blackey

iTrader: (1)

I've read the LS3 oil system has severe issues when pushed hard. Are these issues completely solved with the dry sump system - aka the same as in the LS1 or are there other inherent issues with the LS3 that the dry sump system does not solve?

Firebirdfan

LS1s don't have a dry sump. They're a standard wet sump just like the LS3. The only LS-based dry sump system was the one on the LS7 Z06 corvettes. The oil-control issue can be resolved with a a good baffled insert for your oil pan. It basically has one-way "trap doors" that allow oil to flow towards the pickup, but not away from it. I forgot who makes them, but they were a sponsor on the site I think.

blackey

iTrader: (1)

OK, I think I was clear as mud. Sorry about that.

The SCCA T1 cars were just allowed to dry sump the LS3 due to the fact that the motor would only last about 15 minutes on the track.

Right now I run an SCCA ITE RX7 with a 372 LS1 with a 3 stage dry sump. It's a bit of an unlimited class and I can sustain 1.55G continuous.

I'm looking to upgrade to an LS3 based motor, but have heard horror stories with the motor's oiling. It sounds like (reading through the lines) that although the dry sump has allowed them to run the entire race the LS3 might have some other issues over the LS1, but I'm not sure.

Before I build up an expensive LS3 based motor I'm looking for someone with someone with intimate knowledge of the LS3 and it's oiling issues to chime in with either a nay or a yea.

Louis?
T1 competitors?



Thanks
Bill

blackey

iTrader: (1)

OKcruising

I've heard more issues with LS3's than out of LS1/6's. Why that is, I'm not certain. Possibly because the vettes that are using them are still on factory oiling and the performance edge is much much closer to the failure point.

The GM dry sump system is about 90% marketing 10% fluff. One "upgraded" LS7 system that was on a C6Z with r-comps failed in ohhhh... bout 90 seconds.

But of the dry sump setups I've seen on LS1&6's, haven't seen that much negative out of them except for belt issues. The same should apply for the LS3's unless the architecture of the oiling passages is substantially different.

Why build up a LS3? What's the big edge that it offers over a LS1/6 block design based solution?

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

There isn't one...only the bore size & a better chain dampener.


Please excuse the following off topic statement.

I Luuuuuv built/high powered Supra's. Just about shot a load reading that you've got one. Those things are proven Damn nasty on a 1 mile strip. Am very jealous.

SIK02SS

iTrader: (11)

What region do you race in? I didn't answer on SCCA because I figured the LS3 guys with experience could chime in; guess not.

Thus far from what I've seen of the few LS2/3's running the 3 stage dry-sump, is it's working. Both the LS2 and 3 blocks were not designed to sustain 1.3 + G's (straight from a GM Engineer's mouth to one of the C6 LS3 drivers a couple years ago) in corners. So if you don't run a dry sump, you'll be in a world of (pocket book) hurt

SIK02SS

iTrader: (11)

My guess is budget. re-sleeving an LS1/6 block and building it is more expensive than buying an LS3 crate + cam

blackey

iTrader: (1)

We're in the same region SFRSCCA. I was there at Laguna. Yea it all comes down to price. I have a 98 block, so boring is out. As long as I need a new block for a rebuild I might as well go for the biggest bore I can (with exception to the LS7). It really doesn't cost more to go with the LS3 block so why not?

Bill

SIK02SS

iTrader: (11)

Ahh, okay. I thought I recognized the name We spoke briefly on the grid at the last LS Double; I finished off my motor that day 4 laps into the race

That RX7 is already a monster, can't wait to see what you decide to go with! I can give you contact info for an east coast C6 T-1 racer, but I doubt he would have intimate knowledge when it comes to bore size and block sustainability on the LS3. Email me at: ronsonracing@gmail.com if you want his email address.

OKcruising

The supra is a POS... it's slated for a LSx swap when all my other projects are done. Don't be jealous of race gas requiring, dismal drivability, and crappy chassis dynamics. Moral of story: for my goals, its cheaper $ to $ for HP and quality to toss the 2JayZ aside. Nothing against it, but the car requires $ scrutiny.

back to topic

Will the existing dry sump pan not clear the crank? I know the ARE 3+1 won't clear the LS7 crank. But the pan shouldn't have an issue... but I'm not certain on interchangeability of pans and the LS3 vs LS6. I don't know if any handicaps exist for swapping your current dry sump to the LS3. But yes, it's mandatory for durability.

