When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Had the #1 injector stick open, locked the motor. I thought it was done, about ready to pull it back out but decided to pull the plugs. Fuel came pouring out of it. Never cheap out on injectors.
Couple days later I found BNIB FIC 60lb dekas, they should work for what my goals are.
Got everything back together but Michigan weather sucks. Hahah!
I'll have an update soon. New goal this year is to drive it back to the barn under it's own power... lol
Man you have some bad luck lol weather here in ohio is georgous the last few days. Hopefully no damage to the engine..... I've never had a stuck injector and I'm grateful of that. Your fuel system is clean though right. That's usually the cause for stuck injectors not a mechanical fault, at least in my experiences.
I thought I commented on your injectors lol... maybe not, too lazy to look through the thread. FIC 60lb will work good. Im running them and at 43psi I max them out at 15psi ish %80s DC, bumping pressure to 58psi increases to 72lb for more boosty. 15psi is more than enough for the street, scary from 10ish to 15psi how different it is.
Always test the fuel system/injectors before installing! If they are style style with clips you can just hook them to the rails and pressurize the system and any hung open will be obvious. I had a stock injector hang up off a JY 5.3 with unknown mileage and flooded out the rear driver cylinder while on a test stand. Pulled the rails and tested and then since then I always test the fuel system before cranking.
gotta say man... this car doesn't seem like it wants to work out for you lol.
I just finished a LS turbo swap with stock engine, and tuned a next one. The OEM valvesprings are only good to around 8-9psi of boost and the factory engine only makes 250-280bhp so... a little math
280 * 9/14.5 = 173 + 280 = 453bhp * .85 drivetrain loss = approx 380rwhp max
So for example an all original 5.3 at 9lbs of boost through 4l80e (slightly more drivetrain loss) is making approx 360rwhp, whereas 250rwhp is standard (before the boost from the stock engine).
These engines are amazing but they do not use their displacement very will until you install a cam upgrade, and they will not hold boost pressure well until you install some real springs.
also there is no such thing as FIC DEKA (unless they are using FIC as some kind of slang). FIC is "fuel injector clinic" a reputable company whereas DEKA is a completely different 'brand' and has 'chinese copies of fake deka injectors' to watch out for. FWIW I used FIC's injectors in swaps to avoid injector-related issues which seem prevalent.
A cam upgrade and springs will be down the road. I would be happy with 400+ out of the setup as it currently sits. The 60lb injectors were flow tested by Fuel Injector Connection and they provide the injector data. They are genuine Siemens Deka 60lb Injectors, here is the link: https://fuelinjectorconnection.com/p...high-impedance
No damage to the engine luckily. Caught it in time! Yeah, I don't think the car wants it either. We will force it into submission...
Mark, it has been hit or miss for me. Busy on the good days and free on the rainy/cold ones. I should be able to work on the car tonight!
A cam upgrade and springs will be down the road. I would be happy with 400+ out of the setup as it currently sits. The 60lb injectors were flow tested by Fuel Injector Connection and they provide the injector data. They are genuine Siemens Deka 60lb Injectors, here is the link: https://fuelinjectorconnection.com/p...high-impedance
No damage to the engine luckily. Caught it in time! Yeah, I don't think the car wants it either. We will force it into submission...
Mark, it has been hit or miss for me. Busy on the good days and free on the rainy/cold ones. I should be able to work on the car tonight!
Cold nights? How far up North do you live in Michigan lol it's 75 today and it's been the coolest day of the week. Yesterday it was 85. This is the warmest fall I can remember and I'm loving it. It's not cold out till its below freezing at night.
Cold nights? How far up North do you live in Michigan lol it's 75 today and it's been the coolest day of the week. Yesterday it was 85. This is the warmest fall I can remember and I'm loving it. It's not cold out till its below freezing at night.
Hopefully you get that puppy under power soon!
Not that far! Only an hour north or so. But we just had that tornado and other storms roll through up here. Then I spent the weekend camping. Reasons why the Camaro isn't done...
I just finished a LS turbo swap with stock engine, and tuned a next one. The OEM valvesprings are only good to around 8-9psi of boost and the factory engine only makes 250-280bhp so... a little math
280 * 9/14.5 = 173 + 280 = 453bhp * .85 drivetrain loss = approx 380rwhp max
So for example an all original 5.3 at 9lbs of boost through 4l80e (slightly more drivetrain loss) is making approx 360rwhp, whereas 250rwhp is standard (before the boost from the stock engine).
