As an aircraft avionics technician, my 40 years experience working with electronics tells me if the resistance is so low you can't measure it with a standard (even a cheapie) multimeter it is probably not going to have an effect on charging. If your grounds are good and you have a quality circuit from the alternator to the battery the system should be charging. The only way to measure resistance that small would be with a milliohm meter. Still very small total circuit resistance (in the milliohms) isn't going to hurt your voltage readings. I have a Fluke meter which reads milliohms.

 

I have noticed the Corvette forum is a wonderland of barely used and new parts. Scored a second-hand set of the same heads I was going to buy new. These parts have only 5 dyno pulls! So I drove to Borowski Racing today to pick up my "new" parts.

* Mamo 265 LS7 Trick Flow heads
* Mamo Yella Terra Rockers
* Johnson short travel lifters.

The lifters are the link style. I wouldn't have bought these lifters myself so not sure whether to keep or sell.

 

Nice find.

 

Wow, what a score!!!

 

Saw the car at the body shop today and it is nearing completion. One side was smooth with no body molding and no emblems on sail panel or fender..... Man, that smooth look is HOT!!! I'm having them strip the stuff off driver side too. I like how it is turning out.

Now maybe somebody can lightly tap the front bumper so I can get that all cleaned up too!

 

The charging voltage has been rock solid so far. That's good news I think.

 

Its to quite in here QwkTrip I'm thinking you got a monster build on the way. I seen you over on Ls1tech and holley forums changing direction on your LS7?

 

Hey there, bud. Ya, I've had a few things going on. Mostly in the form of planning things and spending money, not much real action yet.

Apparently you caught me snooping around the internet learning and plotting my LS7 build. Currently I am trying to figure out if I keep the LS7 or sell it to buy a Dart SHP LS Next short block. It's pretty much the same cost either way. The LS7 has a lightweight rotating assembly and aluminum block. The Dart block is a lot heavier but has major improvements over an LS engine. I can also grow the Dart to 440 or 454 if I want. But honestly I pretty much just drive on the street and the LS7 is probably fine for me. The number I'm hoping to coax out of this LS7 are pretty phenomenal for how tame it will drive. And I would like the 100 lbs of weight reduction compared to my 6.0L stroker in the car today. I have about a month to decide and then I need to hit the "GO" button. The only hitch in the plan (literally) is that I have been nursing a bulged disk in my back since July. If that doesn't resolve itself in the next couple months then I might put off the engine swap and continue to drive the car as-is next year.

Another notable item is I got the car back from the repair shop. The damage from the accident was repaired and I put a good amount of my own money into a few other jobs while it was there. The car looks really good! De-badged, no more door molding, and my favorite... I had the front bumper smoothed and license plate holes filled. I didn't say anything earlier because I don't have pictures to share and a thread is useless without pictures!

I also met TTOP350 a few weeks ago. Very nice gentleman! I haven't seen his car yet though (current Car Of The Month, by the way) so we're going to have to find another reason to meet up again next spring. Here is the link to his COTM winner thread for those that missed it.

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/auto...tm-winner.html

We're both going to be in the Car of The Year voting here shortly, so keep us in mind when that time comes.

 

Here are some pictures. I don't have my usual springs in the car right now so ride height is a bit higher than normal.

Damage repaired from accident.



Holes in front bumper filled and no more badging.



Door moldings removed, as well as badging and emblems.

 

Pictures really don't do this car justice, super clean!

 

Or...






https://www.chevrolet.com/performanc...ngines/lsx-454

Comes with a rebate too!

 

I actually have a much better cylinder head. The 454 LSX has what is basically a 6 bolt LS7 cylinder head with a Lingenfelter CNC port.

There are other quirks about LSX that I don't care for. It has tall valve covers that won't fit in my car and there are no coil mount provisions either. It needs an 8 bolt flywheel too. I have a pretty expensive flywheel that I want to keep. And there is something else I can't remember at the moment.

Not to mention, have you actually seen a 454 LSX put down great numbers? I haven't yet.

