subtlez28

iTrader: (15)

I had this same debate w my dad a few years ago when he bought his Corvette w an auto.

He was all: Modern autos, this and I'm getting old that. Well, he found out the auto doesn't pick up on what he is doing fast enough, and he wishes he had a clutch and the ability to downshift smoothly before a corner.

Now the Vette sits in the garage, because he would rather drive his 67 C10 w a swapped in 5-speed. And the truck has a straight 6!!

My current DD is a Colorado w a 5.3. Great truck and an auto is fine for putting around town. But everytime I drive hard I wish it had a T56. If I keep it through the warranty, it will get one.

My point is this: Do not pollute your vision. If you want a manual in your fun car, you will wish you had one every time you exercise it.

It would be one thing if you liked autos better. But if you compromise here, I think you may regret it.

Sorry to get on a soap box. But I'm a pretty die-hard stick shift guy.

85MikeTPI

iTrader: (9)

That bellhousing interference looks strangely like an opening for an external slave cylinder... Your pics are just small thumbnails for me, I can't really see much detail in them.

The AFM had the most transition problems, while VVT had the potential for piston-to-valve interference on a missed shift. (The Comp Phaser lock takes care of that concern, at a cost. I had a thread on here somewhere about my dyno/tuning testing I did last Fall) Mostly you'd find both AFM/VVT as a pair in GenIV vehicles, so the automagic was the way to go. (I'd spend days looking for the source of that info...)

I'm running the TSP VVT2 cam with the E38 and a few others are trying the larger VVT3. I guess my current thought/testing is that once you go that big, the VVT benefits are mostly lost except for maybe <3000rpm street driving.

Goldhawg

iTrader: (7)

I am still trying to dial in my complete setup, but I have a 2010 L96 VVT w/T56 and Mast's HO cam. As far as power and smooth idle, this is awesome. My tuner was unable to get the ECM to read the right VSS (reads 158) but the engine pulls strongly to whatever I want. However I still don't have a tach signal even though I did whatever was recommended last summer re tuning and resistor. But I'm pretty sure I was well north of 4000 rpm on shifts! I am about ready to give up and just run off one of the coils; then I'll really enjoy driving.

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

OK... I'm going to try to reply to all of these in one post...

Sounds like a great candidate for a 5.3 or 6L swap!


I can understand that.


Hey, if you ever saw any of my Facebook posts, you'd realize that I'm pretty much the last guy on earth who can complain about someone being on a soapbox... So hey, I sure as hell don't mind, I appreciate the feedback (and it's good to hear from ya too Shaun!).

The way it seems to me right now is - I might be annoyed with the T56 during normal, in-town driving, especially when I (inevitably) forget to use my left leg when coming up to a stop sign or something. (A few years ago, I rented a manual-transmission Jeep in order to drive up to American Basin/Yankee Boy Basin near Ouray. I must've forgotten to use the clutch a dozen times in eight hours... BTW - I highly recommend that trip, if you're ever in Colorado...) BUT, I'd probably be really irritated with the auto trans whenever I would be able to run a few hot laps on the local road racing track... Soooooo... I guess it kind of depends on how often I'm able to make it out to HPR, vs. how often I'll be driving it in town. I KNOW that I'll be doing a fair bit of in-town driving with it...

Well, it'd be nice to think that there was actually a logical reason for that protrusion...

Yeah, since 'Tech requires that users post their pics elsewhere (apparently so that they can parasite off of the other sites' bandwidth, & not pay for the images' bandwidth themselves) it introduces limitations that shouldn't be present. I've been able to click on the photos that I post, & see reasonably-sized copies of them. If you're using a phone, or some other small-screen, that might be considerably less useful...

Yep - very much aware of the potential for P-to-V problems with these engines, so the "tradeoff" of diminished power for lessened chance of catastrophic engine failure seems reasonable to me.

OK, I can understand that. If you happen to run across that data, please let me know, I'd love to be able to review it - no rush though.

OK, that seems logical, thanks for the feedback. Again, if you just happen to run across that data, it'd be great if you could shoot me a pointer to it (either here in this thread, or in a PM, whatever's easiest for ya). No need to go looking for it specifically.

Cool, I've considered that cam, actually!

Odd. What are you using for an ECM?? The stock GM unit, or the Mast M90/M120??? I've been thinking about selling the blank GM E38 ECM I have, & the Comp Cam I have sitting in the garage, as well as the stock L92 engine harness, & just getting the Mast ECM/harness/HO cam package, just to have a "more integrated" solution... Don't know how much work would be involved with interfacing it with the rest of the car though...

