New LT1 for 2014 6.2l alum block
12-09-2012, 12:03 PM
#382
These two posts (https://ls1tech.com/forums/16935439-post309.html & https://ls1tech.com/forums/16937494-post314.html) pretty much sums it up for me (assuming all is true): It (the Gen V LT1) has an adaptive ECM/PCM that will dynamically accept a range of modifications and make the safest amount of power possible. What's not to love about that? It is the 90% solution for most hot rodders. With enough feedback through various sensors this thing should lead a long happy life.
The other 10%? Well as previously stated: folks who want it, will find it.
The other 10%? Well as previously stated: folks who want it, will find it.
12-09-2012, 01:34 PM
#383
Wrap those headers you have until you can afford better.
More than likely you are running forge pistons they have low silicone properties. This makes a tough piston but the down side, they will expand in the crown of the piston when hot...so more than likely you have more than .002 piston to wall clearance to allow for expanding of the piston. This isn't a problem in problem in regular gasoline. However running 100% E-85 requires the perfect piston to wall clearance. Maximum Clearance is .003 more than that normal blow by now become a problem the E-85 makes it way to the oil pan and dilutes the oil and eating the oil and non - e85 seals. Spun rod bearings, leaking seals, etc... It would take someone with an above average in math to predict the piston expanding at high temperatures to allow for proper clearance of .002 to run e-85 without any problems. Yes it can be done by a great engine builder but getting that accurate surely isn't cheap.
If your engine doesn't have these tight tolerances then just mix your 93 with E-85. Do Not Consider Running Pure E-85 unless you can meet those tolerances.
btw nice number predictions
Bigg Gunz
More than likely you are running forge pistons they have low silicone properties. This makes a tough piston but the down side, they will expand in the crown of the piston when hot...so more than likely you have more than .002 piston to wall clearance to allow for expanding of the piston. This isn't a problem in problem in regular gasoline. However running 100% E-85 requires the perfect piston to wall clearance. Maximum Clearance is .003 more than that normal blow by now become a problem the E-85 makes it way to the oil pan and dilutes the oil and eating the oil and non - e85 seals. Spun rod bearings, leaking seals, etc... It would take someone with an above average in math to predict the piston expanding at high temperatures to allow for proper clearance of .002 to run e-85 without any problems. Yes it can be done by a great engine builder but getting that accurate surely isn't cheap.
If your engine doesn't have these tight tolerances then just mix your 93 with E-85. Do Not Consider Running Pure E-85 unless you can meet those tolerances.
btw nice number predictions
Bigg Gunz
Last edited by Kingsize; 12-09-2012 at 01:56 PM.
12-09-2012, 09:14 PM
#384
Teching In
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Staten Island NY
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still wonder about a few things regarding the LT1, sorry if missed the explanations previously posted.....
With part of the ability for external tuning removed, is the existing system able to compensate for small external modifications such as long tube headers for example?
When connected to GM to resolve any problems that require it, what other data is being downloaded?........ GPS data? Recorded vehicle speeds?
After the warranty runs out, how will non GM service professionals have access to this system?
With part of the ability for external tuning removed, is the existing system able to compensate for small external modifications such as long tube headers for example?
When connected to GM to resolve any problems that require it, what other data is being downloaded?........ GPS data? Recorded vehicle speeds?
After the warranty runs out, how will non GM service professionals have access to this system?
12-09-2012, 11:45 PM
#385
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigg_Gunz,
I have read all of your posts. You are very knowledgeable and the posts are very informative. There are two specific areas for which I have questions, which I hope you can answer:
1) When you discussed the use of E-85, you mentioned that the ECM would increase duration when E-85 is used. I understand how VVT varies cam phasing, but I don’t know how it can be used to increase duration. Can you go into some specifics on this?
2) Is GM doing anything to improve rear wheel traction on the C7 to improve 0-60 performance? Will we see some rear weight bias?
I have read all of your posts. You are very knowledgeable and the posts are very informative. There are two specific areas for which I have questions, which I hope you can answer:
1) When you discussed the use of E-85, you mentioned that the ECM would increase duration when E-85 is used. I understand how VVT varies cam phasing, but I don’t know how it can be used to increase duration. Can you go into some specifics on this?
2) Is GM doing anything to improve rear wheel traction on the C7 to improve 0-60 performance? Will we see some rear weight bias?
12-10-2012, 01:22 AM
#386
Bigg_Gunz,
I have read all of your posts. You are very knowledgeable and the posts are very informative. There are two specific areas for which I have questions, which I hope you can answer:
1) When you discussed the use of E-85, you mentioned that the ECM would increase duration when E-85 is used. I understand how VVT varies cam phasing, but I don’t know how it can be used to increase duration. Can you go into some specifics on this?