 

454 LSX as shipped from GM. 1967 Chevelle, 3700 lbs, 4L60E, 3.73 gear. 11.01 @ 128. OEM configured suspension. Slicks.
Define "great numbers".

I'm not sure what your goals are. You started off in a modest way but naturally a project morphs. Buy better heads and stick in a big cam. Not unlike what you've already done with what you have. You'll make 1.5 HP/CID. 700 HP is not an unreasonable target normally aspirated. The top end TSP head flows 400+ CFM. The block can arguably support in excess of 2000 HP.
I can't comment on the tall valve covers.
As for the provisions for coils, from a personal standpoint, I can't say they belong on the valve covers anyway. But that's a subjective opinion.
You want to sell your LS7 to finance your build but want to keep the flywheel? Seems that's a small percentage of the overall puzzle. Understandable I suppose. It works and you want to keep it.
But, which ever way you go, I'll be interested in the process and the results.
PS. Good luck with the back. That's something I wouldn't wish on anybody. That's an objective sentiment too.

 

I'm not sure you realize that I have a $1400 lightweight flywheel/clutch set. It's not chump change!

My strategy with this build is to use a big bore and put my money in the top end. Heads, intake, valvetrain stability. I'm not even going to do a very big cam because I'm tired of a big cam. We'll just have to see what happens...

 

Yes for money 454 isn't that great and valvetrain stabability is key 454 is for people just want to buy crate and no thought knot build like restomods

Qwk look into double tapered pushrods ultimate rigidity

Big Cam sucks for valvetrain should look into other than xer lobes it's been a min but can guy I went thru used different lobes to be more gentle on valvetrain and get big power from small lobe and with big cube motor top end is everything to include intake and then exhaust setup

 

I am probably going to use the Comp Cams LSG lobe. Not reinventing the wheel here either, going to pattern the cam after something that I already know works. I am not a pioneer, I will shamelessly copy.

Right now trying to decide if I am going to deck the heads or leave the compression ratio a touch soft.

 

I think you're misinformed.

 

Sure if you say so clearly your are and if you want to not do your homework and buy it go ahead if spending that amount and build a equivalent but better and your way I rather be misinformed and get what I want

For money can build the same and better if you do your homework

Just cause its a crate motor from GM doesn't make it a badass engine I'll stick to my statement for some one who doesnt want to put thought into there build then go ahead 454 GM crate is you best bet if you want a "crate motor" but Imo it's not the best ,


Oh and qwk I remember the Cam company it's called EPS Cam owner is good guy use to work for Comp Cam

 

Miss this post look into EPS Cam no reinventing the guy created that LSG lobe to be less harsh compared to see lobes then he left Comp and started eps Cam iirc been a min sense I was talking to Cam builders etc from researching different cams I ended using those lobes

But I agree with you tried and true is key but would give him a call to see what he suggest also and or opinion on particular Cam choice and engine combo as well but up to you either way you be happy �� my comment wasnt meaning to reinvent the wheel lol

 

I think you're talking about Geoff at Engine Power Systems (EPS). I have a custom EPS cam in my current engine and it was made by Cam Motion.

 

Ordered the camshaft today. After all my so called "research" I decided to enlist professional help and got a custom camshaft from Mamo.

We did use the Comp Cams LSG lobe. Almost an identical cam to what I use today in my 6.0L stroker but a little less overlap. I wanted to tame the drivability just a tad.

Going to be interesting to see what happens when I hit the dyno and drag strip. Basically I have two 427 engines in the same car with almost identical cams. One 427 is based on a truck 6.0L with ported LS3 heads and FAST 102R intake. The other 427 is a larger bore, shorter stroke LS7 with phenomenal heads and intake.

 

I'd say the new version will outperform the old if for nothing more than the larger bore in conjunction with better heads.

 

Finally got the car appraised so I can get proper insurance on it. Now I get to find out what proper insurance costs....

 

Hay I can help u out with the ins thing. Give me a text
6309361824

 

Got another ingredient for the LS7 recipe. Intake manifold should be arriving soon and is another Mamo work of art.