These engines are amazing but they do not use their displacement very will until you install a cam upgrade, and they will not hold boost pressure well until you install some real springs.
What?
My L33 (140K miles, stock heads/cam/springs; untouched longblock) made 510rwhp at 10psi through a TH400 and a 12 bolt.
My L33 (140K miles, stock heads/cam/springs; untouched longblock) made 510rwhp at 10psi through a TH400 and a 12 bolt.
L33 is a high output version producing 30 horsepower over the standard 5.3
323*6500/3456 = 607CFM @ 100% VE * .069 = 41.9lb/min
That engine should make 410 horsepower at 6500rpm with 0psi of boost
However, fact checking: It produces 310 horsepower at 5200rpm peak (due to smaller than optimal cam)
Using this knowledge we simply extrapolate the data, i.e.
310hp @ 0psi = 620hp @ 15psi
so at 10psi,
(10/14.5) = .689
So our pressure ratio is 1.689,
310 * 1.689 = 523 engine horsepower predicted
This is the theoretical maximum for 10psi of boost given the manufacturers stated output figures, i.e. 523hp or approx (523 * .85) = 444rwhp
You are suggesting your 'stock' L33 made an additional (510 - 444) = 66 horsepower for "free" to the tires. It is within the realm of acceptable measure to be considered realistic given the nature of different dynometers, fuel quality, tune, compression ratio, cooling artifices, and so forth.
You can also gain or lose (60/500) 10% of horses in a boost application for various reasons.
Here are my dyno numbers for example:
trusted mustang dyno: 442rwhp
Local dynojet #1: 490rwhp
Local dynojet #2: 492rwhp
Local random non-dynojet, 4WD style dyno: 550rwhp (or whatever I wanted I could make it appear)
Dyno numbers vary. Use a trap speed or a dynojet to compare setups is the only way to standardize within some margin.
I've been doing this for 20 years and displacement/pressure numbers do not lie, the math is always correct and the technology of most engine computers made after 1998 is all but dependent on an airflow model that verily describes exactly what the airmass is in the cylinder at all times in order to determine outputs such as timing.
It is the dynometers which lie, and people.
Actually the HO L33 only made 15hp more than the LM7, 2 degrees of duration both exhaust and intake and bump in compression. They are only 15hp difference. Your other issue is your base HP figures which are not accurate. GMs publicized engine output numbers are under rated. It’s very likely the Motors make a good bit more than advertised and easy to add 20-25hp with just a tune and a possible free flowing exhaust. The tune is important as you can compare a stock tune to a boosted stock motor as the tune is already altered. So start with a base engine, tune and exhaust as it will be the same with the turbo. The 4.8 makes alittle less than the 5.3 but again the actual output numbers could be higher than advertised. Dynos are inaccurate, track numbers tell the story. But making 550hp on a 4.8/5.3 would only take 10ish psi and would be a lot easier with a cam and less boost.
L33 is a high output version producing 30 horsepower over the standard 5.3
323*6500/3456 = 607CFM @ 100% VE * .069 = 41.9lb/min
That engine should make 410 horsepower at 6500rpm with 0psi of boost
However, fact checking: It produces 310 horsepower at 5200rpm peak (due to smaller than optimal cam)
Using this knowledge we simply extrapolate the data, i.e.
310hp @ 0psi = 620hp @ 15psi
so at 10psi,
(10/14.5) = .689
So our pressure ratio is 1.689,
310 * 1.689 = 523 engine horsepower predicted
This is the theoretical maximum for 10psi of boost given the manufacturers stated output figures, i.e. 523hp or approx (523 * .85) = 444rwhp
You are suggesting your 'stock' L33 made an additional (510 - 444) = 66 horsepower for "free" to the tires. It is within the realm of acceptable measure to be considered realistic given the nature of different dynometers, fuel quality, tune, compression ratio, cooling artifices, and so forth.
You can also gain or lose (60/500) 10% of horses in a boost application for various reasons.
