Generation IV Internal Engine - Life in a forged daily driver...

Any issues with daily driving a forged motor, say 100 miles a day...???

-longevity?
-oil use?
-???

:lurk:

If assembled properly and the machine work is done right, it should last a good long time and use no more oil than stock.

Driven my 402 7000 miles last summer, used bit of oil, definatly run little extra compression and use a milder cam, would have rather run something around 230/230 112+2 XER lobes with 11.0 SCR for daily driver, I went with XFI lobe cam, springs are holding up well.

Drive's great but does use oil.

Terminators came stock with Manley rods and pistons...

Terminators came stock with Manley rods and pistons...


What??? :confused::confused::confused:

I appreciate the post concerning oil use. It does seem to be a common point with forged motors that many are unwilling to speak about (for whatever reason...).

:lurk:

I never realized that. Why does just forging a motor use more oil ?

:lurk:

I never realized that. Why does just forging a motor use more oil ?

several variables come into play, but two of the large ones are: required clearance diffs between piston and bore, and aftermarket rings...

My Thunder Racing forged 346 uses no oil between changes. Some of this no doubt has to do with the LS6 valley pan conversion. :)

My APE 370 uses about 1/2 quart of oil between changes, ~4k to 5k miles. I am certain that all of this is being sucked in the intake as my FAST appears to be coated inside. I need to get a catchcan on this thing. Basically driving a forged motor as a daily driver is not a problem. Keep a quart of oil in the trunk, just in case, and drive.

I'm sure most oil usage is being sucked throught the PCV system, it's very common. If you built motor is using alot of oil, slap the builder.

What??? :confused::confused::confused:

03-04 Mustang Cobra = Terminator.

agreed onebad there is no reason other than the way it was built that a forged motor should use oil. slap that mofo in da head.


note this statement/assumption is made with my experience from past SBC builds I really don't think that the motor being LS based should make a difference.

Any issues with daily driving a forged motor, say 100 miles a day...???

-longevity?
-oil use?
-???

:lurk:

An engine is an engine, forged doesn't make any difference. And I have about 60,000+ on mine and drive it now over 400 miles a week, yup, 400. Its perfect. Oil burn is high though but it has nothing to do with being a forged engine.
For the first 30,000 miles or so I used about half quart in 3,000 miles.


.

An engine is an engine, forged doesn't make any difference. And I have about 60,000+ on mine and drive it now over 400 miles a week, yup, 400. Its perfect. Oil burn is high though but it has nothing to do with being a forged engine.
For the first 30,000 miles or so I used about half quart in 3,000 miles.


.

The 4.125" crank have anything to do with that?

The 4.125" crank have anything to do with that?

Thats exactly it. short sleeve, long stroke.

.

Thanks for the replies from everyone...

:chug: :chug: :chug:

With modern forged pistons, do you have to set the piston/bore clearances to the point that you get a lot of start up noise, like piston slap?

I've heard that forged pistons expand more slowly as they heat up which could contribute to oil usage. Can anyone confirm this?

With modern forged pistons, do you have to set the piston/bore clearances to the point that you get a lot of start up noise, like piston slap?

:lurk:

DD 427 here. Drives great on a daily basis. 23mpg highway, far less in the city. But it's an oil burner. Selling it next week and going back to stock :(

DD 427 here. Drives great on a daily basis. 23mpg highway, far less in the city. But it's an oil burner. Selling it next week and going back to stock :(

Being that you are going the way you are going (by going back to stock), I'd appreciate any insight as to how you would have done things differently, if you would have done them at all. That's the one thing that has kept me from modding my engine...I'm afraid of getting to the point of diminishing returns and wishing I had a stock car again.

DD 427 here. Drives great on a daily basis. 23mpg highway, far less in the city. But it's an oil burner. Selling it next week and going back to stock :(

AS mentioned above any insights you have would be greatly appreciated. If you could/would do it over what would you do different.

Also, thanks again for the candid feedback showing up here... it is a real testament to LSx community... :chug: It is a bitter pill when things do not work the way you want/plan, and it takes a special kind of person to say so...

:lurk:

AS mentioned above any insights you have would be greatly appreciated. If you could/would do it over what would you do different.



I can tell you what I should have done: Listen to Mike Norris when he told me NOT to use a 4.125 crank. If I listened to him and went with a 4.000 or even a 4.100 I would now have a 60,000+ mile stroker engine, but with little or no oil burn.

Other than that, nothing, the engine is awesome and showing zero signs of wear or potential failure.



.

There is much to say. I'll probably make a cessation thread once the transformation back to stock is complete, ending the cycle of stock to bolt ons, to FI, to displacement, back to stock. Quite frankly, I wouldn't have done anything at all if I had known I was going to end up at the beginning. Much has been lost, including time and money, and I never truly received much satisfaction from my car with any of the modifications done. The only gains were experience, knowledge, etc...

It's time for a new hobby.

Much has been lost, including time and money, and I never truly received much satisfaction from my car with any of the modifications done. The only gains were experience, knowledge, etc...

It's time for a new hobby.

I can't believe you just said that! :(
I think you can still keep the car hobby, but maybe expand into a different area or...

Maybe you are just burnt out on the car hobby.

