LS1 aircraft engine
12-29-2003, 01:49 PM
#21
Chop-Foo Director
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Haymarket, Virginia
Posts: 4,709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Make sure you keep us updated on this project in the "Conversion and Hybrids"
section of this site. You'll probably get some help in there as well, not that its
been done here, but it's a good forum for resources. (Like this whole site!)
section of this site. You'll probably get some help in there as well, not that its
been done here, but it's a good forum for resources. (Like this whole site!)
12-29-2003, 02:54 PM
#22
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your Welcome,
You might also consider the type of exhaust your will be using.
In this prototype the exhaust temps were quite high causing the O2s to assume the AFR was much leaner then it was, in fact it might be better to tune the PCM for MAP (speed density) and not even use O2s and MAF.
If using the MAF I suggest you use at least a 01 or newer F-body PCM that was flashed for a manual trannie, less issues then in functions a auto trannie has to the PCM. This at least then was designed for a 85 mm MAF and not the older 75 mm.
Also PCM does some things as to what the MPH is and I assume your not going to be using the VSS signal that a car trannie inputs to the PCM so you again need to tune the PCM for those issues.
You might also consider the type of exhaust your will be using.
In this prototype the exhaust temps were quite high causing the O2s to assume the AFR was much leaner then it was, in fact it might be better to tune the PCM for MAP (speed density) and not even use O2s and MAF.
If using the MAF I suggest you use at least a 01 or newer F-body PCM that was flashed for a manual trannie, less issues then in functions a auto trannie has to the PCM. This at least then was designed for a 85 mm MAF and not the older 75 mm.
Also PCM does some things as to what the MPH is and I assume your not going to be using the VSS signal that a car trannie inputs to the PCM so you again need to tune the PCM for those issues.
Originally Posted by org
That all makes sense. Sounds like they were trying to make the whole setup do more than it could. Turning a rotor AND a prop would take a lot of power even at idle. Thanks for the clarification.
My application will turn a propeller through a chain drive 2 to 1 reduction, so it won't have all the parasitic stuff they had. The altitudes I plan to operate at won't exceed 17,000 feet, so I won't need a turbo. I'm not sure how much torque is needed to turn the prop at idle (500 prop rpm/1000 engine) but it won't be much, since the prop will be pretty flat at idle. Several people are running small and big block chevy engines with similar setups, and one guy is flying a couple of seaplanes with a stock LS1 and LS6. I'm not sure how he set up the PCMs, but he' flown several hundred hours with no problems. I have a different speed range and will need a different reduction setup since his is a pusher, but that shouldn't make any difference to the computer.
Thanks again for the clarification; sounds like the config you saw was completely different than mine.
My application will turn a propeller through a chain drive 2 to 1 reduction, so it won't have all the parasitic stuff they had. The altitudes I plan to operate at won't exceed 17,000 feet, so I won't need a turbo. I'm not sure how much torque is needed to turn the prop at idle (500 prop rpm/1000 engine) but it won't be much, since the prop will be pretty flat at idle. Several people are running small and big block chevy engines with similar setups, and one guy is flying a couple of seaplanes with a stock LS1 and LS6. I'm not sure how he set up the PCMs, but he' flown several hundred hours with no problems. I have a different speed range and will need a different reduction setup since his is a pusher, but that shouldn't make any difference to the computer.
Thanks again for the clarification; sounds like the config you saw was completely different than mine.
12-29-2003, 03:19 PM
#23
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PendragonZ
Make sure you keep us updated on this project in the "Conversion and Hybrids"
section of this site. You'll probably get some help in there as well, not that its
been done here, but it's a good forum for resources. (Like this whole site!)
section of this site. You'll probably get some help in there as well, not that its
been done here, but it's a good forum for resources. (Like this whole site!)
12-29-2003, 03:32 PM
#24
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Team ZR-1
Your Welcome,
You might also consider the type of exhaust your will be using.
In this prototype the exhaust temps were quite high causing the O2s to assume the AFR was much leaner then it was, in fact it might be better to tune the PCM for MAP (speed density) and not even use O2s and MAF.