You know... Honestly, that'd be the kind of thing that would just ANNOY me to the point to where I would just pull the tach signal off of one of the coils... As easy as it's always been for me to get a tach reading from a "vintage" engine using an inductive clamp on the #1 plug wire with a tach/dwell meter, it would just PI$$ ME OFF to jump through any kind of hoops to get a tach signal in the car.

That might just be me though.. Thanks for the replies all!!

cam

iTrader: (9)

Run the e38 imo. Do you have a stock complete L92 harness?

My QT bell is VERY close to the HAWKS SW headers but it does clear, just, and I mean just, like 1/32" just. Plus to add further... ive read of issues with other bells and geometry being whacked. A local guy who spent a lot of dough on a Harrop 455 LS build eventually ditched his McLeod bell for a QT and his problems went away.

Anyways auto is easy, quicker, but dont be concerned about the VVT and stick shift etc. 4L60 is..... meh.... 6spd auto? Badass but again a fair bit of work to sort it all out, especially tune wise etc.

If you run an LS7 or Katech LS9 clutch the pedal is easy and the grip is mighty mighty. I like the LS7 personally, it gets slagged on but it sure took a hell of a beating in my case and never missed a beat.

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

Yep, sure do, it's currently zip-tied to a piece of plywood in the basement. Figured that would probably make it a little bit easier to locate/label everything.

Is "QT" the actual brand name, or is that an abbreviation? I don't recognize that one...

Hmmm. I figured there would probably be a truck out there running a 6L80E or similar that would have a tune that I could start with...

Good to know... I've read good things about Spec clutches, so I grabbed one of their 'Stage 2' units to start out with... Biggest problem I expect to have with it is having the discipline to break it in correctly without winding it out before the break-in period!!

Thanks for the reply Cam!

cam

iTrader: (9)

QT = Quick Time

Spec 2 isnt a bad clutch

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

Thanks Cam.

Hey, I had a random thought & would like to hear what you guys think about it. Would it be worth trying to take the bellhousing off the car, rent/borrow an acetylene torch, heat that portion of the housing & pound it "in" so that it doesn't protrude quite so far out??

(I'm guessing that it's probably not feasible/worth doing because of how easily it could warp it, but want to hear everyone's feedback anyway.)

Anyone have any other thoughts on how I can get around this??

Thanks guys.

subtlez28

iTrader: (15)

I get your logic running a safety minded bell housing. However, if it were me I would look into a stock aluminum housing before modifying your SFI steel one. I am not aware of a lot of LS motors throwing clutch shrapnel through the factory bell, and the steel floor. I think a factory unit would suit your needs.

If you do decide to pimple the SFI unit I would try to do it with it bolted up to the engine and trans to avoid warping. Is that possible?

Would that void the SFI end of it?

PS My dad is doing a resto on 69 C10. When he is done w that I will lobby (again) for the 5.3 swap in his "beater" C10. Problem is he has a couple old school SBCs around.

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

I suspect you're pretty much correct there. The steel bell is just kind of a nice "insurance" piece for the most part. The biggest reason that I'd like to keep it is that I'd like to run a couple of open-road events (Silver State Classic & the Sandhills event in Nebraska), and they'd both involve several minutes of higher-than-normal RPMs... We've also gotten a nice new road course about an hour east of here, so that's a factor as well. Even with those, I don't think that the steel housing is a necessity, just something that I'd prefer to keep...

I don't know that I'd want to have it bolted up to my real engine & trans, if I had a junk block & trans, I'd do that in a heartbeat. My concern would be that the housing is fairly thick, so it would require a pretty good bit of heat applied in order to get it malleable enough - and I'd be concerned that that much heat right by the crank could conceivably cause problems with seals and/or bearings.

On the other hand, that aluminum block would act like a really good heat-sink, so it could also distribute/disperse the heat enough that the overall effect is that it wouldn't be any warmer at the crankshaft than normal operation.

I just don't know, & I'm not really inclined to test it with the only drivetrain pieces that I have... If I had a fixture that I knew would keep the mating surfaces within tolerances, it wouldn't even be a question, I'd just hook it up to the fixture & do it...

Don't know, but I'm not really concerned about that - if I recall correctly, the current sticker on it is expired anyway (I'd have to run out to the garage to confirm that). I bought it thinking that even if it's not strictly "legal", it's still better protection than the factory unit.

Just tell him how impressed you are by "1955 technology"... Then hint at how much nicer it would be to get better mileage, smoother operation, etc, etc...

