to 7.0X.
Raceweight is 3540
2001 LQ4 6.0L Stock bottom end w/arp rod bolts
-Stock unported unmilled 317 casting heads with ARP head bolts, PRC dual springs and tit. retainers, Futral Motorsports F13 cam 230/232 .595.585 114
-HP tuners speed density tune
360rwhp 360rwtq on dynojet through TH350 w/3000 stall and 3.42 geared stock 10 bolt
NA it runs 1.73 60 ft 7.75 1/8 mile @ 92 12.04 1/4 @ 114
150 shot runs 1.54 60ft 6.84 1/8 mile @ 101 10.74 1/4 @ 126
200 shot runs 1.45 60ft 6.71 1/8 mile @ 101 10.54 1/4 @ 128
I guess if you took my 7.75 NA 1/8 mile added ported heads, the higher compression, the lower 3.73 gear, and the lower 1st gear ratio of the 4L60, it would be close to 7.0X.
Last edited by ILLWIN; 12-02-2008 at 10:23 PM. Reason: added raceweight
12-02-2008, 10:42 PM
#6
Yea, he's definatley running a power adder..
My 402 LQ4/L92 N/A on Motor ran a 7.1@96.6mph 1/8 Mile, 1.56 60ft. At the time it was an Auto, Yank SS3600, 3.73's, ~3450lb Race weight. I had an O2 Sensor out too at the time, so it was running a little rich. That and I have a Tuning issue to work out, it runs rich at WOT..
My 402 LQ4/L92 N/A on Motor ran a 7.1@96.6mph 1/8 Mile, 1.56 60ft. At the time it was an Auto, Yank SS3600, 3.73's, ~3450lb Race weight. I had an O2 Sensor out too at the time, so it was running a little rich. That and I have a Tuning issue to work out, it runs rich at WOT..
Trending Topics
12-03-2008, 01:24 AM
#8
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since this is a stock bottom end, would it be fine to spray something like a 200 shot as long as you are using ARP head studs and ARP rod and main bolts?
I've been considering these items even as an N/A setup for insurance for the bottom end. It is the "I may as well" syndrome I'm about to go through. Looks like everyone else here says that the iron motors both LM7 5.3L all the way up to the 6.0L LQx motors can take the floggings from high rpms and power adders much better than a standard 350 Chevy/LTx motor can.
I've been considering these items even as an N/A setup for insurance for the bottom end. It is the "I may as well" syndrome I'm about to go through. Looks like everyone else here says that the iron motors both LM7 5.3L all the way up to the 6.0L LQx motors can take the floggings from high rpms and power adders much better than a standard 350 Chevy/LTx motor can.
12-03-2008, 01:39 AM
#9
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW.. Just to give you an idea of my mods
Raceweight is 3540
2001 LQ4 6.0L Stock bottom end w/arp rod bolts
-Stock unported unmilled 317 casting heads with ARP head bolts, PRC dual springs and tit. retainers, Futral Motorsports F13 cam 230/232 .595.585 114
-HP tuners speed density tune
360rwhp 360rwtq on dynojet through TH350 w/3000 stall and 3.42 geared stock 10 bolt
NA it runs 1.73 60 ft 7.75 1/8 mile @ 92 12.04 1/4 @ 114
150 shot runs 1.54 60ft 6.84 1/8 mile @ 101 10.74 1/4 @ 126
200 shot runs 1.45 60ft 6.71 1/8 mile @ 101 10.54 1/4 @ 128
I guess if you took my 7.75 NA 1/8 mile added ported heads, the higher compression, the lower 3.73 gear, and the lower 1st gear ratio of the 4L60, it would be close to 7.0X.
Raceweight is 3540
2001 LQ4 6.0L Stock bottom end w/arp rod bolts
-Stock unported unmilled 317 casting heads with ARP head bolts, PRC dual springs and tit. retainers, Futral Motorsports F13 cam 230/232 .595.585 114
-HP tuners speed density tune
360rwhp 360rwtq on dynojet through TH350 w/3000 stall and 3.42 geared stock 10 bolt
NA it runs 1.73 60 ft 7.75 1/8 mile @ 92 12.04 1/4 @ 114
150 shot runs 1.54 60ft 6.84 1/8 mile @ 101 10.74 1/4 @ 126
200 shot runs 1.45 60ft 6.71 1/8 mile @ 101 10.54 1/4 @ 128
I guess if you took my 7.75 NA 1/8 mile added ported heads, the higher compression, the lower 3.73 gear, and the lower 1st gear ratio of the 4L60, it would be close to 7.0X.
12-03-2008, 07:08 AM
#11
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tellico Plains, TN
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trap speed, times, and hp I'll buy. That horse coming from that motor with that cam through an auto seems highly optmistic to me. I also ? the 60'. I would think either the times would be considerably slower with that trap and 60' or the 60' would have to be better. Maybe a power adder could make up the difference. My opinion is somethings not being brought out in the open.
12-03-2008, 12:57 PM
#14
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just verified the numbers and his mods. All the above numbers with the 100 mph+ traps were on a 100 wet shot. I should have questioned him about that earlier before I left school yesterday. Today just before class, I went to the lab and he showed me 10 other timeslips from Dec. 2007 and was running in the 7.6-7.3x range. The trap speed shown varied from 94-97 mph. He showed me some 12 more timeslips before his torque converter swap, 12 bolt and gear swap. As I recall, he was running in the 8.2-7.7 range and trapped in the 92-95 mph range. On the stock LS1 tune from a 2000 Camaro PCM, he ran only 8.0x @ 90-92 mph. I saw 6 other timeslips proving this. Pretty neat ride for just a school salaried physics professor who just happens to like working on cars just as all of us do.
Told me he done hundreds of passes on the LQ4 swap and that it runs with 0 issues. Said I should budget about $4,000 in parts alone if I want to do a swap like this. Sounds reasonable I guess...
Told me he done hundreds of passes on the LQ4 swap and that it runs with 0 issues. Said I should budget about $4,000 in parts alone if I want to do a swap like this. Sounds reasonable I guess...
12-03-2008, 02:48 PM
#16
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once this swap is done, I would consider ditching the IRS for a 9" rear with 4.11 gears. Top end might suffer but the thing should be ridiculous on the launch and the get' go.
