Just put QA1 shocks and springs on our CTS-V
08-05-2005, 12:34 PM
#1
Tenured Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: MN
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just put QA1 shocks and springs on our CTS-V And wow, does it make a difference. We still need to do some adjustment on the shocks, but the car feels tons better already. The springs we put in where a 1.25" drop I believe, and the car in my opinion has a real nice stance. I also put on the one of our oval LS-6 intake manifolds and pulled the screen out of the MAF and this car moves. (Had to go out an do a little "test drive" after we got the car together 
) We hope to have Dyno numbers next week.
Just thought I would post some pictures of the car, in case anyone was interested in lowering their CTS-V. This is a brand new kit, I dont know pricing as of yet, but we will have this available for sale in the next few weeks.
Everyone have a great weekend
Erik(please keep in mind I am a mechanic not a photographer
)
TPiS
) We hope to have Dyno numbers next week.Just thought I would post some pictures of the car, in case anyone was interested in lowering their CTS-V. This is a brand new kit, I dont know pricing as of yet, but we will have this available for sale in the next few weeks.
Everyone have a great weekend
Erik(please keep in mind I am a mechanic not a photographer
)TPiS
08-05-2005, 02:51 PM
#2
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scarborough, Maine
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks sweet, the QA1's are adjustable right?
Thinking really hard on getting your single mass flywheel and clutch kit, maybe time for a group buy on them??
Bill
Thinking really hard on getting your single mass flywheel and clutch kit, maybe time for a group buy on them??
Bill
08-05-2005, 04:14 PM
#3
Tenured Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: MN
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We could probably work something out....I would have to talk it over with Myron, but if there is interest I am sure we can get something going.
Erik
TPiS
Oh....BTW they are adjustable shocks, yes.
Erik
TPiS
Oh....BTW they are adjustable shocks, yes.
08-06-2005, 09:40 AM
#6
Staging Lane
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Salem, OR
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I removed my MAF screen also; and know of at least two others who have done it. No downsides noted. I think this is GM's cautious overkill.
If you are careful, you can remove the screen intact so that it can be reinstalled if you change your mind. It is glued in place, and can be removed by tapping around the edges with a drift from the motor-side of the MAF.
If you are careful, you can remove the screen intact so that it can be reinstalled if you change your mind. It is glued in place, and can be removed by tapping around the edges with a drift from the motor-side of the MAF.
08-06-2005, 10:10 AM
#7
TECH Addict
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas/Denton/Houston
Posts: 2,645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know, I am an old LT1 guy and that was one of the first things you did with those. When I descreened the MAF on the caddy, around 3-4k it would stutter a little.
Trending Topics
08-06-2005, 12:04 PM
#8
Tenured Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: MN
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maf Screen
Originally Posted by Parker TX
I know, I am an old LT1 guy and that was one of the first things you did with those. When I descreened the MAF on the caddy, around 3-4k it would stutter a little.
mc
08-06-2005, 03:34 PM
#10
TECH Addict
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas/Denton/Houston
Posts: 2,645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drove it around for 2 weeks like that and it didnt learn its way out of it, so I just bought a new one and it solved the problem. Wow, what a change of subject huh?
08-06-2005, 03:42 PM
#11
Tenured Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: MN
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 02 Tahoe on 20s
is there really a gain to doing this? i did it on my tahoe and felt no difference
Ben
Ben
mc
08-06-2005, 04:21 PM
#12
Staging Lane
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Salem, OR
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still on the changed subject of MAF screen removal.
In a flurry of **** engineering, I moved the MAF closer to the throttle body. At the time I was having no problems with the MAF screen removal, but figured that having a longer straight run before the MAF wouldn't hurt. Bought my parts from Air Flow Systems. http://shop.airflowonline.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv.
Used a 4"X3.5" 90 degree bend rubber intake tube for the fit from throttle body to MAF. Used the short silicon connector that comes with the Lingenfelter CAI to connect the MAF to a 4" aluminum tube; and then connected the aluminum tube to the air filter as supplied by Lingenfelter. There is clearance, but it is tight. I haven't dynoed the car, so I cannot report an A/B comparison test, but my reasoning is that this materially betters the stock intake at an almost nominal cost.
In a flurry of **** engineering, I moved the MAF closer to the throttle body. At the time I was having no problems with the MAF screen removal, but figured that having a longer straight run before the MAF wouldn't hurt. Bought my parts from Air Flow Systems. http://shop.airflowonline.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv.
Used a 4"X3.5" 90 degree bend rubber intake tube for the fit from throttle body to MAF. Used the short silicon connector that comes with the Lingenfelter CAI to connect the MAF to a 4" aluminum tube; and then connected the aluminum tube to the air filter as supplied by Lingenfelter. There is clearance, but it is tight. I haven't dynoed the car, so I cannot report an A/B comparison test, but my reasoning is that this materially betters the stock intake at an almost nominal cost.
08-06-2005, 04:52 PM
#13
Launching!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: On a mountain with snow
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tested the MAF screen removal on mine today:
***Note: This was not with a stock tune! YMMV***
Results of no screen:
AFR leaned out an average of nearly four tenths at WOT
Lost an average of 1.1 hp from 2000 rpm to 6800.
MAF measured airflow was 3.2% less (hence the leaning out of the AFR)
Measured asphalt performance from 29 to 98 mph = 0.151 seconds slower
Test Conditions:
Screened IAT = 77.8*F
Descreened IAT = 76.4*F
Screened ECT = 192*F
Descreened ECT = 192*F
On a stock tune, leaning out the AFR @ WOT would be a good thing. Since my WOT AFR was already dialed with the MAF screen in place in the custom tune, the more lean mixture without the screen didn't do my particular V any good.
Was collecting data to recalibrate the MAF without a screen and my laptop died midstream. Once mine is recalibrated for the lower measured airflow, the performance should be back to screened levels if not more.
***Note: This was not with a stock tune! YMMV***
Results of no screen:
AFR leaned out an average of nearly four tenths at WOT
Lost an average of 1.1 hp from 2000 rpm to 6800.
MAF measured airflow was 3.2% less (hence the leaning out of the AFR)
Measured asphalt performance from 29 to 98 mph = 0.151 seconds slower
Test Conditions:
Screened IAT = 77.8*F
Descreened IAT = 76.4*F
Screened ECT = 192*F
Descreened ECT = 192*F
On a stock tune, leaning out the AFR @ WOT would be a good thing. Since my WOT AFR was already dialed with the MAF screen in place in the custom tune, the more lean mixture without the screen didn't do my particular V any good.
Was collecting data to recalibrate the MAF without a screen and my laptop died midstream. Once mine is recalibrated for the lower measured airflow, the performance should be back to screened levels if not more.
Last edited by StealthV; 08-06-2005 at 07:57 PM. Reason: fixed typo