There is much to say. I'll probably make a cessation thread once the transformation back to stock is complete, ending the cycle of stock to bolt ons, to FI, to displacement, back to stock. Quite frankly, I wouldn't have done anything at all if I had known I was going to end up at the beginning. Much has been lost, including time and money, and I never truly received much satisfaction from my car with any of the modifications done. The only gains were experience, knowledge, etc...

It's time for a new hobby.

I will say it one last time, thanks for the no-hype and candid responses in this thread... I think when this modding thing does not turn-out according to our plan many of us just get quiet about it. Some real/honest experiences in here...

I have done the same as you but not the big-displacement yet. Several of my friends have modded their Corvettes to the point of not wanting to drive them anymore. I recently removed my 226/230 112lsa cam and installed a factory ZO6 cam to get back to a more daily driver.

:cheers:

I will say it one last time, thanks for the no-hype and candid responses in this thread... I think when this modding thing does not turn-out according to our plan many of us just get quiet about it. Some real/honest experiences in here...

I have done the same as you but not the big-displacement yet. Several of my friends have modded their Corvettes to the point of not wanting to drive them anymore. I recently removed my 226/230 112lsa cam and installed a factory ZO6 cam to get back to a more daily driver.

:cheers:

This is the kinda stuff that I've always wondered about, but everyone seems to neglect saying anything. I've driven a friend's big cammed car (MS3 with Patriot Heads), and although it was cool for a little bit, I would never want to drive it daily. It was really no fun to drive at all around town. How do you like the ZO6 cam with the top end you have? It probably still lays down some decent numbers...

This is the kinda stuff that I've always wondered about, but everyone seems to neglect saying anything. I've driven a friend's big cammed car (MS3 with Patriot Heads), and although it was cool for a little bit, I would never want to drive it daily. It was really no fun to drive at all around town. How do you like the ZO6 cam with the top end you have? It probably still lays down some decent numbers...

If driving (daily driving) your car is important to you I would highly recommend it. Maybe just a little more cam, something like 220/224 112lsa(+0). With my 226/230 cam I dyno'd 453/423 and with the ZO6 cam I hit 417/396 SAE. I am in the middle of moving right now so I do not have my current dyno-graphs. I will try to dig through storage and find the graphs...

I usually get flamed for saying this; get the best heads, intake, and headers you can and then go with the milder cam. People rely too much on the cam to get their power. Just my opinion...

:cheers:

Great info here. I do think it has to do with the engine builder though. Three of my buddies have TPIS 427's with the 4.125 cranks that hardly burn any oil and they get around 26mpg with them.

If driving (daily driving) your car is important to you I would highly recommend it. Maybe just a little more cam, something like 220/224 112lsa(+0). With my 226/230 cam I dyno'd 453/423 and with the ZO6 cam I hit 417/396 SAE. I am in the middle of moving right now so I do not have my current dyno-graphs. I will try to dig through storage and find the graphs...

I usually get flamed for saying this; get the best heads, intake, and headers you can and then go with the milder cam. People rely too much on the cam to get their power. Just my opinion...

:cheers:

That was actually gonna be my strategy going in to this...I want the nicest heads I can get with a nice ported FAST 90 and a small cam. I'd gladly leave some power on the table for reliability and stealth.

Great info here. I do think it has to do with the engine builder though. Three of my buddies have TPIS 427's with the 4.125 cranks that hardly burn any oil and they get around 26mpg with them.

I know SDPC has a specific procedure (type of oil, oil additives, driving style) for breaking-in their forged short-blocks.

:lurk:

It's the mentality of if one is great two is better or wow I bought a big one but that one is bigger. If you need to drive something everyday you want to try and not get carried away. Hell on a basic easy to do test get one of these video games Forza Motor sports or Granturismo take any car and drive it in stock form on the game then put everything that is available for the car on it and then try and tune the S.O.B. and see how shitty it drives unless you are pretty good at video games I happen to be pretty shitty. The guys who are saying best heads and intake with a mild/sane cam are on to something.

DD 427 here. Drives great on a daily basis. 23mpg highway, far less in the city. But it's an oil burner. Selling it next week and going back to stock :(

What stroke does your 427 have?


.

If driving (daily driving) your car is important to you I would highly recommend it. Maybe just a little more cam, something like 220/224 112lsa(+0). With my 226/230 cam I dyno'd 453/423 and with the ZO6 cam I hit 417/396 SAE. I am in the middle of moving right now so I do not have my current dyno-graphs. I will try to dig through storage and find the graphs...

I usually get flamed for saying this; get the best heads, intake, and headers you can and then go with the milder cam. People rely too much on the cam to get their power. Just my opinion...



I agree. My car could easily be a daily driver, but if it actually was my DD then I would not have gone radical on it. If I wasn't making enough money to be able to afford a practical second car then at the most I would have just done a mild h/c setup.

No one has commented on my start up noise question. One aspect of building up my car is that I hate to lose the nice OEM manners that GM puts in. My car has slap and I hate it. I never like the answer, hey it sounds like forged pistons, because they aren't.

When I was younger and had more free time I used to swap cams regularly on my old SBC 350 and getting huge power at the expense of driveability got old pretty fast for me.