 

2017 'Car Of The Year' voting is open. Check out the 12 cars here,

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/auto...ml#post6189802

My Firebird is Miss January this year.

 

Intake manifold arrived today. This is an MSD Atomic Airforce for LS7 that has had the ugly lettering shaved off and custom porting by Mamo Motorsports. Looks a LOT better without the obnoxious lettering on top! All told this intake is worth +40 RWHP over a stock LS7 intake with an engine that can take advantage of it (like mine).

Next step is to pull the stock LS7 heads off the engine and measure out for gasket thickness. I am shooting for quench somewhere between 0.035 - 0.040 inch, and a static compression ratio of 11.6 - 11.7.

 

Just put a turbo or blower on that car. You will make more power with less $$ its so easy ...lol

 

Do you realize that you're turning in to Dick from the internet? Not appreciated. You can stop now.

 

phenominal build a lot to read ! awesome work

 

Wow
Real nice. Thanks

 

Thanks! It doesn't handle like your car though. The suspension has the building blocks for autocross but drag radials really screw up back end handling. Problem is the car is stupid slippery without drag radials so I'm kind of caught in the middle of two worlds without a good solution (and I'm addicted to the straight line traction of drag radials).

I have a friend with Pro EFI on his Supra and he has been able to get some really good results with traction control. His car already had 4 wheel ABS so he was able to tap into the signals from the wheel speed sensors. The Pro EFI is an expensive setup, but boy can he move on normal tires!

 

Awesome car, before you consider nannies maybe this book can help you learn to tame your "stupid slippery" Camaro.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/....Going_Faster_

 

Thanks! I probably will order that book. It probably is time to start modding the driver. I've never had something as "raw" as this car. Basically this is the first car I've had where I am always aware that it could actually kill me if I don't respect it. It has definitely showed my lack of ability / experience.

 

It looks as beastly as it sounds!

Aretha Franklin sings it the best

 

Seems the cost of this project has spiraled out of control at every step, and the oil pan appears to be no exception either. My initial plan was to simply carry over the LS1 F-body oil pan from my current engine. However, I decided I want to use a crank scraper with this engine build and that has proven to be more difficult than I ever thought it would be.

Turns out the LS1 F-body pan is so shallow toward the front that a crank scraper will not fit with a 4" stroke crank. I guess I shouldn't be surprised because I had to grind on my pan to make clearance for the 4.125" stroke of my current engine. C6 oil pan is a bit deeper in the front and a crank scraper can be installed with a 4" stroke but there isn't enough room remaining to use a windage tray. One by one I kept eliminating every GM oil pan either due to scraper/tray packaging, or due to poor fit in the car.

This has pushed me to look at the aftermarket and I may have found a solution with the Holley 302-1 oil pan. Everything will fit inside the pan with a 4" stroke, but I still need to verify clearance with BMR K-member and steering arms on my car. But of course a relatively affordable crank scraper mod just got expensive by needing a $400 oil pan to go with it. Update: Oil pan fitment with the stock k-member, Post #1109, https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/ltx-...ml#post6273075

Below are dimensions and p/n's of various oil pans I found. It might not be very readable though. Most this information came from the Improved Racing website where you can find better graphics, http://www.improvedracing.com/ Hopefully somebody else can find this useful for their project. I did not include the MAST oil pan because it is small at only 5 quart capacity (might as well use a GM pan with 5.5 quarts). Be aware that most of these pans will not fit with a stock k-member.

 

C5 Bat Wing fits BMR K and A Arms.
No idea about stroke clearance issues- I just bolted my (slightly) camed C5 in.

Beware, though- C5 accessory setup is different. Positions of items AND everything is 1/2" closer to engine. I had to notch the BMR K to fit the A/C compressor.

 

I was wondering if the C5 pan would fit in the car. Good info, thanks. Unfortunately, C5 pan is another case of no room for windage tray. And they cost over $700 just for the pan! But the 6.5 quart capacity and factory baffles is nice. It is one of the highest capacity GM oil pans too.