If using the MAF I suggest you use at least a 01 or newer F-body PCM that was flashed for a manual trannie, less issues then in functions a auto trannie has to the PCM. This at least then was designed for a 85 mm MAF and not the older 75 mm.
Also PCM does some things as to what the MPH is and I assume your not going to be using the VSS signal that a car trannie inputs to the PCM so you again need to tune the PCM for those issues.
You might also consider the type of exhaust your will be using.
In this prototype the exhaust temps were quite high causing the O2s to assume the AFR was much leaner then it was, in fact it might be better to tune the PCM for MAP (speed density) and not even use O2s and MAF.
If using the MAF I suggest you use at least a 01 or newer F-body PCM that was flashed for a manual trannie, less issues then in functions a auto trannie has to the PCM. This at least then was designed for a 85 mm MAF and not the older 75 mm.
Also PCM does some things as to what the MPH is and I assume your not going to be using the VSS signal that a car trannie inputs to the PCM so you again need to tune the PCM for those issues.
Not being knowledgable on the computer functions, I'm guessing I won't need anything but FI control, ignition control, knock sensor, fuel pump relay, and maybe check engine light. Like I said, I don't know a whole lot about the LS1 setup, and that's why I'm here. Basically, I guess my setup will operate much like a marine engine.
Would it be easier to use the GM standalone computer/harness that comes with the crate engine? Would that do what I'm looking for without a lot of wire cutting/splicing?
I'll need the Camaro fuel injection since I'd like to not use a return line, and I believe that's what's on the crate engine.
Thanks.
Last edited by org; 12-29-2003 at 03:33 PM. Reason: spelling
12-29-2003, 04:54 PM
#25
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS1 powered Kitplanes Feel free to e-mail me at jjjcabi@yahoo.com , I can e-mail you a pic of the Jaguar and what the original Rodeck (Chevy-350) Aluminum block looks like. LS1 has different firing order and runs smoother, better for aircraft apps.
Talley-Ho!
Cabi~
Talley-Ho!
Cabi~
Originally Posted by org
Thanks, Cabi, I'll look into it.
12-29-2003, 05:06 PM
#26
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS1 Airplane engines All you 2-dimensional gearheads trying to rain on this guy's parade about putting an LS1 in a scaled replica of a P-51 need to offer an apologoy! There are LS1s flying in Kitplanes as I type (I have a LS1 powered kitplane in my garage being built) and the prototypes and several are already out there flying with a cruise airspeed of 250-300MPH on a modest stroker 383cid LS1, with a Vne(Max structural speed) of 350MPH with the LS1/Rodeck block! If you don't believe me, I have a video tape of the project to prove it too! Vortech supercharged for 350+hp from zero-to-25,000'
Cabi~
ps...BTW, I also fly a 70mph Piper Cub!
Cabi~
ps...BTW, I also fly a 70mph Piper Cub!
Originally Posted by CamaroSS
I uhhhhhh hate to break it to you but a 350hp WWII era plane + a very slow piece of machinery! The old P-51 Ds used to have upwards of 1700hp. One good thing about your scale replica is that you can take out all war time weapons, shields, and also the fact the a 346ci LS1 weighs much less then a 1500+ci V-12 Merlin engine. I hope you took these into consideration as my friend didn't when his father built a full scale replica of a P40 ended up with no more performance then a Piper Cub. :haha: Hope it turns out great!
Last edited by cabi; 12-29-2003 at 05:15 PM.
01-02-2004, 05:07 PM
#27
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello again, everybody. With the research I've done, it appears the LS1 with some mods is a pretty good way to go. In order to end up with an equal weight engine, a small block would be more expensive and require more workarounds to make it work as well as a LS1 with computer mods.
I'm thinking that getting a 2000 up (so the bore can be cleaned up well) LS1 complete engine/PCM/engine harness in rebuildable condition with all belt driven accesories, starter, and FI will allow me to have a 340+ horsepower engine with a good torque curve and strong bottom end. An Eagle forged 3.75 crank, aftermarket rods, and forged pistons will be around $2000. Machine work on the block, balancing, etc another $700-$1000 (??), a new set of 6.0 heads $500 or so, and rework of the harness and computer $?. A cam set up for peak torque at 3500rpm or so would complete the package. This engine would NEVER see more than 4800 to 5000 rpm.
