"CAM ONLY" setup, I want to use LS6 heads?
11-24-2009, 07:19 PM
#81
And I'm running a canton oil pan, the filter is relocated. Never went to Sam. The intake is box stock and the runner is bigger that the heads opening by quite a bit. I had already thought of epoxy as well. Thiers a lot of room for improvement in our junk if I can just find the time to work on it.
11-24-2009, 07:23 PM
#83
I dunno, I mean the oil pump, do what ya want, it's off the car to change the timing chain which is part of a cam only setup. If you put rod bolts in, yeah the pan is off and if you put a moroso pan on it, fine. If you go dry sump, I dunno that's kind of taking it a bit far.... but I'm not really sure where the line is. IMO, it's a stock bottom end, oil pump and rold bolts o.k., stock heads untouched, rest I guess do what ya want.
11-24-2009, 07:25 PM
#84
Better sump in the canton/moroso pan, not as much a worry about running out of oil in the pan, and when the car is doing a big wheelstand, the pickup is submerged better.
Less of a chance of running out of oil.... less of a chance of having something bad happen.
Moroso pan IMO is cheap insurance for a race car.
Less of a chance of running out of oil.... less of a chance of having something bad happen.
Moroso pan IMO is cheap insurance for a race car.
11-24-2009, 07:51 PM
#85
My main reason was I wanted to relocate the oil filter in order to do away with the restrictive oil flow and small oil filter the factory pan provides. It also holds more oil. As JL ws-6 sayed, its cheap insurance...and with a stock bottomend I need all the insurance I can get at 7800 rpms. If you're not going to spin the engine over 7200 rpms its probably useless...atleast for a car that isn't scrubbing the bumper on occasion. 
You can do a little "port work" to a factory pan that will help it also.
The sheetmetal pan will drop a few lbs off the front of the car as well.
You can do a little "port work" to a factory pan that will help it also.The sheetmetal pan will drop a few lbs off the front of the car as well.
11-25-2009, 07:25 AM
#88
[QUOTE=Jonathan@Tick;12540487]We'll, I found the 1.414 slip from two weeks ago and the 330 was a 4.310. This weekends 1.478 had a 4.342 330 time...
[QUOTE]
ya, I think beacuse we (m6) guys have to lauch so agressive, for little power. And let the car wheelie more then it seams, so we don't bog. I think its somtimes the front nose, OR somtimes its the airdam that trips the 60 lights. But its somthing that not consistent? So I just look at the 330 numbers now for adjustment. 60#s are a waste.
Try it jonathan, and see about it.
[QUOTE]
ya, I think beacuse we (m6) guys have to lauch so agressive, for little power. And let the car wheelie more then it seams, so we don't bog. I think its somtimes the front nose, OR somtimes its the airdam that trips the 60 lights. But its somthing that not consistent? So I just look at the 330 numbers now for adjustment. 60#s are a waste.
Try it jonathan, and see about it.
11-25-2009, 09:32 AM
#90
Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that SSPerformance is so strict on "cam only" criteria while having a "cam only" LS1 in a 94 Z28? I personally have no problem with it but it is extremely amusing to me.
Larry
Larry
11-25-2009, 09:44 AM
#91
TECH Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Norton, Ohio
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are always going to be objections and bending when rules are applied to anything "unofficial", and even most official things. I don't know how an official judgement could be made on an issue like this, and by what authority, but I think it should be done. Just to be able to say "Hey man, welcome to the fastest LS1 cam-only list, congrats" , or "Oh, whats that? 243 heads? Sorry buddy, you gotta apply to the LS6 list, wait in line over there." Haha, or something along those lines. My .02
11-25-2009, 05:03 PM
#93
haha so whats everyone got in store for next year. 