Lsj/tvs engine build #2
#36
FYI for the true TVS folks, I have been fooling around with different size pullies. Area47 brought my atttention to it, as I did not. Looks like 2.9 is the ideal pulley; less than that say 2.7 generates too much heat and I am not sure the gains are worth it. I am back to 2.9 and happy as a clam. 3.0 or 3.1 is kinda sad sack ....
For the guys who want big numbers on the dyno, thats a whole other story. I have enough trouble tracking my car and putting the engine at risk, getting big numbers say above 320 on a TVS will just lead to very short, sometimes prematurely short engine life. So I dont get into that.
Very few people have made their cars live a long time at high outputs. Area47 again was probably the longest, 90k miles before re ring, but he drove the car with HPT pretty much plugged in full time beside him, and adjusted tunes according to his immediate wish: street race . power? got that. road trip. mileage? got that. etc.
mere mortals are hardpressed to do that.
my .02c.
For the guys who want big numbers on the dyno, thats a whole other story. I have enough trouble tracking my car and putting the engine at risk, getting big numbers say above 320 on a TVS will just lead to very short, sometimes prematurely short engine life. So I dont get into that.
Very few people have made their cars live a long time at high outputs. Area47 again was probably the longest, 90k miles before re ring, but he drove the car with HPT pretty much plugged in full time beside him, and adjusted tunes according to his immediate wish: street race . power? got that. road trip. mileage? got that. etc.
mere mortals are hardpressed to do that.
my .02c.
#38
I plan to use my 2.9 with the ATI pulley for that reason. I'm trying to detune it to around your hp John or less for the canyons and daily. Then have sexy time button
#39
FYI for the true TVS folks, I have been fooling around with different size pullies. Area47 brought my atttention to it, as I did not. Looks like 2.9 is the ideal pulley; less than that say 2.7 generates too much heat and I am not sure the gains are worth it. I am back to 2.9 and happy as a clam. 3.0 or 3.1 is kinda sad sack ....
For the guys who want big numbers on the dyno, thats a whole other story. I have enough trouble tracking my car and putting the engine at risk, getting big numbers say above 320 on a TVS will just lead to very short, sometimes prematurely short engine life. So I dont get into that.
Very few people have made their cars live a long time at high outputs. Area47 again was probably the longest, 90k miles before re ring, but he drove the car with HPT pretty much plugged in full time beside him, and adjusted tunes according to his immediate wish: street race . power? got that. road trip. mileage? got that. etc.
mere mortals are hardpressed to do that.
my .02c.
For the guys who want big numbers on the dyno, thats a whole other story. I have enough trouble tracking my car and putting the engine at risk, getting big numbers say above 320 on a TVS will just lead to very short, sometimes prematurely short engine life. So I dont get into that.
Very few people have made their cars live a long time at high outputs. Area47 again was probably the longest, 90k miles before re ring, but he drove the car with HPT pretty much plugged in full time beside him, and adjusted tunes according to his immediate wish: street race . power? got that. road trip. mileage? got that. etc.
mere mortals are hardpressed to do that.
my .02c.
#40
A lot of unnecessary heat associated with pulling down past a 2.9.
For you and I with girdled built blocks it's one thing
John's speaking of the average individual bolting a TVS on for daily use.
For you and I with girdled built blocks it's one thing
John's speaking of the average individual bolting a TVS on for daily use.
#46
Joined: 05-18-11
Posts: 39,848
Likes: 87
From: West Chicago, IL
dont tell me i gotta set my block on kill too...
a properly built engine should run reliably daily with spirited driving in the mix, should it not? someone stroke me and tell me so
a properly built engine should run reliably daily with spirited driving in the mix, should it not? someone stroke me and tell me so
#48
guys figure this. the only thing the "stock| bottom end lacks is forged pistons. If that matters. Maybe it does. The rest is already pretty darn good. Forged crank. Rods? I would chose stock LSJ or LNF rods over chiwanese stuff anyday of the week/.
and I do/ never lost an Ecotec engine due to internal parts failure. Ever.
first failure: maf pulled out of airbox on track/ car ran real strong until it subied.
second failure: phenolic spacer leaked. changed motor, but nothing wrong with removed motor upon inspection.
Third failure: YYZ pulled high g's on track, did not have trap door pan on the motor ( lazy) paid the price oil starvation to rod bearings.
I run to 7600 with the limiter set at 7800.
and I do/ never lost an Ecotec engine due to internal parts failure. Ever.
first failure: maf pulled out of airbox on track/ car ran real strong until it subied.
second failure: phenolic spacer leaked. changed motor, but nothing wrong with removed motor upon inspection.
Third failure: YYZ pulled high g's on track, did not have trap door pan on the motor ( lazy) paid the price oil starvation to rod bearings.
I run to 7600 with the limiter set at 7800.
#49
Joined: 05-18-11
Posts: 39,848
Likes: 87
From: West Chicago, IL
you run an ati? blance shafts? delete?
i havent heard much of any internal failures either like rods, cranks pistons etc. its usually from a spark plug or leaning out or some stupid ****
i havent heard much of any internal failures either like rods, cranks pistons etc. its usually from a spark plug or leaning out or some stupid ****
#50
For my part, 2.9 is way better than 2.7. waaaay better.
280 on 2.7 to 300 on 2.9 both on pump gas.