My current rebuild strategy will take me a year to complete but it will focus on heads, with the cam being as mild as possible.

I am hoping someone will comment on piston noise at start up.

No one has commented on my start up noise question. One aspect of building up my car is that I hate to lose the nice OEM manners that GM puts in. My car has slap and I hate it. I never like the answer, hey it sounds like forged pistons, because they aren't.

When I was younger and had more free time I used to swap cams regularly on my old SBC 350 and getting huge power at the expense of driveability got old pretty fast for me.

My current rebuild strategy will take me a year to complete but it will focus on heads, with the cam being as mild as possible.

I am hoping someone will comment on piston noise at start up.

I have forged pistons and have never had piston slap, cold or hot, never.


.

No one has commented on my start up noise question. One aspect of building up my car is that I hate to lose the nice OEM manners that GM puts in. My car has slap and I hate it. I never like the answer, hey it sounds like forged pistons, because they aren't.
No piston slap here. Alot of valvetrain noise, but I'm running .650 lift. But I had no piston slap with the stock engine.

SideStep, put a Magnacharger on your Vette. It'll give you everything you are looking for: power and streetability.

I had a ported Eaton 2003 Cobra. It was very nice to drive around with 500rwhp.

What stroke does your 427 have?


.

4.00"

Hmmm interesting thread... I was all about my stock-cammed, nice driving, 384 rwhp, bolt-ons Z06... then I made the mistake of driving to Florida in my buddies '04 h/c Z w/ AFRs at 59cc and the G5-X1E cam... thus I have a G5-X2 on the way :D I'm going the other way... I want some cam lope now.

Drivability is all in the tune apparently... If It sucks... well then I'll put up w/ it until I can build my 416 L92 based motor one day.

4.00"

Wow, I'm surprised you have any oil burning at all.


.

Hmmm interesting thread... I was all about my stock-cammed, nice driving, 384 rwhp, bolt-ons Z06... then I made the mistake of driving to Florida in my buddies '04 h/c Z w/ AFRs at 59cc and the G5-X1E cam... thus I have a G5-X2 on the way :D I'm going the other way... I want some cam lope now.

Drivability is all in the tune apparently... If It sucks... well then I'll put up w/ it until I can build my 416 L92 based motor one day.

Speaking of a 416 L92 engine, the shop thats building my new engine just built exactly that, with an L76 intake and a small 230 cam. Put down 526 RWHP this week. He ported the heads to 350 cfm. Idles exactly like stock.



.

Wow, I'm surprised you have any oil burning at all.


.

Lol, I can assure you plenty of 4.00 strokes burn oil.

Speaking of a 416 L92 engine, the shop thats building my new engine just built exactly that, with an L76 intake and a small 230 cam. Put down 526 RWHP this week. He ported the heads to 350 cfm. Idles exactly like stock.



.
I think you made a mistake... in the spirit of Christmas and brotherly love you actually built the motor I want and are shipping it to me :judge:

Hmmm interesting thread... I was all about my stock-cammed, nice driving, 384 rwhp, bolt-ons Z06... then I made the mistake of driving to Florida in my buddies '04 h/c Z w/ AFRs at 59cc and the G5-X1E cam... thus I have a G5-X2 on the way :D I'm going the other way... I want some cam lope now.

Drivability is all in the tune apparently... If It sucks... well then I'll put up w/ it until I can build my 416 L92 based motor one day.



Well that is partially true... BUT, there is only so much that "tuning" can do for you when cam overlap exceeds 58 degrees (@ .006), for example... As overlap increases higher and higher idle quality and low-rpm driving suffers. Sure there are tricks to work around it, keep raising the RPM level until you can get idle under control, and/or go to SD... and if the cam is really wild you can ditch it all and run in open-loop... many here do...

I am on my sixth cam (mild to wild, back to mild) and have done the supercharger. There are compromises to each.

Driving a car once or twice is not living with and this thread is about daily driving your ride... in traffic, in the parking lot, five to seven days a week...

:lurk:

^ I drive my car everyday... unless it snows or I'm pulling my jeski then I drive my beater truck. I have 68,xxx on her so she's no garage queen.

Well that is partially true... BUT, there is only so much that "tuning" can do for you when cam overlap exceeds 58 degrees (@ .006), for example... As overlap increases higher and higher idle quality and low-rpm driving suffers. Sure there are tricks to work around it, keep raising the RPM level until you can get idle under control, and/or go to SD... and if the cam is really wild you can ditch it all and run in open-loop... many here do...

I am on my sixth cam (mild to wild, back to mild) and have done the supercharger. There are compromises to each.

Driving a car once or twice is not living with and this thread is about daily driving your ride... in traffic, in the parking lot, five to seven days a week...

:lurk:
Don't blame the cam, blame the intake ;)

Don't blame the cam, blame the intake ;)

You are joking right??? :) :) :) :)

What has the intake got to do with high overlap cams (58* or so and higher) affecting idle and low-rpm driving???

I am using a FAST 90/90 setup now but with a ZO6(2002) cam and idle/low-rpm driving is as good as stock... a huge differnce compared to the 232/236 XE-R cam I had...