2) Is GM doing anything to improve rear wheel traction on the C7 to improve 0-60 performance? Will we see some rear weight bias?
I have read all of your posts. You are very knowledgeable and the posts are very informative. There are two specific areas for which I have questions, which I hope you can answer:
1) When you discussed the use of E-85, you mentioned that the ECM would increase duration when E-85 is used. I understand how VVT varies cam phasing, but I don’t know how it can be used to increase duration. Can you go into some specifics on this?
2) Is GM doing anything to improve rear wheel traction on the C7 to improve 0-60 performance? Will we see some rear weight bias?
Bigg_Gunz is confusing duration with lobe tracking during MOP, where the cam lobe can be advanced or retarded during the lift phase to follow the cam position. A cam map is most likely written to manipulate the ramp up to MOP and down from MOP during the duration cycle to "see" more duration. Duration can not mechanically change.
12-10-2012, 07:12 AM
#387
I still wonder about a few things regarding the LT1, sorry if missed the explanations previously posted.....
With part of the ability for external tuning removed, is the existing system able to compensate for small external modifications such as long tube headers for example?
With part of the ability for external tuning removed, is the existing system able to compensate for small external modifications such as long tube headers for example?
https://ls1tech.com/forums/16962981-post382.html
12-10-2012, 08:06 AM
#388
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems that GM approves of these headers by offering on COPO Camaro, I wonder if these fill the requirements outlined by BG in this thread on LT1 ?
https://ls1tech.com/forums/gen-5-cam...g-headers.html
http://www.americanracingheaders.com...dUnlimited.htm
https://ls1tech.com/forums/gen-5-cam...g-headers.html
http://www.americanracingheaders.com...dUnlimited.htm
12-10-2012, 04:45 PM
#389
FormerVendor
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Waco, TX
Posts: 634
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For extra VOLUME in air the engine would add more fuel and more timing. A spike in EGT the engine would pull timing for sure. It's difficult to predict what the ECM would do on oxides as they due drop intake temps and burn hotter which would raise EGT. This is a grey area and I can honestly say... I don't know what would happen. Since no two oxide strikes are the same. If the ECM determine there was variables that was too radical expect 231cu in mode.
A dry shot sounds good in theory, however the ECM parameters and the oxides aren't going to play together well is my guess. But then again... I'm honestly saying. I don't know what would happen.
Bigg Gunz
A dry shot sounds good in theory, however the ECM parameters and the oxides aren't going to play together well is my guess. But then again... I'm honestly saying. I don't know what would happen.
Bigg Gunz
Hey well your the man! Thanks for all the answers. I cant wait to see the announcement of the Corvette in the next couple of weeks. Happy Holidays to you sir or ma'am (since i never caught that)!
12-10-2012, 07:49 PM
#390
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our directors and GM executives would have no problem sticking a H.O LS7 in the C7.
And a lot goes on that people do NOT know. We are talking about thousands and thousands of engineers working on the development of the C7 and then its power train would had careers, shattered reputations ruined. A brand tarnished. Any risk was too much....we works in ISO standards, 0000001% risk would have resulted in a H.O LS7 in the C7 #Fact
As a current 427 Vert owner (#140) I have a few questions regarding your comments on the 'other option' engine for the C7:
1. Are you able to provide more information on the H.O (high output?) LS7 that appears to be the plan B for the C7? Apparently not needed with release of the LT1.
2. I assume GM has invested $$ in the further developing the LS7 as an option for the C7 Corvette. Has GM given any thought to releasing the HO LS7 via GM Performance Parts? Upgrade parts for current LS7 owners; heads, cam, intake, etc???
3. With GM allowing/asking you post on this forum, why hasn't GM posted on the corvetteforum regarding the LS7 dropped valve issue? Having read ALL your posts you make it very clear a GM STOCK LS7 will not drop a valve. Seems the issue has gotten out of hand over there. Just a thought...
Thank you
Robert
12-10-2012, 09:01 PM
#391
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: inactive
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Merry Christmas to you as well sir. And I'm a man of course haha.
Take care
Bigg Gunz
12-10-2012, 09:31 PM
#392
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: inactive
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigg Gunz,
As a current 427 Vert owner (#140) I have a few questions regarding your comments on the 'other option' engine for the C7: I'm sure that is a beautiful car. Congrats on getting #140
1. Are you able to provide more information on the H.O (high output?) LS7 that appears to be the plan B for the C7? Apparently not needed with release of the LT1. Unfortunately not at the moment however as time progress our red tape is taken down, to where we can speak freely. At the moment I am unable to speak in great detail about the H.O LS7. However I can say it was considered if the FUEL TABLES could not be LOCK in fashion to prevent aftermarket tampering.
