ugod02010

Hey guys just wondering what everyone thinks would be a good next step for my 95 formula
So far it has acell24 lb injectors
MSD coil
New opti
Cold air intake
Flowmaster catback(40or44 series muffler)
3.73 gears and a stall not sure what the actual stall speed is
I am thinking either pacesetter LTs with a ORY or should I put 1.6 full roller rockers on for my next mod since both are gonna be around the same price.
Also with stock internals what would be the biggest yet safest shot of n20 I could run while keeping it reliable as it is my daily driver?

ugod02010

I am mostly wondering if anyone has any dyno results from adding bigger rockers /springs
Or a result from just the headers

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

If the valves are floating early as is common with aged stock valvesprings then a spring swap can let it keep making power to the limiter, something cheap like the LT4 springs is fine.

cardo0

Dyno results cost like $500/hr. Not many have that much time and cash to spend for each mod. But to make power u will need headers. While the only improvement to stock heads while on the car is larger ratio rockers then better springs is a must for those. So headers are near $500 and rockers with new springs can be another $500 when all said and done. With dyno time thats twice as much for each mod. If u want reliable information u can buy books and read results from experts like D. Vizard, TPIS, D. Emanuel and John Lingenfelter (RIP) for less than 20 bucks.
But with the weak stock LT1 vlv springs, i expect 1.6 rockers will make less power that stock rockers unless u upgrade the springs. BTW those cheapie LT4 vlv springs are engineered to work with much lighter hollow LT4 vlvs and others have posted here bad results when installed on the LT1 head - do a forum search. If your spending the time and money go for spring designed for the LT1 head and vlvs.
And there are soo many different headers out there u can't expect anyone to have tried them all let alone record the results. Short tube, mid length, long tube headers made by a dozen different manufactures. I can tell u this my NOx exhaust gas increased at smog time with just my using shorty Edelbrock headers due to the extra scavenging and proved reduced backpressure using even shorty headers. But my 1/4 mile time went down because i raced at 2,500' higher altitude on a 100*F day so i never saw results to brag about.

If u decide to dyno after your mod please post your results,
cardo

94NDTA

LTs or converter if it is an auto.

ugod02010

I was told it already had the converter. It has 3.73s also already so she is already a blast to drive. I def. see what your saying about the dyno. The closest one to me is probably an hr and a half. So I won't be heading over anytime soon. Same with the strip I am about an hr away from keystone down in Pittsburg. Just looking to see if people had some real world experiences to share. That's damn good to know about the LT4 spring b/c I damn near bought them. That's exactly the reason I made this thread.

ugod02010

I read somewhere about those edlebrock shorties actually holding the cars back too everyone seems to say long tubes but are they worth the extra 200$ over the mid tube pacesetters.

Tbird232ci

iTrader: (4)

I've been running 1.6 roller rockers and LT4 springs without an issues for over 60K miles. You have to keep in mind, yes the LT4 springs are designed to run with lighter valves, but they're also designed to be run with a more aggressive cam than out LT1 cam AND designed for 1.6 roller rockers. You won't be taxing those springs nearly as bad with just the roller rockers as you would with a LT4 cam and the roller rockers with heavy valves.

As far as the headers and y-pipe, do it. Most of the time, when doing the headers, we put in new, poly motor mounts, do new spark plugs, and set up the plug wires to go over the valve covers, so while you're doing headers, you're addressing a few other wear items in the process. Not to mention, with headers, it's much easier to change spark plugs. Most people, including myself, would tell you to ditch the Flowmaster. They're known to be the more restrictive exhaust for these cars. If you have the budget to get a new catback, but still want the Flowmaster-ish sound, I'd suggest a Hooker catback. I love mine.