:confused: :confused: :confused:

Lol, I can assure you plenty of 4.00 strokes burn oil.
:werd:

If you hit the searches hard enough (not just here) there are several 4" strokes burning/using oil... Some do, some do not... I have to assume that depending on how well everything seats some oil use is not the end of the world. I would like to know if a stroker does use oil how much is too much, 1qt every 3000 miles, 2qt every 3000 miles, ...etc...???

Unfortunately people guard this information, like it is a dirty little secret they do not want to admit to or let out... when many of us could greatly benefit from their experiences...

:lurk:

Some of these motors might be burning oil because they were not broken in right. There is alot of debate on what is right though.

You are joking right??? :) :) :) :)

What has the intake got to do with high overlap cams (58* or so and higher) affecting idle and low-rpm driving???

I am using a FAST 90/90 setup now but with a ZO6(2002) cam and idle/low-rpm driving is as good as stock... a huge differnce compared to the 232/236 XE-R cam I had...

:confused: :confused: :confused:

I'm assuming he's referring to independent throttle body intakes like the Harrop. Reversion doesn't have near the impact on those, thus allowing the use of a much tighter LSA without the impact to the idle quality. But considering a $3000-$4000 intake for a daily driver might be a bit much, and thus not feasible to the normal end user.

Just took delivery of a 402 LS2. I put a bottle of GM EOS (Engine Oil Supplement) and will be changing the oil to Valvoline Racing Oil that has a high content of zinc and phosphorus tomorrow and will add the EOS again. I want driveability and reliability, not pre-occupying myself with a dyno expectation or a trap speed. Shut the hood and move on to something else. Life is too short.

Some of these motors might be burning oil because they were not broken in right.

That's right. And if they run too rich for too long before they get tuned the rings may never seat.

I'm assuming he's referring to independent throttle body intakes like the Harrop. Reversion doesn't have near the impact on those, thus allowing the use of a much tighter LSA without the impact to the idle quality. But considering a $3000-$4000 intake for a daily driver might be a bit much, and thus not feasible to the normal end user.


$3000-4000!!!! :eek2: :eek2: :eek2:

That is almost the price of a SDPC 402...

Wow, I'm surprised you have any oil burning at all.

Stroke has nothing to do with oil consumption. If it does, I'd like to hear about it. Anyways, my oil burning issue was caused by a reluctor wheel that was installed backwards. This caused the timing to be off... a lot. Suprisingly, the car actually ran like this, but was only running on cylinders 4,5,7,8. Because the timing was so off, all of the cylinders were washed down in gasoline, 1,2,3, and 6 more so, removing the oil from the cylinder walls from assembly. This resulted in the rings not being able to seat properly upon break-in. Removing the spark plugs acutally shows that cylinders 1,2,3, and 6 are burning more oil than the others, but they are all burning oil to some extent. After 1600 miles, the oil consumption has gone way down, but it is still unacceptable.

Stroke has nothing to do with oil consumption. If it does, I'd like to hear about it. Anyways, my oil burning issue was caused by a reluctor wheel that was installed backwards. This caused the timing to be off... a lot. Suprisingly, the car actually ran like this, but was only running on cylinders 4,5,7,8. Because the timing was so off, all of the cylinders were washed down in gasoline, 1,2,3, and 6 more so, removing the oil from the cylinder walls from assembly. This resulted in the rings not being able to seat properly upon break-in. Removing the spark plugs acutally shows that cylinders 1,2,3, and 6 are burning more oil than the others, but they are all burning oil to some extent. After 1600 miles, the oil consumption has gone way down, but it is still unacceptable.

Who built the engine?

Speaking of a 416 L92 engine, the shop thats building my new engine just built exactly that, with an L76 intake and a small 230 cam. Put down 526 RWHP this week. He ported the heads to 350 cfm. Idles exactly like stock.



.
specs on cam

Who built the engine?

I did. But the local "professional" engine builder balanced the rotating assembly, and they removed the reluctor wheel to do so, and put it on backwards.

Lol, I can assure you plenty of 4.00 strokes burn oil.

In those cases its a build issue.


.

I think you made a mistake... in the spirit of Christmas and brotherly love you actually built the motor I want and are shipping it to me :judge:

I didn't build it, I couldn't install a set of heads. The builder I'm using from now on built it, along with 5 C5R builds he has going right now. He's awesome.


.

:werd:

If you hit the searches hard enough (not just here) there are several 4" strokes burning/using oil... Some do, some do not... I have to assume that depending on how well everything seats some oil use is not the end of the world. I would like to know if a stroker does use oil how much is too much, 1qt every 3000 miles, 2qt every 3000 miles, ...etc...???

Unfortunately people guard this information, like it is a dirty little secret they do not want to admit to or let out... when many of us could greatly benefit from their experiences...

:lurk:

I'm not afraid. I use 2 qrts every 200 miles, thats right every 200. For the first 30,000 or so it burned NOTHING really. But after that it just started getting bad. BUT......it was expected because of my long 4.125 stroke and short older sleeves.

There's no reason for a 4.00 stroke engine to burn oil FOR THE SAME REASON MINE IS. A bad break-in, washing the cylinders or just someone who doesn't know how to build an engine is the only other reasons.