And If I'm not mistaken, and SIK02SS may know the rules better than me, but I believe that dry sump is now legal for T1 vettes due to oiling issues.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

The aero is far superior to a Vette. That is why they do so well on 1 mile strips & is why I'm jealous, regardless of the POS engine. Biggest problem w/ my 5#/hp LSX powered Munster is that the aero sucks even with several aero related mods.

SIK02SS

iTrader: (11)

For T-1, yes the ARE 3 stage drysump is legal for C6 LS2/3 Corvettes. For ITE which the OP races his (monster) RX7 in, it's pretty much anything goes and on occasion has ex-World Challenge GT cars in it. One of our competitors just put on a 4 stage drysump (iirc) for his new forged LS7 this year.

I just try to stay out of the OP's way on track He's a great driver + extremely fast car= I check my mirrors after about 11 laps to try and let him catch me in a good spot

blackey

iTrader: (1)

Just imagine what another 150hp could do....

Seriously though, trying to make some decisions about next year's motor.

PoleCat2SSRS2010

If I may.......Improved Racing.
http://www.improvedracing.com/
They don't offer anything for the 2010 Camaro chassis but that was back in April when I spoke to them. Not sure what the status is now. I like the set up though and think it can cross over easily into the new pan chassis with a little patience and ingenuity.
The factory pan of the 2010 seems to have a higher rated capacity than any of the after market pans that I have seen (food for thought).

Hope this helps.

Maynor

Negative on the Improved Racing baffle.. at least for open track events with slicks and high g's. I've got one and it doesn't make a difference in an LS2 (M3 chassis) WITH an Accusump.

Oil pressure still drops 20-30 psi in high-g turns, heavy braking etc without fail. Its hasn't dropped below 20 psi but I'm not sure if that's because of the Accusump discharging or the pan/baffle being involved.

Still looking for a wet sump solution that might not be there...

John
M3 LS2

Andy1

I'm not entirely sure what the root cause is from the reading I've done, but is it due to the inability of the oil to effectively drain from the head(s) at sustained high g's? If this is in fact the case and you're looking for that wet sump solution, then perhaps a hybrid system might work for a track application. Run an external drain line from each head (not uncommon for SBC's) to a Tilton or Mocal cooler pump mounted mid height between the the heads and the pan. You'd have to devise an appropriate return somewhere just above the oil level in the pan. This would get the oil back into the pan where it's needed and hopefully avoid starvation. The cost of such a system would be fractional when compared to a dry sump, and relatively easy to configure. A speculative solution especially since I haven't tried it myself, but I'm open for comment/criticism/flaming, etc.

Andy1

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

blackey, drilling the lifter trays helps, as well. (2) 1/2" holes side by side about 1/3 rd of the way up the tray, on the bottom side (side toward the head, not the intake). This drains oil (back to the oil pan) that otherwise would be trapped in the tray due to the lack of clearance between the pushrods & the pushrod clearance holes.

I run (2) 1 qt. bladderless pre-oilers side by side w/ drilled lifter cups & do not lose noticable oil pressure under long high g pulls or hard braking. Stock F-body pan & baffles.

SIK02SS

iTrader: (11)

No. The problem is GM did not engineer the blocks to be able to function properly (with regards to oil flow) over 1.3 G's. 1.3+ G's (sustained over ~2+ seconds in mostly only left hand corners) will begin to starve the bearings whether you have a quart over, an accusump with bat-wing pan, or the improved racing baffle (or any combination). Thus far from everything I've seen and heard, there is no cure but dry sump.

In regards to the hybrid setup: The LS7's have the same issue as the LS2/3's. The LS7 comes with a dry-ish sump from factory. What people are doing is getting a larger capacity tank with different baffle inside (I believe the common 2 are AVIAD and Lingenfelter), and I think a new oil pan too but I forget. This has thus far solved the problems for the C6Z guys, so this is possibly an option

Andy1

Here are some pre-engineered LSx specific dry sump systems. Not real expensive. Interesting that they don't seem to mention or suggest additional engine prep or modifications to go along with them.

http://aviaid.com/pdfs/115-complete_...et_engines.pdf

Andy1