Here are my dyno numbers for example:
trusted mustang dyno: 442rwhp
Local dynojet #1: 490rwhp
Local dynojet #2: 492rwhp
Local random non-dynojet, 4WD style dyno: 550rwhp (or whatever I wanted I could make it appear)
Dyno numbers vary. Use a trap speed or a dynojet to compare setups is the only way to standardize within some margin.
I've been doing this for 20 years and displacement/pressure numbers do not lie, the math is always correct and the technology of most engine computers made after 1998 is all but dependent on an airflow model that verily describes exactly what the airmass is in the cylinder at all times in order to determine outputs such as timing.
It is the dynometers which lie, and people.
You speak like an engineer, and in my world, that's a bad thing. Guys like you just cannot see past the numbers.
How can you preach equations when you have less than half the relevant variables? That 310bhp rating GM gave the engine was with a full accessory drive, stock manifolds/converters, and on a mild 87 octane tune. In the installed condition minus the compressor it's easily 380-390bhp. Furthermore, you don't know what compressor I'm using. Here's a hint: going from a 65mm to a 75mm turbine netted 40rwhp with no other changes at that same 10psi.
My L33 swapped Camaro was never run at the track with the stock cam. But it has been run on the same dyno in the same conditions as another one of my cars, the Trans Am. The TA made 420rwhp and traps 124-125 at 3700lbs. The Camaro made 640rwhp with a small 216/220 cam and 14psi. The dyno is by no means generous.
Finally, it's not that people lie, or that dynos lie. It's your "math" that's lying.
You speak like an engineer, and in my world, that's a bad thing. Guys like you just cannot see past the numbers.
How can you preach equations when you have less than half the relevant variables? That 310bhp rating GM gave the engine was with a full accessory drive, stock manifolds/converters, and on a mild 87 octane tune. In the installed condition minus the compressor it's easily 380-390bhp. Furthermore, you don't know what compressor I'm using. Here's a hint: going from a 65mm to a 75mm turbine netted 40rwhp with no other changes at that same 10psi.
My L33 swapped Camaro was never run at the track with the stock cam. But it has been run on the same dyno in the same conditions as another one of my cars, the Trans Am. The TA made 420rwhp and traps 124-125 at 3700lbs. The Camaro made 640rwhp with a small 216/220 cam and 14psi. The dyno is by no means generous.
Finally, it's not that people lie, or that dynos lie. It's your "math" that's lying.
In order to properly fuel an engine, airmass and cylinder volume are computed. If you want fueling to be exact, then airmass and cylinder volume (effective) are also exact.
Fueling is used to determine power. It is a fairly straightforward and simple equation with real world relevance, since the 80's as modern control has developed.
This is simply how the factory after 1998 in GM ECU calculate required fueling. Their airflow equations derive air->fuel exactly as I have above, except in a much more complex manner.
All I've done is remove the 'fluff'- the confusing differentials- so we can see the backbone of the airflow model, which is based on cylinder displacement and airmass, which I have effectively computed and used for almost 20 years in order to both tune engines and size turbochargers for combinations successfully.
You act like no engineering is used or needed to engineer an engine, and scoff at their equations as if 'they lie', when in fact one false input to such an equation in modern control systems leads to poor system behavior and people complaining online about their cars.
Power reading from a dyno is meaningless. You saying '40 hp this' and '330hp that' is an empty, futile response, since dyno numbers vary from dyno to dyno and you have given no 'standard' from which to compare.
In order to properly fuel an engine, airmass and cylinder volume are computed. If you want fueling to be exact, then airmass and cylinder volume (effective) are also exact.
Fueling is used to determine power. It is a fairly straightforward and simple equation with real world relevance, since the 80's as modern control has developed.
This is simply how the factory after 1998 in GM ECU calculate required fueling. Their airflow equations derive air->fuel exactly as I have above, except in a much more complex manner.
All I've done is remove the 'fluff'- the confusing differentials- so we can see the backbone of the airflow model, which is based on cylinder displacement and airmass, which I have effectively computed and used for almost 20 years in order to both tune engines and size turbochargers for combinations successfully.
You act like no engineering is used or needed to engineer an engine, and scoff at their equations as if 'they lie', when in fact one false input to such an equation in modern control systems leads to poor system behavior and people complaining online about their cars.