.

Stroke has nothing to do with oil consumption. If it does, I'd like to hear about it. Anyways, my oil burning issue was caused by a reluctor wheel that was installed backwards. This caused the timing to be off... a lot. Suprisingly, the car actually ran like this, but was only running on cylinders 4,5,7,8. Because the timing was so off, all of the cylinders were washed down in gasoline, 1,2,3, and 6 more so, removing the oil from the cylinder walls from assembly. This resulted in the rings not being able to seat properly upon break-in. Removing the spark plugs acutally shows that cylinders 1,2,3, and 6 are burning more oil than the others, but they are all burning oil to some extent. After 1600 miles, the oil consumption has gone way down, but it is still unacceptable.

The reason mine burns oil is because the piston rocks too much at BDC because the stroke is so long for the sleeves I have. Over time this wears the rings out way prematurely and also takes the nice round shape of the cylinders. So oil passage by the rings steadily increases over time.

Thats why I'm surprised your 4.000 stroke burns oil, it basically can't for the same reason as me because with your stroke you have alot more piston support.

Now that I see your post, and like I said a few posts back.....it was the builder.

.

specs on cam

I will call him tomorrow and get them for ya.


.

I did. But the local "professional" engine builder balanced the rotating assembly, and they removed the reluctor wheel to do so, and put it on backwards.

Doesn't that just piss ya off. You built a good engine and they fucked it up.


.

Forged 347 here. No oil burning issues so far. It does kind of clatter like a diesel a little bit, but that might be an exhaust leak.

I just got a forged 347 and it has a little "clatter "also unitl warm.Oil pressure is good and doesnt use oil.

In those cases its a build issue.


.

No not always.

No not always.

An engine built right won't burn oil, one built wrong will.


.

An engine built right won't burn oil, one built wrong will.


.

Well no not always there are other factors but I've noticed on here that trying to have a debate with you is like trying to catch a hog covered in vaseline so I won't bother lol. No offense.

Well no not always there are other factors but I've noticed on here that trying to have a debate with you is like trying to catch a hog covered in vaseline so I won't bother lol. No offense.

Why would an engine burn oil if the stroke was not too long for the sleeve, like mine is, and the engine was built perfectly.

why is noone concerned about stock motors not burning oil and built motors burning alot or more noticeable? Is that the forged/hypereutectic part? I personally dont think it matters between the two, but i can see a larger bore creating more oil consumption than a smaller one. I also dont think stroke has anythign to do with it.

why is noone concerned about stock motors not burning oil and built motors burning alot or more noticeable? Is that the forged/hypereutectic part? I personally dont think it matters between the two, but i can see a larger bore creating more oil consumption than a smaller one. I also dont think stroke has anythign to do with it.

What are you trying to say???
:lurk:

What are you trying to say???
:lurk:

How come everyone is blaming the engine builder for burning oil? Dont the stock ones burn oil that were made by GM?

So what truly is the cause of oil consumption? Is it a stroke/sleeve length issue, or is it more related to bore size? Or bore size vs. stroke?

:lurk:

So what truly is the cause of oil consumption? Is it a stroke/sleeve length issue, or is it more related to bore size? Or bore size vs. stroke?

I'd say it is related to how the motor is broke in and bore size.

just my $0.02

read post #33...

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=546353&page=4&pp=10

Too short, as in length. I posted in 98Z28CobraKillers threads as well. He had pictures of spark plugs and they looked liked mine you could see the oil on the plugs. Read his post above he is burning oil. I hate to say this but the FORD guys were right. They use to build long rod 306 motors and I was told this over 10 years ago and did not believe them. Bascally the same piston a 402 uses that long rod 306 uses. They told me it will never work on the street because the rings are into the wrist pin and you use the rail for support. Oil goes around the back side of the oil rings. You only get the benefit of the top oil rail if even that. This is a major problem but when combined with pulling out of the sleeve at bdc it compounds the problem. You guys are a little luckier that I was mine used a quart every 150 miles.

I cannot verify or disclaim what the poster suggest..

Ive got a fully forged motor...diamond dished pistons, callies dragonslayer crank, and callies compstar rods. i dunno if being an lt1 has anything to do with it, but i dont burn any oil.

Very interesting thread...it has shaped my future mods a LOT.

So what truly is the cause of oil consumption? Is it a stroke/sleeve length issue, or is it more related to bore size? Or bore size vs. stroke?

It can't be bore size, there's tons of all-bore engines that don't burn any oil.

Long stroke with short sleeves....100% guaranteed, no question about it, pure fact that it contributes heavily to massive oil burning. My engine is a perfect example.

If bore was than every one of them would have problems. Now if a builder fucks up the ring set, well then that builder will fuck up any engine on earth and it'll burn oil no matter what.

So its the stroke/sleeve length.....FIRST...because even the best engine builder on earth can't help that problem, its a mechanical problem.

Then it goes to the builder..........SECOND...starting with the decision to not use a long stroke with a short sleeve in the first place, than just simply building the damn thing properly.

