02 Z06 Cam in LQ4 6.0 Truck?
04-02-2008, 09:54 PM
#21
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NEWARK OHIO
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how does having more torque and power make it not suitable for the tranny and rear end? that doesnt even makes since, thats why you're retarded, that and you dont know how to spell
04-03-2008, 12:07 AM
#23
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Bend IN
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remembered reading that and I have the book handy. How to Build High-Performance Chevy LS1/LS6 V-8s. If you are talking about the test I'm thinking you are, it is in Chapter 8 on Gen III Vortec Truck Engine Buildups, on page 126. This is the data from a 6.0L engine with shorty headers, stock air cleaner assy & water pump. No alternator or power steering on the dyno. This test ran a baseline compression of 9.25:1, and the tests after LS6 heads bumped that to 9.915:1.
If you notice, the heads added almost 20 lb-ft across the board, but the cam gave it back below 3400 on the graph. I imagine the trend continues below that point, so you see why I would not recommend the LS6 cam for towing.
Code:
Baseline LS6 Heads LS6 Heads/Cam
TQ HP TQ HP TQ HP
3000 356 207 374 214 354 203
3200 361 220 378 231 360 219
3400 365 237 383 248 368 238
3600 370 254 390 267 378 259
3800 373 270 395 286 386 279
4000 372 284 395 301 390 297
4200 372 297 393 314 392 313
4400 371 311 391 327 395 331
4600 369 323 389 340 398 348
4800 362 331 382 349 396 362
5000 352 336 372 354 390 372
5200 339 335 359 355 382 378
5400 324 332 344 353 372 382
5600 309 329 328 349 361 385
5800 296 327 312 344 352 389
04-03-2008, 06:24 AM
#24
you obviously know nothing about towing and very little about how an engine, trans, and rear gear work together. save yourself the embarrassment and stop posting.
04-03-2008, 12:57 PM
#25
I remembered reading that and I have the book handy. How to Build High-Performance Chevy LS1/LS6 V-8s. If you are talking about the test I'm thinking you are, it is in Chapter 8 on Gen III Vortec Truck Engine Buildups, on page 126. This is the data from a 6.0L engine with shorty headers, stock air cleaner assy & water pump. No alternator or power steering on the dyno. This test ran a baseline compression of 9.25:1, and the tests after LS6 heads bumped that to 9.915:1.
If you notice, the heads added almost 20 lb-ft across the board, but the cam gave it back below 3400 on the graph. I imagine the trend continues below that point, so you see why I would not recommend the LS6 cam for towing.
Code:
Baseline LS6 Heads LS6 Heads/Cam
TQ HP TQ HP TQ HP
3000 356 207 374 214 354 203
3200 361 220 378 231 360 219
3400 365 237 383 248 368 238
3600 370 254 390 267 378 259
3800 373 270 395 286 386 279
4000 372 284 395 301 390 297
4200 372 297 393 314 392 313
4400 371 311 391 327 395 331
4600 369 323 389 340 398 348
4800 362 331 382 349 396 362
5000 352 336 372 354 390 372
5200 339 335 359 355 382 378
5400 324 332 344 353 372 382
5600 309 329 328 349 361 385
5800 296 327 312 344 352 389 good info, I like how you are backing up what you say with proven information and not just posting bs like others are doing in here... it actually brings some validity to the table and i agree with your argument.
04-03-2008, 05:23 PM
#26
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NEWARK OHIO
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actually i drive a damn semi ever day u retard, i have the mo fo revd out all over the place thats how they build power. revs build power, a turbo isnt going to spool unless ur ur putting a load on it, guess how u get a load(mexican food) and revs. and the graph i will have to say i was wrong there must have been the heads i was thinking about, so fbod only, dont be a dick, unless u have a reason
04-03-2008, 09:10 PM
#27
Staging Lane
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Stoney Creek, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ever looked at the tach on that truck you drive? Notice how it don't rev to 6000. They make loads of torque down low, and are geared to always run low. Thus the need for 18 gears. I'd like to see what happened if you tried to run it to 6000.
I agree with whoever said to get some lower gears. Also, my boss just threw a bullydog on his truck and loves the way it altered his shift pattern for towing and firmer shifts.
I agree with whoever said to get some lower gears. Also, my boss just threw a bullydog on his truck and loves the way it altered his shift pattern for towing and firmer shifts.
04-04-2008, 07:27 AM
#28
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NEWARK OHIO
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actually diesel trucks dont rev high because the internals are so heavy. and i cant remember if its the powerstroke or the duramax, i think its the duramax, but they rev to 5grand. and the new banks race motors they build also rev high, and yeah i added an s to make, good catch although that was just a mistake not actually how i think its spelled
04-04-2008, 11:55 AM
#29
Off topic, but stock duramax engines are cut-off at 3200. Diesel engines can't rev too high because of the time that combustion takes. At a point, combustion takes longer than the piston is around TDC to continue to apply pressure/leverage to the crank. Basically, the burn is slow enough that more fuel and air don't matter, it can't effectively burn it all.