Or, what the hell, just enjoy working with him on it regardless...

cam

iTrader: (9)

Well heating that bell up might work out it is required to be true for all parts to jive with harmony and not eat bearings etc. If i was to try such I think Id bolt it up to the engine and trans and then do spot heat/clearance to limit warpage. That said im sure you'll be fine with a stock bell on there and you can pick up a few bucks with the sale of yours.

Maybe the tech guys will allow it? Might be worth some inquiry before making a final decision.

Could always sell that one and buy a QT unit as well. Probably wont put you much aside from the time hassle

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

Contacted a local fabrication place that deals with a lot of heavy-gauge steels, etc, sent them a couple pictures (one each from above & below), to find out if it might be possible to get that section of the bellhousing "flattened down" a little bit, or just moved out of the way enough to use the headers. Here's the guy's response:

Well, considering the fact that I paid something like $350 to buy the bellhousing, I'm not exactly excited at the thought of doubling that price just so I can actually get to use it...

Think I'm going to get out there with a 2nd pair of hands as soon as I'm able to, & see exactly how far off it is...

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

OK, latest update is that I've pulled the transmission out of the car again, have the bellhousing ready to go into a carton for shipping,and have a tracking number for the QT bellhousing that will be replacing it...

85MikeTPI

iTrader: (9)

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

HONEST TO GOD... I'm not sure if I want to CRY - or throw up... (Probably BOTH!!) Went out to the garage, started reassembling all of the crap that I'd had to disassemble because I was a *DUMBA$$* & tried to save money by buying a used SFI-certified bellhousing - that turned out to not fit so well...

So - I have the new parts in hand, I get the block-protector plate set on the 'pins' on the back of the block, & I start bolting the flywheel up. Torque specs say 74 lb/ft in three stages - first stage, tighten all six bolts to 15 lb/ft. Easy, nothing to it! Second stage, tighten all six bolts to 37 lb/ft. - OK, I had to grab a prybar, & wedge it between the flywheel teeth & the ground to keep the flywheel & crankshaft from turning, and hold it with one hand while the *other* hand tightened the bolts, but hey, no big deal, I got it done.

I *KNEW* that the final stage (tightening all six bolts to 74 lb./ft.) would just require more than I'd be able to handle, trying to hold the prybar while applying that much force to the torque wrench, so I enlisted my beautiful wife's help to hold the prybar, so that I could use both hands to do the final tightening. The torque wrench worked beautifully, clicking as expected on 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, - WHA'????? Huh, lemme try that again...

OHHHHHHH $#IT... Move the socket from the torque wrench to one of my normal ratchets... DEAR GOD, it's doing the same thing... (Feeling like I've been simultaneously been kicked in guts AND the nuts, & feeling the bile rise in my throat)

It looks like I've stripped out one of the bolt holes used to hold the flywheel on. Which... OH YEAH, just *HAPPENS* to be bolting into the crankshaft!!!

LONG story short, unless SOMEONE can tell me otherwise, it LOOKS LIKE I *NOW* get to pull the engine out of the GTA, and replace a crankshaft that - OH YEAH - has *ZERO* freaking miles on it!!!

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

OK... I'm looking for the "bright spot" here - and I guess that the ONE 'bright spot' I can see in all of this is -

At least the whole rotating assembly (pistons, etc.) turned over relatively easily...

subtlez28

iTrader: (15)

I just swapped the fly-wheel onto my L92 and was thinking 74 lb/ft was kind of low when I read it on the spec sheet. Glad I didn't go higher.

Are you sure you didn't damage the bolt as apposed to the crank though?

I misread a torque spec for the block off plate above the oil filter (like a dumb-*** working on minimal sleep). I got the same sick feeling when it began to spin and I realized I applied way to much torque. For me though, the bolt was soft. The aluminum block held. That said I would think the steel crank threads would be even stronger.

Especially when you consider how much torque is applied to the front of the crank by the harmonic balancer bolt.

V8Rumble

iTrader: (9)

Thanks Shaun, but I pulled the bolt (I bought ARP bolts for this), & it looks totally good/normal - OH YEAH, except for the sliver of metal thread/shaving on it...

subtlez28

iTrader: (15)

That sucks!

You know when I put on my LS7 flywheel, I found a pack of GM flywheel bolts the seller thought he had lost. I decided to use them rather than the ARP bolts I had purchased. Do you think the difference is that the GM bolts stretch?

subtlez28

iTrader: (15)

Not to sound like to much of a hack, but...

I would be tempted to heal-a-coil it in place. Really the other 5 should be able to keep it in place, I would just want to make sure all 6 are there to keep the weight balanced.

I have no experience w that, just thinking out loud (or in text I guess).

Pulling or replacing the essentially new crank just seems like something to avoid.