2. I assume GM has invested $$ in the further developing the LS7 as an option for the C7 Corvette. Has GM given any thought to releasing the HO LS7 via GM Performance Parts? Upgrade parts for current LS7 owners; heads, cam, intake, etc??? The LS7 is a race engine make no mistake about it. The engine really only needs a few minor 3 external modifications and 1 modification internally. EGT+AFR TUNE for the ECU. That is all I am allowed to say.
3. With GM allowing/asking you post on this forum, why hasn't GM posted on the corvetteforum regarding the LS7 dropped valve issue? Having read ALL your posts you make it very clear a GM STOCK LS7 will not drop a valve. Seems the issue has gotten out of hand over there. Just a thought... 1.There is no dropping valve issue with in the LS7, or the LS7 would have been recalled. I've covered this within this thread before I'll say it again. Metal is not bias for GM OR THE CUSTOMER...Metal tells a story just like any other accident (plane crash, car crash, etc) Experts or the engineers that designed the plane or car etc are called in to figure out the cause and effect of the accident. A stock LS7 will ONLY drop a valve during "down shift/over revving" to 8125 RPM's this is beyond the computer capability and beyond the valve springs specs. The Valve will throw in the towel and let go. 2. A LS7 will drop a valve if "POORLY DESIGNED CHEAP HEADERS" are applied which causes higher EGT -200.00f or +200.00'F over 1300'f degrees. Combined this with AFR TUNED that hasn't combined EGT tuning. Yes the VALVE will deformed .003 due to heat stress and fatigue, it's going to throw in the towel. GM cannot and will not cover this aftermarket modification. WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER THIS. We know what the damage looks like there is tell tell signs all over the engine. There is no problem with the LS7 in OEM form. When a person goes into modifications that person is own his own, make all recommended changes by that parts supplier and the installer.
Thank you
Robert
As a current 427 Vert owner (#140) I have a few questions regarding your comments on the 'other option' engine for the C7: I'm sure that is a beautiful car. Congrats on getting #140
1. Are you able to provide more information on the H.O (high output?) LS7 that appears to be the plan B for the C7? Apparently not needed with release of the LT1. Unfortunately not at the moment however as time progress our red tape is taken down, to where we can speak freely. At the moment I am unable to speak in great detail about the H.O LS7. However I can say it was considered if the FUEL TABLES could not be LOCK in fashion to prevent aftermarket tampering.
2. I assume GM has invested $$ in the further developing the LS7 as an option for the C7 Corvette. Has GM given any thought to releasing the HO LS7 via GM Performance Parts? Upgrade parts for current LS7 owners; heads, cam, intake, etc??? The LS7 is a race engine make no mistake about it. The engine really only needs a few minor 3 external modifications and 1 modification internally. EGT+AFR TUNE for the ECU. That is all I am allowed to say.
3. With GM allowing/asking you post on this forum, why hasn't GM posted on the corvetteforum regarding the LS7 dropped valve issue? Having read ALL your posts you make it very clear a GM STOCK LS7 will not drop a valve. Seems the issue has gotten out of hand over there. Just a thought... 1.There is no dropping valve issue with in the LS7, or the LS7 would have been recalled. I've covered this within this thread before I'll say it again. Metal is not bias for GM OR THE CUSTOMER...Metal tells a story just like any other accident (plane crash, car crash, etc) Experts or the engineers that designed the plane or car etc are called in to figure out the cause and effect of the accident. A stock LS7 will ONLY drop a valve during "down shift/over revving" to 8125 RPM's this is beyond the computer capability and beyond the valve springs specs. The Valve will throw in the towel and let go. 2. A LS7 will drop a valve if "POORLY DESIGNED CHEAP HEADERS" are applied which causes higher EGT -200.00f or +200.00'F over 1300'f degrees. Combined this with AFR TUNED that hasn't combined EGT tuning. Yes the VALVE will deformed .003 due to heat stress and fatigue, it's going to throw in the towel. GM cannot and will not cover this aftermarket modification. WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER THIS. We know what the damage looks like there is tell tell signs all over the engine. There is no problem with the LS7 in OEM form. When a person goes into modifications that person is own his own, make all recommended changes by that parts supplier and the installer.
Thank you
Robert
Last edited by Bigg_Gunz; 12-10-2012 at 10:06 PM.