A properly built engine with a short enough stroke so the stroke/sleeve length issue is a NON-issue, there will be no oil burning from blowing by the rings, period. My friends 3 1/2 year old 422ci making 535 RWHP N/A and 850 RWHP (on spray) prooves that, and it helps that it was also built by someone who REALLY, TRULY knows how to build an engine properly. Not some cheezeball shop that makes 4 good ones, then one that blows up and they don't cover it, than they build one that runs low 10's and everyone says, Oh, they're the best shop now", than in a month they go out of business. So the builder is where it all starts, but noone can over-come the long stroke/short sleeve problem.

Other bad oil burning comes from bad valve seals in the heads, which I also had after my heads were 4+ years old. Besides oil leaks in the system (gaskets, lines, oil pan, etc) thats pretty much it for BAD oil burning problems.

The longer sleeves that Darton just made are 5.800" long, so even a 4.125 stroke is considered short and the oil burning will not happen anymore, at least not from the stroke/short sleeve issue. Your builder will have to fuck up to have blow by. Or a abd tune in the beginning that washed the rings and they never seat, which also happened to my first engine.

Its so simple :bang:


.

Long stroke with short sleeves....100% guaranteed, no question about it, pure fact that it contributes heavily to massive oil burning. My engine is a perfect example.

I'm asuming you're running a 6.125 rod? If so that is your problem, not the fact that the sleeves are too short. You could have short sleeves as long as you used an adequately long rod.

I've been thinking about my next engine after this one and most likely it will be a 422ci iron block. 4.030 bore, 4.125 stroke, 6.200 rods. I've read up on them a lot on here and listened what to Sled28 has posted. He's built plenty of long stoke motors that don't have oil consumption problems. Granted with the longer rod, you now have less of a piston, because the pins are higher up.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=586580
Thread about long stroke motors

With my 226/230 cam I dyno'd 453/423 and with the ZO6 cam I hit 417/396 SAE.

:cheers:
not bad at all with a stock cam :)

I'm asuming you're running a 6.125 rod? If so that is your problem, not the fact that the sleeves are too short. You could have short sleeves as long as you used an adequately long rod.

I've been thinking about my next engine after this one and most likely it will be a 422ci iron block. 4.030 bore, 4.125 stroke, 6.200 rods. I've read up on them a lot on here and listened what to Sled28 has posted. He's built plenty of long stoke motors that don't have oil consumption problems. Granted with the longer rod, you now have less of a piston, because the pins are higher up.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=586580
Thread about long stroke motors

Besides what length rods, crank, sleeves and piston are used, the oil burn comes from one place. The piston is traveling too far down the sleeve and at BDC it "rocks" back and forth, which causes cylinder and ring wear. Then you have blow by.

No matter what combo of crank and rod you use, if the piston is almost coming out the bottom of the sleeve, thats the oil burning culprit.

Oh, BTW....Sled28 built my engine. Besides the oil burning, he built a great engine as far as I'm concerned, reliable and staying together-wise.


.

I am surprised to hear about all the people complaining about the driveability loss that resulted from forged motors and or large cam swaps. I have been daily driving a 67 Chevelle with a Carbed Gen I SBC with a healthy cam and I wouldn't have it any other way. Sure it sucks when its cold and it doesn't want to start, sure it doesn't idle well because of the cam, and even after all that it still probably only runs 14s but I love it and I have never regretted it. It is under the knife for a forged/cammed LS1 swap however, which should improve driveability but I did it more for power and weight vs. cost rather than driveability. Whatever driveability I do gain will be lost with the 800 lb springs up front I plan to install. It just seems to me that part of being an automotive enthusiast is seeking the most power safely out of your engine. Be it at the cost of idle quality, oil consumption, gas mileage etc. Sorry for the long rant but surely somebody here agrees with me?

... Sure it sucks when its cold and it doesn't want to start, sure it doesn't idle well because of the cam, and even after all that it still probably only runs 14s ....

All of those are reasons that many of us are picking a smarter/more balanced answer to our upgrade path (for a true daily driver, sitting in DC traffic with the AC and XM on....).

Even with all the good and bad experiences/examples from this thread I am pretty sure this May I will end up with a 402 (my AFR205s and a small cam...) in my C5....

:cheers:

Easy solution would be to get a GM LS7. That's what I plan on doing in a year or so.

Besides what length rods, crank, sleeves and piston are used, the oil burn comes from one place. The piston is traveling too far down the sleeve and at BDC it "rocks" back and forth, which causes cylinder and ring wear. Then you have blow by.

No matter what combo of crank and rod you use, if the piston is almost coming out the bottom of the sleeve, thats the oil burning culprit.

Oh, BTW....Sled28 built my engine. Besides the oil burning, he built a great engine as far as I'm concerned, reliable and staying together-wise.


.

Well, there's a few other causes, but others have said those. What causes the piston to travel too far down / almost out of the sleeve? Too short of connecting rod and inadequately designed / chosen pistons. With a longer rod you'll lose some piston and the pins will be higher up, but if a correct piston and rod are chosen oil burning shouldn't be a problem with concern to sleeve length. Granted having the older shorter style sleeves doesn't make it any easier either.

Well, there's a few other causes, but others have said those. What causes the piston to travel too far down / almost out of the sleeve? Too short of connecting rod and inadequately designed / chosen pistons.