The 6.0 heads might not make sense to some of you, but I'm not after absolute power numbers, and it makes sense to have a 9.5 compression ratio rather than have the engine on the edge of detonation all the time. You'd never hear detonation in an unmuffled airplane (at least not until the final BIG detonation. Since the 6.0 heads flow well and provide a CR cushion, I think they'd be good in this application.
A few questions: Are there any compromises with stroking the engine more than 3.75"? Is the piston pin position still well below the rings? How about block clearance? How far can I go without having to grind the block?
Do the 6.0 heads have all the accessory mounting holes of the LS1 heads
Are there any cooling mods that work well on this engine, or is it already optimized?
I'll need a F body engine due to the non return type FI and the placement of the accesories. What can I expect to pay, if anyone has an opinion? (especially if somebody lives in Colorado, this info would be welcome.)
If I'm wrong, let me know. If I've missed something, ditto.
Thanks.
I'm thinking that getting a 2000 up (so the bore can be cleaned up well) LS1 complete engine/PCM/engine harness in rebuildable condition with all belt driven accesories, starter, and FI will allow me to have a 340+ horsepower engine with a good torque curve and strong bottom end. An Eagle forged 3.75 crank, aftermarket rods, and forged pistons will be around $2000. Machine work on the block, balancing, etc another $700-$1000 (??), a new set of 6.0 heads $500 or so, and rework of the harness and computer $?. A cam set up for peak torque at 3500rpm or so would complete the package. This engine would NEVER see more than 4800 to 5000 rpm.
The 6.0 heads might not make sense to some of you, but I'm not after absolute power numbers, and it makes sense to have a 9.5 compression ratio rather than have the engine on the edge of detonation all the time. You'd never hear detonation in an unmuffled airplane (at least not until the final BIG detonation
. Since the 6.0 heads flow well and provide a CR cushion, I think they'd be good in this application.A few questions: Are there any compromises with stroking the engine more than 3.75"? Is the piston pin position still well below the rings? How about block clearance? How far can I go without having to grind the block?
Do the 6.0 heads have all the accessory mounting holes of the LS1 heads
Are there any cooling mods that work well on this engine, or is it already optimized?
I'll need a F body engine due to the non return type FI and the placement of the accesories. What can I expect to pay, if anyone has an opinion? (especially if somebody lives in Colorado, this info would be welcome.)
If I'm wrong, let me know. If I've missed something, ditto.
Thanks.
01-03-2004, 01:13 AM
#28
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey org, I'm far from the most experienced LS1'er at this site, but I know a bit about planes and a bit about LS1s. Sounds like a great project. I'd be more than happy to help out in any way I can with this project so feel free to get in touch with me at any time.
As far as the engine goes, I might be a bit concerned about running a heavily cammed engine in an airplane, just on the basis of low power to high power changes such as on a go-around... or even idle characteristics while in flight. Also, have you thought about a roots style blower? That should probably fit in a P-51 style cowl if you're looking for a bit more horsepower.
Anyway, I'd love to hear more about this. I personally can't get enough of either airplanes or cars. Good luck.
Garrett
As far as the engine goes, I might be a bit concerned about running a heavily cammed engine in an airplane, just on the basis of low power to high power changes such as on a go-around... or even idle characteristics while in flight. Also, have you thought about a roots style blower? That should probably fit in a P-51 style cowl if you're looking for a bit more horsepower.
Anyway, I'd love to hear more about this. I personally can't get enough of either airplanes or cars. Good luck.
Garrett
01-04-2004, 01:02 AM
#29
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by org
Hello again, everybody. With the research I've done, it appears the LS1 with some mods is a pretty good way to go. In order to end up with an equal weight engine, a small block would be more expensive and require more workarounds to make it work as well as a LS1 with computer mods.