I blew the headgaskets in my car a while back, so in the process, I put in 1.6 roller rockers, LT4 springs, guide plates, hardened pushrods, put Pacesetters, Y-pipe and Hooker catback, cold air intake, and a tune. Compared to stock, the car felt like a monster. The mods are probably the best you can do for the money, and help support more power in the future.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Your comments would be accurate if he were talking about putting in a HOT cam , you are completely wrong when it comes to a STOCK cam with 1.6 rockers, for that the LT4 springs are a very good reliable reasonably priced option. Some folks even do use the LT4 springs with a HOT cam and the heavier LT1 valves and never realize they could have done better because it runs "good enough". The LT1 cam is a lot milder which means the heavier valves aren't an issue.

The original poster should take this as a lesson on not to blindly trust folks.

Far as a spring designed for LT1 heads, is that a joke?, springs aren't designed for heads, especially not a low production bastard child of an engine. Springs fit a variety of applications and you need to pick one that physically fits and has appropriate rates for the given valvetrain and rpm.

Jason94z

iTrader: (3)

Headers and spray it 150 wet shot. Nitrous Outlet makes good LT1 kits.
Nicely tuned it will last a long time.

cardo0

If the LT4 springs were strong enough they would be my first choice and i would put them on my car as this was my first impression - the seat press and bind height are a good match. But i was talked out the LT4 on LT1 vlvs from posts on another forum (KW Baraka and others: http://www.ls1lt1.com/forum/lt1-|-lt...hot-cam-2.html). I don't see how conservative advice can possibly be bad advice as i wouldn't want to advise too weak a spring to anyone. But if u have dyno graphs to prove it then please post them but until u can then what both of us post is nothing but someone else's advice - hearsay. And with that i post conservative.
And yes vlv springs can have dedicated applications. Look at any of the cam mfs cataloges for LT1 vlv springs. Isky, Comp, Lunati, Crane as several have dedicated vlv springs and part numbers. But yes some are also sharedwith other applications but when u shop for LT1 vlv springs are you going to look for L98 head springs?

cardo

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

I no longer have the dyno , so can't send you the graph. Since people endlessly asked what something was worth, we bought a lot of stuff to test like that. My '95 Camaro test car hot a set of 1.6 Comp rocker one afternoon. John made a couple of baseline pulls, it repeated dead nuts. (Always did, good test mule), so he installed the rockers, siting right there on the dyno. Results showed about $100.00 per rwhp gain. 3 rwhp gained for about $300.00.

Kinda like taking the guard bars out of your doors.

I would save the rocker change for a cam install.

A tune made a hell of a lot more difference.

A 160 'stat made more difference.

cardo0

So lets take another look at those spring specs. The LT4 has a lower spring rate (332lb/in vs 373lb/in for the LT1 and probably matches the lighter LT4 vlvs) than the LT1 spring even though the LT4 spring has higher installed/seat press (101# vs 85#).
So when we crunch all the numbers the LT4 spring has only 263.5# exh and 259.3# intk open press where the LT1 spring has 267.6# exh and 262.8# intk open press. So which spring do u think will better control the vlv at higher rpm???

Take it for what its worth but myself i would look elsewhere to replace the LT1 springs. Easiest way is to use a cam mfrs catalog and look up LT1 vlv springs. I do read a lot of posts where the LS6 beehive is becoming popular but may not be easy for a novice to select the correct springs, retainers and shims.

This some interesting discussion and i am learning more here myself.
Good luck and please post your results,
cardo

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

If the lifter gets thrown over the nose of the cam that can be extra lift, called "lofting" often done intentianally in cam restricted racing classes.

The valve float that hurts power is when the valve bounces back off the seat allowing the intake charge to try and go back out the intake valve. So higher seat pressure is what you need.

I can try and find the thread by one of Bauer's victims one of the guys that got a square lobe cam tried like 3 sets of springs trying to control it and tried the same seat pressure with more over the nose despite several of us saying that was not going to help. It didn't and he eventually did get it temporarily under control with more seat pressure but eventually swapped the cam.

cardo0

From Crane Cams catalog:

Consider the following possibility:
A vehicle owner wants to use a .520" valve lift camshaft in an application
and is considering different valve springs.
Spring A has an installed pressure of 125# at 1.750" installed height and has
a rate of 280#/in.
Spring B has an installed pressure of 115# at 1.750" installed height with a
rate of 410#/in.
At .520" lift, Spring A has an open pressure of 271# (this is 125# of seat pressure
plus [.520" x 280#/in] = 146# from spring compression). At .520" lift,
Spring B has an open pressure of 328# (this is 115# of seat pressure plus
[.520" x 410#/in] = 213# from spring compression). Both of these springs
would work on a street performance application requiring good performance
and reliability. However,.... Spring B would probably provide better performance above 6000
RPM (especially with relatively heavy valves) because of its higher open
pressure of 328#. Spring A would probably idle a little smoother with higher
vacuum, especially if a high pressure oil pump or thicker oil is used. This is
a result of Spring A's higher seat pressure of 125#.

Do u know more about vlv springs than Crane Cams
cardo

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

get over it, you don't understand the topic. I made a solid statement on why you were wrong and you dug around to find a generic bit of info you want to apply here.

Notice your generic excerpt uses the term "probably" several times..........

cardo0

U need mental help. U read some hi-tech trick that NASCAR uses with mountains of engineering experience, equipment, testing and monetary support then think u can talk Bubba into believing u know what your doing. And as usual u continue to come up with advice that someone else did or says - just hearsay. And u hate it when someone posts facts from real documented expertice. Your head is full of what someone else said or did and are too self rightous to admit error. If u have facts then post them or just shut up but u don't because u can't.
That fact is the LT4 spring has less open pressure than the LT1 spring which itself has a lousy reputation but u want to perpetuate u think the LT4spring works good enough. Did ever stop to think why no one just sells the LT4 spring for an upgrade to the LT1? At least GMPP?

I am over it. I am even more so convinced the LT4 spring is a bad replacement for the LT1 spring - after searching this again,
cardo

93M6Formula

I'm pretty sure I saw somewhere that if you go to GM and order springs for an LT1, they give you LT4 springs...

Anyway back on topic...

OP, is there any reason you have Accel injectors? I've "heard" but don't quote me that they are a pain to deal with when it comes time to tune your car. If have your stock injectors, i'd put them back in personally. You will have to upgrade eventually anyway if you decide to do heads and cam in the future.

Pacesetter LT's are decent, LPP is making headers again for these so look into them also.
I would ditch the flowmaster too, I'm not a fan of the sound of them on an LT1 myself, just preferance I suppose. The Hooker Aerochamber catback sounds great and is a fair price.

As said above, Nitrous Outlet makes a nice kit for these and other cars.

cardo0

So saying i order an LT1 vlv spring #10206040 then i would get an LT4 vlv spring #125551483 instead? That would be against the law as an unfair trade practice. Well with that logic how bout i order an LT1 engine then will i get an LS1 or LS2 instead? Man either GM is gonna go bankrupt again from lawsuits or get plenty of business selling LT1 motors.


So i can't help but to laugh at someone suggesting valve lofting on street cam/vlv train. NASCAR has used this for years now and maybe the know how has even tricked down to some of the lesser racing classes that don't have Spintron vlv train test setups with high speed cameras using time elapse photography to analyze a vlv train combos. And maybe even a couple of village idiots will claim they attempted this on a street car. So before i opened my mouth i searched the catalogs of Comp, Crane, Lunati, GMPP and Isky for "valve lofting". Nope, no cams are advertized as "lofting" cams or any tech reports for that trick tech. All i find is a definition of "valve float" by Isky: VaLVE FLOaT: A detrimental condition caused by over revving of the engine, or by inadequate spring pressure, resulting in a lag of the valve gear components where they fail to follow the dictates of the cam profile. Under this condition the valve is a greater distance off its seat than it normally would be, causing a loss in compression and power as well as
possible damage to the engine if the floating valve strikes the oncoming piston.
So who wants to use less open pressure for thier LT1 vlvs??

Good luck with that,
cardo

93M6Formula

Dude give it up....

It's the same thing as when you order LT1 lifters too....You will receive LS7 lifters. Whats the big deal? You're saying you would be pissed to receive better than factory springs? That makes sense.....

Sorry to derail the thread OP.