12-11-2012, 12:46 AM
#393
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 4,354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not the fault of the engineers or the consumers. was a manufacturing flaw.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...confirmed.html
12-11-2012, 02:52 AM
#394
GM reps already admitted that there was a machining issue with the ones that dropped valves. not headers, not over revs, it was an OEM flaw.
not the fault of the engineers or the consumers. was a manufacturing flaw.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...confirmed.html
not the fault of the engineers or the consumers. was a manufacturing flaw.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...confirmed.html
12-11-2012, 08:08 AM
#395
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: inactive
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM reps already admitted that there was a machining issue with the ones that dropped valves. not headers, not over revs, it was an OEM flaw.
not the fault of the engineers or the consumers. was a manufacturing flaw.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...confirmed.html
not the fault of the engineers or the consumers. was a manufacturing flaw.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-z...confirmed.html
The fox in the hen house, gives the flock anxiety and shock. This is nothing more than culminating anxiety among many that the situation with the valves letting go on all LS7 engines. Which is purely untrue,this is why engines have a warranty. When defects occur they can be replaced.
Bigg Gunz
12-11-2012, 09:30 AM
#396
i skipped allot of pages but its the same on every website.
The name : LT1 = stupid, the only people who like it are a handful of lt1 owners on various sites. and like i said that only a handful. most lt1 owners and lsx owners dont like the name
GM-- be ******* creative and use a new name or rpo code or something, jeez
Tuning: Now Big GUnz has said it wont be tunable.
as a programmer who has done network security tasks, i can say thats the funniest thing ive ever read. Really almost spit pepsi at the screen from laughing so hard.
I love it when someone says something not hackable(govt ****), or breakable, or sinkable(titanic)
then people like me come along and actually hack something, then all the nay sayers fade away and you never hear about them again.
There will be tuning. of that you can be sure, someone will make it happen, so you can keep talking about your servers and keys and fuel tables and saftey all day but your talking to a brick wall.
cheers
-Nick ..... the last ls1 owner lol
The name : LT1 = stupid, the only people who like it are a handful of lt1 owners on various sites. and like i said that only a handful. most lt1 owners and lsx owners dont like the name
GM-- be ******* creative and use a new name or rpo code or something, jeez
Tuning: Now Big GUnz has said it wont be tunable.
as a programmer who has done network security tasks, i can say thats the funniest thing ive ever read. Really almost spit pepsi at the screen from laughing so hard.
I love it when someone says something not hackable(govt ****), or breakable, or sinkable(titanic)
then people like me come along and actually hack something, then all the nay sayers fade away and you never hear about them again.
There will be tuning. of that you can be sure, someone will make it happen, so you can keep talking about your servers and keys and fuel tables and saftey all day but your talking to a brick wall.
cheers
-Nick ..... the last ls1 owner lol
12-11-2012, 01:36 PM
#397
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 4,354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again if there was a problem with the LS7 engine it would have recalled. There is NOT a problem with the LS7 engine. There is NO design issue with the LS7 HEADS. GM admitting there was a defect from the supplier. Which was corrected, and all 33 effected engines that dropped the valve due to this were replaced. And once again after receiving the engine with drop valves, of course it is inspected to determine the causes, a machining defect from the supplier was determined. This has nothing to do with the engineering a design. This is NOT A DESIGN FLAW in the LS7 layout. And yes a LS7 engine will drop a valve from excessive heated attributed by "poor designed headers" and "down shifting." We know what details and clues to look for which this happens.
The fox in the hen house, gives the flock anxiety and shock. This is nothing more than culminating anxiety among many that the situation with the valves letting go on all LS7 engines. Which is purely untrue,this is why engines have a warranty. When defects occur they can be replaced.
Bigg Gunz
The fox in the hen house, gives the flock anxiety and shock. This is nothing more than culminating anxiety among many that the situation with the valves letting go on all LS7 engines. Which is purely untrue,this is why engines have a warranty. When defects occur they can be replaced.
Bigg Gunz
12-11-2012, 01:56 PM
#398
12 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 5.0
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
some kid in croatia hacked the unhackable iphone4 in what, a week? lol i think in two years we'll be in the tables.
none the less my mom will probably buy the new LT1 camaro
12-11-2012, 03:14 PM
#399
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Pinetop, AZ
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure if it's an age related thing, but some of you guys are just disrespectful jackasses.
The guy may not be your cup of tea, but he's here giving us some updated info and you guys think it's your place to give him a rash. I'm not getting it?
The guy may not be your cup of tea, but he's here giving us some updated info and you guys think it's your place to give him a rash. I'm not getting it?
12-11-2012, 03:50 PM
#400
12 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 5.0
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are lot of educated people here. Is it weird that people get offended when someone is offers their knowledge at a cost?
Yes it is a nice gesture, and I am happy he is here, but why not be a little humble? We are VERY good customers.