I'm thinking that getting a 2000 up (so the bore can be cleaned up well) LS1 complete engine/PCM/engine harness in rebuildable condition with all belt driven accesories, starter, and FI will allow me to have a 340+ horsepower engine with a good torque curve and strong bottom end. An Eagle forged 3.75 crank, aftermarket rods, and forged pistons will be around $2000. Machine work on the block, balancing, etc another $700-$1000 (??), a new set of 6.0 heads $500 or so, and rework of the harness and computer $?. A cam set up for peak torque at 3500rpm or so would complete the package. This engine would NEVER see more than 4800 to 5000 rpm.
The 6.0 heads might not make sense to some of you, but I'm not after absolute power numbers, and it makes sense to have a 9.5 compression ratio rather than have the engine on the edge of detonation all the time. You'd never hear detonation in an unmuffled airplane (at least not until the final BIG detonation. Since the 6.0 heads flow well and provide a CR cushion, I think they'd be good in this application.
A few questions: Are there any compromises with stroking the engine more than 3.75"? Is the piston pin position still well below the rings? How about block clearance? How far can I go without having to grind the block?
Do the 6.0 heads have all the accessory mounting holes of the LS1 heads
Are there any cooling mods that work well on this engine, or is it already optimized?
I'll need a F body engine due to the non return type FI and the placement of the accesories. What can I expect to pay, if anyone has an opinion? (especially if somebody lives in Colorado, this info would be welcome.)
If I'm wrong, let me know. If I've missed something, ditto.
Thanks.
I'm thinking that getting a 2000 up (so the bore can be cleaned up well) LS1 complete engine/PCM/engine harness in rebuildable condition with all belt driven accesories, starter, and FI will allow me to have a 340+ horsepower engine with a good torque curve and strong bottom end. An Eagle forged 3.75 crank, aftermarket rods, and forged pistons will be around $2000. Machine work on the block, balancing, etc another $700-$1000 (??), a new set of 6.0 heads $500 or so, and rework of the harness and computer $?. A cam set up for peak torque at 3500rpm or so would complete the package. This engine would NEVER see more than 4800 to 5000 rpm.
The 6.0 heads might not make sense to some of you, but I'm not after absolute power numbers, and it makes sense to have a 9.5 compression ratio rather than have the engine on the edge of detonation all the time. You'd never hear detonation in an unmuffled airplane (at least not until the final BIG detonation
. Since the 6.0 heads flow well and provide a CR cushion, I think they'd be good in this application.A few questions: Are there any compromises with stroking the engine more than 3.75"? Is the piston pin position still well below the rings? How about block clearance? How far can I go without having to grind the block?
Do the 6.0 heads have all the accessory mounting holes of the LS1 heads
Are there any cooling mods that work well on this engine, or is it already optimized?
I'll need a F body engine due to the non return type FI and the placement of the accesories. What can I expect to pay, if anyone has an opinion? (especially if somebody lives in Colorado, this info would be welcome.)
If I'm wrong, let me know. If I've missed something, ditto.
Thanks.
If you want to keep your LS1 Kitplane application simple, I recommend you forgo the computer and FI system and use the tried/true Airflow Performance Aircraft mechanical/manual-controlled fuel injection system. If you run AvGas(100LL) your probability of detonation goes down significantly - practically Nil! You can also use dual distributor ignition, or even use Automotive Magneto systems! This makes for less complex airplane motors... This way, your airplane & engine will "act" like a normal aircraft setup. Afterall, you're not going to drag race your scale P-51? Cooling hasn't yet been an issue on the LS1 applications I know of, although it could happen?
Cabi~
01-06-2004, 11:51 PM
#30
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cabi... I've got to say that I don't believe it would be safe to run straight 100LL in an LS1. I know for a fact that there is an issue with the 02 sensors when running leaded fuel, but for some reason, I want to say that 100LL also leads to large amounts of lead to deposit on the valves, causing sealing issues... Truthfully, this is kinda outta left field, seeing as I am not sure about the valve issue, but I do remember discussing it with one of the A&Ps I've worked with and it seems to me that that came up during the conversation...
01-10-2004, 01:40 AM
#31
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pimpmaro
Cabi... I've got to say that I don't believe it would be safe to run straight 100LL in an LS1. I know for a fact that there is an issue with the 02 sensors when running leaded fuel, but for some reason, I want to say that 100LL also leads to large amounts of lead to deposit on the valves, causing sealing issues... Truthfully, this is kinda outta left field, seeing as I am not sure about the valve issue, but I do remember discussing it with one of the A&Ps I've worked with and it seems to me that that came up during the conversation...