We have a winner. There are quite a few more reasons for burning oil than an improperly built shortblock lol

Well, there's a few other causes, but others have said those. What causes the piston to travel too far down / almost out of the sleeve? Too short of connecting rod and inadequately designed / chosen pistons. With a longer rod you'll lose some piston and the pins will be higher up, but if a correct piston and rod are chosen oil burning shouldn't be a problem with concern to sleeve length. Granted having the older shorter style sleeves doesn't make it any easier either.

This is exactly what I said earlier, its a build issue either way. If the builder chose the wrong parts than the engine was improperly built. Thats what I was trying to tell 11 Bravo. If an engine is built properly it will not burn oil, fact. Choosing proper parts is the key to properly building an engine. Or am I missing something?

Its like we, as pilots say, sometimes the crash happens before the pilots even show up to the airport because of a bad decision to fly that day.........an engine can have an oil burning problem before the engine is even put together because of bad decisions.

:confused:


.

Another issue that contributes to high oil consumption is having a bore finish that is too smooth. With too smooth of a wall finish, the oil rings will never seat well and you can have oil consumption, even with a good leak-down number.

Easy solution would be to get a GM LS7. That's what I plan on doing in a year or so.

Yeah... but you could build a bigger motor that makes more power for less money.

Yeah... but you could build a bigger motor that makes more power for less money.

And would it be realiable as a daily driver to at least 100k miles?

And would it be realiable as a daily driver to at least 100k miles?

If it's built right it would be just as reliable.

Another issue that contributes to high oil consumption is having a bore finish that is too smooth. With too smooth of a wall finish, the oil rings will never seat well and you can have oil consumption, even with a good leak-down number.

Again, a bad builder.


:chug:


.

Lingenfelter forged motor here, no oil consumption.

Had a JPR forged motor for a couple years, had oil consumption.

As far as daily driving, and this opinion is after 2 forged motors and 5 different tuners, I believe a LOT of it has to do with the tune.

Lingenfelter forged motor here, no oil consumption.

Had a JPR forged motor for a couple years, had oil consumption.

As far as daily driving, and this opinion is after 2 forged motors and 5 different tuners, I believe a LOT of it has to do with the tune.

No doubt, my first engine was tuned pig rich and the rings were gas washed, oil burning was immediate and heavy. Had nothing to do with the build though.

My friend has a 422ci thats 3 years old and still burns nothing, it was built properly.


.

Yes, tune does have a HUGE factor on driveability. However, tuning cannot fix the poor driving characteristics of a large cam.

Yes, tune does have a HUGE factor on driveability. However, tuning cannot fix the poor driving characteristics of a large cam.


:werd:

Again, a bad builder.


:chug:


.

A builder builds, a machinist hones the cylinders ;)

Rings that are too hard will also result in an oil burner.....

I built a forged SBC (327) in my first car (Monza) when I was 16, didn't burn a drop of oil between changes.

A builder builds, a machinist hones the cylinders ;)

You, me and the man on the moon may agree or disagree with what I'm about to say, doesn't really matter to me, I know the facts.

If a builder chooses a shitty machinist, than that builder fucked up the build.

As always, my previous post was not understood. So, here goes again. A builder must start an engine build way before the parts are there and way before a tool is ever touched. Using a good machinist is perhaps the most important part of a build.

PERIOD

Didn't my pilot analogy make sense?


:confused:

.

Rings that are too hard will also result in an oil burner.....

Man, I can do this all day long...........improper build.

I built a forged SBC (327) in my first car (Monza) when I was 16, didn't burn a drop of oil between changes.

Congrats on a PROPER engine build. I love this....... :)


.

After reading all of this thread... I just cant wait to get my forged iron block... The mod bug is being very annoying right now, but I have learned a whole bunch from this thread, keep it up guys! Man i love ls1tech...

I've got an SLP 402 with AFR 225 heads,Eagle crank and Manley forged pistons and rods. 11:1 compression, all factory intake system, 228/230 Comp cam with .595" lift, LG LongTube headers and factory TI mufflers. 481rwhp and 489rwt.

The engine now has about 3500 miles on it and was carefully broken in. I am not a neophyte when it comes to performance motors or cars. I have built several cars from the ground up and assembled more than a few motors making roughly the same power as this SLP402.

My hp numbers are good, even my highway mileage at 75mph is 26-28mpg.
BUT... I do not like the apparent piston slap and I really don't like going through a quart of 10-30 M1 every 750 miles!! The cars sounds like a bloody diesel EVEN AFTER IT IS WARMED UP. When accelerating up a hill in 6th it really sounds like a diesel. This is not detonation. I have HP Tuner, no knock recorded whatsoever. I can increase the timing and induce minor knock above 23-24 degrees advance WOT so I know it is not a faulty knock sensor.

I am inclined to agree that the 4" stroke really exposes a lot of piston skirt which makes sense that this would aggravate piston slap. A factory LS7 short block is sure tempting. I would probably seriously consider this if changing out these engines wasn't such a PITA. A good friend of mine has a '07 ZO6. His 4" stroke forged engine is smooth as silk. I am royally bummed that mine is not. For the $$ I should've just bought a new Z, but because a valve spring broke at 78,000 miles and toasted my engine my options were somewhat limited. I thought building a C6ZO6 equivalent with my C5Z made sense. My car still looks like the day I drove it off the showroom floor. I love the power, but it burns oil like and old farm truck and doesn't sound much better except at WOT (which is nothing short of fabulous!)