Power reading from a dyno is meaningless. You saying '40 hp this' and '330hp that' is an empty, futile response, since dyno numbers vary from dyno to dyno and you have given no 'standard' from which to compare.
I'm glad to see that you're incapable of adequately rebutting my response. You reiterated what I already said: your "math" is a farce, and it's nice that we agree on that (although I doubt you understand why). Finally, I searched your username and holy ****, customblackbird and QwkTrip aren't joking. I'm done with you. Sorry OP.
Oh no, it is all good. Great bathroom reading... LOL.
Was going to work on dialing in the idle yesterday, but the old man needed help cleaning up the barn. He starts with "Hey, do you have 10 minutes to help me?" 2 hours later...
There is now a nice little spot for the Camaro when it can move. haha.
Nice, get a video up... I want to hear that fender exit! Ive thought about doing a short dump but dont think I could live with that kinda life anymore lol. I personally love the sound of my cutout open and getting loud turbo spool noises and added boost but driving around through a full exhaust is still 80% of my daily driving, so i guess I think I like it bc I can manually choose when I want it .
totally get it with the rents! I go to my rents house to say high all of sudden... "while your here can you do me a favor?" and I end up taking out big *** AC units out of the windows from multiple floors for winter storage.
I'm glad to see that you're incapable of adequately rebutting my response. You reiterated what I already said: your "math" is a farce, and it's nice that we agree on that (although I doubt you understand why). Finally, I searched your username and holy ****, customblackbird and QwkTrip aren't joking. I'm done with you. Sorry OP.
I guess you are confused. I am nowhere near the levels of the engineers that designed the stock GM ecu. I take no credit for their math.
I'll get a video soon. I still need to find the time to deep dive into why it is idling so rich. Luckily I am not fighting a leaking injector anymore! I need to go back through my tune with a fine-tooth comb.
Finally got the car together and it is now idling... kind of. Got the AFR in check, but the commanded IAC and actual IAC is 0. Which makes no sense as there isn't a vacuum leak.
Adjusted the throttle blade and reset the TPS, blocked off the hole in the throttle body. Idles at 800-900. I'll take it for now.
Also, it finally moved last night. So that is something!
Gotcha, I was just remembering how you popped the first one idling so I'm worried your tuning/engine management is not working correctly. Yea I would have kept the NB 02s, the truck harness I did with the older 99 PCM I left the NBs but I never used them... I just tuned in open loop for the year or 2 I ran it.
Holley system looks okay... Some things I don't like about it like the fact you can only run 1 02 and you can't add another, also the internal MAP sensor is a bad idea bc when it goes its gone, even tho you can add an external I don't like the idea of an internal one. Some other small stuff but the support is there and there other systems are decent plus the dominator. I just wonder how they skimmed $1k off the price to come in at $1k compared to the HP etc and where they cut corners. I personally think they took the TB sniper electronics plus the handheld and just adapted it for LS use.
I've been running the fitech $799 70050 kit with no problems, runs pretty good and love that I just crank the EBC to whatever I want it the Fitech takes care of the fueling. Given the holley came out 3 years later I would consider it... might get one to test it out on a future project but the single 02 is killing me.
Thanks Dave! I still have those manifolds if we ever manage to meet up one of these days. LOL!
Blackbird, yes I agree. The internal MAP is a bit funny, but the opportunity to add an external is nice. I don't think the internal would be "huge" issue as long as it works right. The single O2 is a bit funny but if it works it works I guess.
Haha! The new place is actually in Taylor, so a bit north. Nice little 3 bed, 1 bath starting house with a extra-large 2.5 car garage. Excited to close Friday and start moving everything over.
Yes, yes I do. It is somewhere faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar up north.
I will have to get some pictures once I am settled in. Car moved under it's own power last night up and down the driveway. Now I need to start finessing the VE table in order to make it happy. LOL.
Sounds and looks good! Like the Bimmer wheels too. Congrats on the house! I too just purchased my 2nd home on the 8th, (this one will be my new permanent residence) it's out of state (moved from NJ to CT) and I to also got a 2 car detached garage! My first garage... so of course Ive filled it and I don't even have my car here yet lol. I'm used to a tent in a driveway so this is a big upgrade lol. Nice little 4 bed 2 full bath on a acre of land, doing big things being only 34 . Worst part of buying a house is the upgrading, now pulling my ancient 100amp buss fused main panel for a 200amp and going to run 100amp sub panel in the garage so its going to be $$ and alot of work to dig 75ft for buried wire to the garage.