I am carrying over the F-body accessory drive from my current engine but upgrading to an ATI damper with this new engine build.

 

Cross-members and exhaust, GRRrrrr. The bane of ThirdGens.

Fitting the LS7 y-pipes around an auto is not for the faint of heart. I'm surprised you had driver's side issues, mine were pass.



I had to section the pipe between the black lines, removed the attachment point in red, and re-fabbed an attachment point in green to attach horizontal rather than vertical. This gave me the room to tuck the pipe up.

New attach point:

Pipe tucks better, you can see the 'collars' I used for horizontal stability. With the added bracket material removed off of the rail (and no bolt heads in the way), I'm happier.

 

I'm thinking maybe you meant to post that in a different thread?

 

Yes, no idea what happened.
Must be my fault cause my browser history points here, too?!!
Owner needs resto-mods, himself

 

Where WAS that supposed to be posted anyway?

 

I was reading Qwk Trip's response to the 4th Gen tank ohm values. I clicked on a link to this thread, BUT I failed to see what I was doing and quick replied to what I was reading without looking (rookie mistake and I ain't one!). I was reading posts 346-350 and posted a reply at bottom of page, duh...time stamps, not at the end of the thread, etc.

 

It's so much HOW it happened. I can relate to that. (I was also once told to never send an email after 9 pm but that's a different matter altogether).
It's a question of where you intended that post to go. I have a few pictures to contribute (provided they're relevant).

 

Question for you engine building gurus. What is a good method to check piston height out of hole?

The rule of thumb for my engine is to not go tighter than 0.035" quench. Is that a nominal measurement on the pin centerline axis, or does the 0.035" have be added on top of any possible piston rock?

I've got the same questions on the Corvette Forum and LS1tech for anybody that is curious what those folks have to say.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...re-quench.html

https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...l#post19814878

 

I took a stab at this with measurements of piston #8. I'm guessing in this example I should use a value of 0.008 inch out of deck. This equates to a gasket thickness of 0.045 inch to get just a hair over 0.035 quench. And repeat 7 more times to see which piston is worst case scenario.... sound reasonable?

Measurement on piston centerline:
0.008 inch (left and right side)

Piston rocked down at top side:
top .002
bottom .011
Average = .0065

Piston rocked down at bottom side:
top .009
bottom .005
Average = .007

 

Not much in the way of answers at either forum really.
And I can't say you 'll get one from me as I don't profess to be a guru however I can ask some questions.
If avoiding piston to head contact is your goal and .035" is as close as you care to get (I've always spec'd .040" with a relatively tight hypereutectic cast piston), then wouldn't it make sense to go with the "worst case"? Quench being what it is, the difference between .035" and .038" isn't likely to be something you'll be able to quantify but the piston hitting the head certainly would be.
Something to consider is whether either side of the pin axis is relevant or just the quench pad side. Does the piston not fit entirely in the circumference of the combustion chamber or is there is perimeter to contend with? If there is no issue on the chamber side then the pad side is all you have to contend with.
Helpful or otherwise, I thought I'd throw that in and maybe twig something in the thought process.

 

Looks like there is cylinder head deck to contend with both top and bottom.



I found a youtube video by Mahle and they only measure on piston pin axis (don't take into account piston rock). I suppose the piston will rock in one direction on the up stroke and rock in the other direction on the down stroke? On the down stroke the piston would be pulling away so maybe only the up stroke is the main concern? On second thought, that might change whether the piston is being pushed or pulled, too.

 

I have a stock short block and there is a known reference point that 0.045 gasket has been done on LS7 time and time again without trouble. I have measured several cylinders and they all keep pointing at a 0.045 gasket using the method below. It's definitely not worst-case scenario though.

 

Using that as a reference, a .045" gasket and your greatest value out of the hole including piston rock, what do you get?
I have seen examples (but not necessarily LS based) where piston to head contact is evident yet there is no damage reported. This is to the point where the carbon has been erased from the contact surfaces but no obvious deformation otherwise. But that's literally splitting hairs.