Would going to 50wt oil help? Living in San Jose, CA I don't have sub zero startup concerns. I know not to push a cold engine and know that doing so with heavy oil can blow a filter right off the block. I always used 50 wt Valvoline in my 69 L88. By the way, the factory 427 L88 made virtually the same rwhp and used a lot less oil even with its forged pistons.

Informed comments would be greatly appreciated!

Chuck

Man, I can do this all day long...........improper build.


God himself could build the engine. If he gets bad rings (metallurgy) it would still burn oil......It isnt like you can brinell test a set of rings. Ill admit the odds of this happening arent very high but I have seen it happen.

Man, I can do this all day long...........improper build.

Just so you know, by taking the term "builder" so broadly, you have defined any point you might have had out of existence. Obviously, if "build" includes parts selection, parts quality, assembly, machining, and everything else, then yes, by definition an oil-burning engine indicates a "bad builder." But then you haven't really said anything.

Just so you know, by taking the term "builder" so broadly, you have defined any point you might have had out of existence. Obviously, if "build" includes parts selection, parts quality, assembly, machining, and everything else, then yes, by definition an oil-burning engine indicates a "bad builder." But then you haven't really said anything.

You may as well give it up with that dude. He is never wrong. He's the same guy who said about titanium rods, and I quote "its a marketing tool so Vette owners can say "I have Ti rods in my engine". And so cheezball car salesman can say, "This engine has Ti rods." and "I don't see why anyone would want those weaker Ti rods". Of course he shows no test that proves they are weaker, his word is the word of God. And this was after a shop like Katech said they did countless days of spinng them and dyno time lol. So he knows even more than them. My "builder" didn't pick my parts, machine anything or even tune it.

You may as well give it up with that dude. He is never wrong.

Hehe, who says I'm talking to him. :devil:

Anyhow, I'm not saying he's wrong. But in a way, he's worse than wrong. He's not even wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong).

Forged 347 built by Rapid. No oil burning issues here.

So with what's been said in here...are you guys implying that all LS2 402 strokers are fundamentally going to burn oil because they use a 4.0" stroke crankshaft?

So with what's been said in here...are you guys implying that all LS2 402 strokers are fundamentally going to burn oil because they use a 4.0" stroke crankshaft?

No not at all.

ok...so after reading most of this thread about cranks, bore size, and sleeve length, just hypethetical senario here, but what combo of crank, rod, and sleeves would you recomend for building something like...say a 408?!

ok...so after reading most of this thread about cranks, bore size, and sleeve length, just hypethetical senario here, but what combo of crank, rod, and sleeves would you recomend for building something like...say a 408?!

Does it have to be a 408??? Why not just get a 402 (LS2) from SDPC or TSP???


:cheers:

well..i got a 6.0 iron block thats gettin bored, and i got a good deal on it, so i figured i'd just start a budjet 408 and see where it gets me just curious on what you would put in there if it was your motor :)

I have a forged 383 that (pauses to knock on wood) has yet to give me any issues. The scary part is that I took a chance and bought it used. There are many factors that will differentiate a "good" engine from a "bad" engine, but IMO whoever does the final assembly/tuning will make or break the deal. A good shop should be able to steer the most stubborn buyer away from potentially disastrous combinations of parts...

Quickin: Funny you should mention Mike Norris as his patience kept me from trying to get too crazy with my old H/C combo...

I have about 20k miles on my HPE 383. Runs like a top and burns less oil than stock. My oil consumption is via the PCV. ~ 1/2 qt per 3k miles.

If driving (daily driving) your car is important to you I would highly recommend it. Maybe just a little more cam, something like 220/224 112lsa(+0). With my 226/230 cam I dyno'd 453/423 and with the ZO6 cam I hit 417/396 SAE. I am in the middle of moving right now so I do not have my current dyno-graphs. I will try to dig through storage and find the graphs...

I usually get flamed for saying this; get the best heads, intake, and headers you can and then go with the milder cam. People rely too much on the cam to get their power. Just my opinion...

:cheers:

I agree with you :judge:

Mine's still running like a top. No oil usage at all.

Mine's still running like a top. No oil usage at all.

Sweet! that is good to hear... I was wondering what you had gotten into....

:cheers:

Sweet! that is good to hear... I was wondering what you had gotten into....

:cheers:

Just driving whenever I want. This thing could easily be a daily driver.

what if i have a built short block from TExas speed. are the tolerances all set correctly?

There are a lot of posts here that are erroneous. Until then, understand that the internet is full of regurgitated BS that leads people down the wrong path.

A piston CAN be designed that rides just fine and quietly in a 4.0 and 4.125 stroke engine. The Rings are a big deal as well....a lot of people with oil control problems aren't saying which rings they're running because their belief in marketing hype is stronger than their own observations. They'll keep looking at EGR/valve stem seals etc. until the cows come home and never acknowledge the root of the problem.

-Brian Nutter-Wiseco Piston