I should point out that gears would really help out the truck, but one of the concerns appears to be fuel economy, and more RPM's on the highway will definitely hurt that. Also, changing gears front and rear is not going to be inexpensive. I'd guess $1,000 is probably not far off. I will tell you that friend of mine put 4.56's in his 2wd 1500 vortecMax truck, and his mileage didn't change much. As a matter of fact, his truck runs very well for what it is, but it has a 4L65e with a 3.06 first gear, instead of the 4L80 with just a 2.48 gear, and we're talking about a much heavier 2500 series 4x4 here.
I know the bigger tires look much better on that truck, but switching back to the 245's would help you out some if you don't want to change gears.
I should point out that gears would really help out the truck, but one of the concerns appears to be fuel economy, and more RPM's on the highway will definitely hurt that. Also, changing gears front and rear is not going to be inexpensive. I'd guess $1,000 is probably not far off. I will tell you that friend of mine put 4.56's in his 2wd 1500 vortecMax truck, and his mileage didn't change much. As a matter of fact, his truck runs very well for what it is, but it has a 4L65e with a 3.06 first gear, instead of the 4L80 with just a 2.48 gear, and we're talking about a much heavier 2500 series 4x4 here.
I know the bigger tires look much better on that truck, but switching back to the 245's would help you out some if you don't want to change gears.
04-05-2008, 10:34 PM
#32
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Bend IN
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Off topic, but stock duramax engines are cut-off at 3200. Diesel engines can't rev too high because of the time that combustion takes. At a point, combustion takes longer than the piston is around TDC to continue to apply pressure/leverage to the crank. Basically, the burn is slow enough that more fuel and air don't matter, it can't effectively burn it all.
I should point out that gears would really help out the truck, but one of the concerns appears to be fuel economy, and more RPM's on the highway will definitely hurt that. Also, changing gears front and rear is not going to be inexpensive. I'd guess $1,000 is probably not far off. I will tell you that friend of mine put 4.56's in his 2wd 1500 vortecMax truck, and his mileage didn't change much. As a matter of fact, his truck runs very well for what it is, but it has a 4L65e with a 3.06 first gear, instead of the 4L80 with just a 2.48 gear, and we're talking about a much heavier 2500 series 4x4 here.
I know the bigger tires look much better on that truck, but switching back to the 245's would help you out some if you don't want to change gears.
I should point out that gears would really help out the truck, but one of the concerns appears to be fuel economy, and more RPM's on the highway will definitely hurt that. Also, changing gears front and rear is not going to be inexpensive. I'd guess $1,000 is probably not far off. I will tell you that friend of mine put 4.56's in his 2wd 1500 vortecMax truck, and his mileage didn't change much. As a matter of fact, his truck runs very well for what it is, but it has a 4L65e with a 3.06 first gear, instead of the 4L80 with just a 2.48 gear, and we're talking about a much heavier 2500 series 4x4 here.
I know the bigger tires look much better on that truck, but switching back to the 245's would help you out some if you don't want to change gears.
04-06-2008, 01:18 PM
#33
yes, because you drive a truck for living you now are the information guru regarding towing. once again, if you're taching out an engine to tow, you have a problem that needs to be addressed. odds are, if you're driving a "big" truck, it probably makes peak tq @ 1,000-1,200 rpm, so if you're running it to the limiter..haha keep up the good work. by your thoery, let's throw a t-rex in this truck, it makes excellent peak numbers and definately makes the fbod cars haul ***.
04-06-2008, 10:59 PM
#36
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lincoln,NE
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree w/ hammertime. The Z06 cam will be to much duration for your app. I would have to say 1.8 rockers and shortie headers w/ catback and custom tune helped mine out the most. I tow 6000 lbs w/ mine on a regular basis.
04-07-2008, 02:17 PM
#39
Depending on local & state regulations, long tubes are usually illegal if the catalyst is not in the stock location. While shorties will never give the gains that a longtube header will, they are sometimes the best compromise between freeing up a few HP and not having to worry about failing a visual inspection.
THEBRAD, I'm trying not to resort to a personal attack here, but you have brought little technical value to this thread, and a whole lot of name calling and insults that don't really help anyone. Can you add something constructive like a graph that shows why long tubes are so much better and where they make the power? I know you posted gains earlier in the thread...
So lets see some before and after numbers
THEBRAD, I'm trying not to resort to a personal attack here, but you have brought little technical value to this thread, and a whole lot of name calling and insults that don't really help anyone. Can you add something constructive like a graph that shows why long tubes are so much better and where they make the power? I know you posted gains earlier in the thread...
So lets see some before and after numbers
04-07-2008, 10:51 PM
#40
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NEWARK OHIO
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the after numbers r in my sig the before numbers id have to find. and u just stated yourself that long tubes give more lbs and hp, i didnt think anybody would need a graph figured it was just common sense