Enjoy the house experience... nothing quite like it and don't forget about the car, house things will get in the way and the car will never get done lol.
Out in the wild this weekend. Put a couple miles on the car. Need to get my overflow tank from my parents and button up a few more things like intercooler piping and whatnot. Seems to cruise pretty good!
Current to do list:
1. Button up intercooler piping
2. Actually build boost and see how "close" the base tune is. Adjust from there.
3. AEM 340 Fuel Pump / Overflow tank
4. Deep clean.. interior/exterior (sitting for 2 years outside is not ideal)
5. Install front crash bar and bumper
6. Polish paint so it is slightly presentable again
7. Install CTS-V front Brembos sitting on my shelf..
8. Fix fender exit to be flush with fender
Thanks! It is getting there. I have a potential buyer for my 1970 Cutlass coming on saturday, so if it sells I will have more time to allocate to the Camaro. Hopefully get it out some more this year.
Yes, it was tough not building boost! The car makes all the right cruising noises though.. that is for sure. The fender exit isn't bad at all from the driver seat. Couldn't tell you from the passenger. It is actually very quiet... lol
Ouch, th350 is def going to hurt any type of highway cruising. Your going to have a hard time keeping the heat down under the hood. But the Th350 is cheaper to build than the 4l60e. Your going to miss that highway gear and lockup converter believe me. I did a C6 (3 speed auto) behind my 521 BBF and on the highway with 3.55 gears it was brutal even with a 2500 stall. Basically at 60mph I was doing 3k. Hope it works out for you!
Yes I know it is a trade off. I think I did well though, TH350 w/ B&M shift kit, TCI breakaway stall, Summit Crossmember w/ Torque arm relocation, and the longer thirdgen driveshaft needed for the short tailshaft TH350 all for $250.
I don't do really any highway cruising with my camaro. Honestly, it hasn't even been on the road in forever. I just want to get back behind the wheel without constantly breaking things.
Yes I know it is a trade off. I think I did well though, TH350 w/ B&M shift kit, TCI breakaway stall, Summit Crossmember w/ Torque arm relocation, and the longer thirdgen driveshaft needed for the short tailshaft TH350 all for $250.
I don't do really any highway cruising with my camaro. Honestly, it hasn't even been on the road in forever. I just want to get back behind the wheel without constantly breaking things.
I've been running th350s for a solid 6 years now and did do alot of driving to the track and such. Long as you have 3.73 or lower gears you'll be fine even if you do go crusing..just keep it under 70 when crusing and the rpm wont be too bad at all.
I've been running th350s for a solid 6 years now and did do alot of driving to the track and such. Long as you have 3.73 or lower gears you'll be fine even if you do go crusing..just keep it under 70 when crusing and the rpm wont be too bad at all.
So you got the 6 inch tail instead of a 9?
Good to hear, thanks Mark! Yessir got the 6” shaft and the right driveshaft.
Well I took it up to the dream cruise a few weeks back and the steering linkage decided it didn't want to stay as one. New Proforged kit later, back on the road! I probably put 100-150 miles on it this year. Really just working out kinks in the cooling system and more. I will be doing a cam swap over the winter, hopefully with the twin 255 fuel pump setup I have on the shelf. Then we can really start to make some steam!
As for the Terminator X, it was probably the best thing this car could have ever received. Damn thing started up on full E85 in 25 degree weather to move the car into the garage.
Not the best photo ever, but you get the gist. This is the first time the car has ever had a garage spot! Haha. It is surrounded by honda's, so it is feeling like the alpha male.
Goal this winter is to get the car presentable - so I don't feel so bad driving it... lol. As you can see, being out side for 3 years and neglected doesn't work well with single stage paint.
Also need to get my 4 piston brembos on the front, along with buttoning up some stuff on the interior. I managed to lose all my plastic screws for the back plastics, along with the white backing part they screw into. Also misplaced 4x of the torx for the radio bezel, and both covers under the dash. Fun!
10-02-2018, 05:53 PM
.