If there is NO O2 sensor, how would it affect the engine using 100LL? The LS1s I speak of, used in my Kitplanes, don't use the stock computer or EFI system, nor does it use the stock ignition system! It uses an Aircraft FI system (Airflow Performance) There is one chap who uses a custom computer controlled LS1, and is doing well with it - he uses 100LL. All the O2 sensor does is gives an error input signal for the computer to "fine tune" the fuel/air ratio scheduling of the stock automotive EFI and ignition timing. If that computer and EFI is not there, there is NO need for an O2 sensor. However, I will tell you that they DO sell O2 sensors for aircraft (Like Cessnas using Continental or Lycoming engines) so that pilots can have a better idea of how their Fuel/Air mixture is for optimization - don't believe me? Look up in the www.WagAero.com catalog! Yes, it does eventually get lead fouled, but that normally occurs after 200hrs of operation! (Part# E321000 AvMix Fuel Mixture Sensing System)
Chevy 350 engines used leaded fuel for many, many years w/o valve sealing issues. Yes, there would eventually be a carbon buildup, but you can also deal with that using fuel injectore cleaner etc... in the fuel.
Oh, BTW, I am also an A&P!
Cabi~
01-11-2004, 01:42 AM
#32
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cabi
Dude,
If there is NO O2 sensor, how would it affect the engine using 100LL? The LS1s I speak of, used in my Kitplanes, don't use the stock computer or EFI system, nor does it use the stock ignition system! It uses an Aircraft FI system (Airflow Performance) There is one chap who uses a custom computer controlled LS1, and is doing well with it - he uses 100LL. All the O2 sensor does is gives an error input signal for the computer to "fine tune" the fuel/air ratio scheduling of the stock automotive EFI and ignition timing. If that computer and EFI is not there, there is NO need for an O2 sensor. However, I will tell you that they DO sell O2 sensors for aircraft (Like Cessnas using Continental or Lycoming engines) so that pilots can have a better idea of how their Fuel/Air mixture is for optimization - don't believe me? Look up in the www.WagAero.com catalog! Yes, it does eventually get lead fouled, but that normally occurs after 200hrs of operation! (Part# E321000 AvMix Fuel Mixture Sensing System)
Chevy 350 engines used leaded fuel for many, many years w/o valve sealing issues. Yes, there would eventually be a carbon buildup, but you can also deal with that using fuel injectore cleaner etc... in the fuel.
Oh, BTW, I am also an A&P!
Cabi~
If there is NO O2 sensor, how would it affect the engine using 100LL? The LS1s I speak of, used in my Kitplanes, don't use the stock computer or EFI system, nor does it use the stock ignition system! It uses an Aircraft FI system (Airflow Performance) There is one chap who uses a custom computer controlled LS1, and is doing well with it - he uses 100LL. All the O2 sensor does is gives an error input signal for the computer to "fine tune" the fuel/air ratio scheduling of the stock automotive EFI and ignition timing. If that computer and EFI is not there, there is NO need for an O2 sensor. However, I will tell you that they DO sell O2 sensors for aircraft (Like Cessnas using Continental or Lycoming engines) so that pilots can have a better idea of how their Fuel/Air mixture is for optimization - don't believe me? Look up in the www.WagAero.com catalog! Yes, it does eventually get lead fouled, but that normally occurs after 200hrs of operation! (Part# E321000 AvMix Fuel Mixture Sensing System)
Chevy 350 engines used leaded fuel for many, many years w/o valve sealing issues. Yes, there would eventually be a carbon buildup, but you can also deal with that using fuel injectore cleaner etc... in the fuel.
Oh, BTW, I am also an A&P!
Cabi~
01-11-2004, 11:48 PM
#33
Teching In
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pimpmaro
Aaaaahhh, I see now. I wasn't think at all about an aftermarket FI system, and lead safe O2's slipped my mind. Sorry about that!
Cabi~
