Cadillac CTS-V Forum banner
41 - 60 of 84 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,911 Posts
Mann Speed Specialty
9514 E Truman Rd, Independence, MO 64052
(816) 833-0232

Good people. I use to sell to them when I was at Arrow Speed Warehouse
 

· Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 · (Edited)
The mains were out up to about .0015 so I ended up taking the engine to Driskell's Racing Engines to have the block align honed. After speaking with Matt he recommended a minimum of .0025 clearance on the mains so he's going to target .0027 on the mains. Also we were discussing going .003 on the rods.

I've never used them before but just looking around his shop it was very professional with good equipment and there were some nice higher end engine builds in process.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
I have the block back after having the mains align honed. I took the recommendation of the shop and the main bearing clearance now ranges between .0030 - .0033 and the rod clearances are mostly at .0028 with one at .0029. I started mocking it one last time and noticed the pistons were sitting down in the hole a tad bit when they should be at 0 deck. After checking and measuring the JE pistons I received with the rotating assembly didn't have the pin moved to compensate for the stroke change. I started with a piston made for a 3.9 stroke and they were to adjust the pin location for the 3.825 stroke. The compression height should have been 1.2025 and it was 1.165 so now I'm waiting on getting another set of pistons.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 · (Edited)
@Rubber Duck

Cams, Cams, Cams - I'm second guessing the recommendation from BTR on their Stage 3 torque cam. I'm trying to decide on a direction and would like to get your thoughts.

My goal is 900chp on 93 octane (was originally going to mimic Lingenfelter's 900chp crate motor)

The cams on the table

BTR Stage 3 Torque (currently have)
223/246 @.050
.610/.600 valve w/1.7
117+6 LSA

Lingenfelter GT22 (used in 900chp crate motor)
228/232 @.050
.588/.595 valve w/1.7
118 LSA

Jones Cams recommendation
244/259 @ .050
.637/.612 valve w/1.7
116 LSA

Matt
Hasn't spec'd a cam but didn't like the BTR cam for my application.

Just to refresh

LS9 block/LS9 CNC heads
Callies/JE rotating assembly with center counter weights
3.825 stroke/4.065 bore (397 CI)
6.125 rods
8.9:1 compression
1 7/8 long tube headers
Kong 2650 with Kong 112mm throttle body
T56 Magnum - close ratio
3.42 rear gears

Going in a 3500 lb car used mostly for street with some autocross and drag racing
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
17,818 Posts
Without knowing lobe ramp angles, and knowing that the Lingenfelter cams tend to have very aggressive ramps, I like the duration of the BTR3 cam, as 22x / 24x seem to do very well in our cars. The lower lift will probably leave more life in the springs for a daily also with better control at higher RPM.

Tighter LSA is not necessarily good for a FI cam where you'll bleed off cylinder pressure at higher RPM. I think I have that right...

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,972 Posts
I'm getting ready to build my first LS engine and thought I'd look for any words of wisdom from the group since this forum seems to have the most experience with the LSAs. I've built several small block and big block chevys but this is my first LS. I've been reading several posts and am a little concerned about my cam choice for one and need to size the injectors. I'm thinking ID1300s for the injectors. Also I'm trying to decide between a 3" and 3.25" upper pulley for the supercharger. I'd like to be able to run on 93 pump gas but am planning on adding a flex fuel sensor to allow for E85. Also I'm hoping by going to a 3.825" stroke instead of a 4" stroke the stock piston oil squirters will work.

For starters, I looked at the Lingenfelter 900hp crank HP on 93 octane pump gas engine to get ideas and would like to get somewhere in that neighborhood. I've changed things enough that the engine will be a little unique.

-4.065 bore x 3.825 stroke (Same bore and stroke as COPO 396)
-LS9 Block and LS9 CNC Heads
-Callies Magnum 3.825 Stroke 8 CTW crank
-Callies Ultra I beam 6.125 Rods
-JE Pistons 8.9:1 with ceramic coating
-Total Seal Rings (second ring "gapless")
-BTR Stage 3 torque cam
-BTR Shaft Rockers
-Johnson 2110 Lifters
-Katech LS9 Head Studs
-Katech Timing Chain
-LS9 Head Gaskets
-Kong 2650 LSA Superchager
-ZL1 Supercharger Cover
-ATI balancer (8.66 SC Pulley)

FWIW - The rotating assembly arrived today from Callies so now I have most of the parts.
@Rubber Duck

Cams, Cams, Cams - I'm second guessing the recommendation from BTR on their Stage 3 torque cam. I'm trying to decide on a direction and would like to get your thoughts.

My goal is 900chp on 93 octane (was originally going to mimic Lingenfelter's 900chp crate motor)

The cams on the table

BTR Stage 3 Torque (currently have)
223/246 @.050
.610/.600 valve w/1.7
117+6 LSA

Lingenfelter GT22 (used in 900chp crate motor)
228/232 @.050
.588/.595 valve w/1.7
118 LSA

Jones Cams recommendation
244/259 @ .050
.637/.612 valve w/1.7
116 LSA

Matt
Hasn't spec'd a cam but didn't like the BTR cam for my application.

Just to refresh

LS9 block/LS9 CNC heads
Callies/JE rotating assembly with center counter weights
3.825 stroke/4.065 bore (397 CI)
6.125 rods
8.9:1 compression
1 7/8 long tube headers
Kong 2650 with Kong 112mm throttle body
T56 Magnum - close ratio
3.42 rear gears

Going in a 3500 lb car used mostly for street with some autocross and drag racing
First just a comment on a Jones (Mike Jones) camshaft; you really
can't compare his cam lobes against other camshaft manufactures
lobes by simply looking at just the typical valve events.

Mike does not generate his lobe profiles, particularly his
open and closing ramp velocities, nor his flank rates the
same way others do.

Did you fill out the spec sheet for a cam online with Mike?
If so, can you cut and paste it with your next post. . . .

Also, are the cylinder heads ported, or stock?

Usually Mike asks you for the cylinder head flow.
If you gave him the flow numbers, what were they?

Also, Mike gives you the ICL. . . What is it?
And how much advance is ground into it?

Your interested in making ~900 rwHP.
At what engine RPM?
What Fuel?

Are you going to have a problem with a rough idle?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a couple of parting comments:
With a 3.825 stroke and a 2.165" valve, the cylinder heads
will really have to flow well. Even with a 2.204" valve, you
would be right on the verge of meeting the engine cfm demand.

Finally; this 244/259 @ .050 exhaust duration tells me
that Mike feels there is a problem with the exhaust side
of the cylinder head.

Please understand; Here I am not attempting to be negative
about your build, I am just attempting to point out where you
might desire to focus moving forward..;)

Cheers
 

· Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #47 ·
First just a comment on a Jones (Mike Jones) camshaft; you really
can't compare his cam lobes against other camshaft manufactures
lobes by simply looking at just the typical valve events.

Mike does not generate his lobe profiles, particularly his
open and closing ramp velocities, nor his flank rates the
same way others do.

Did you fill out the spec sheet for a cam online with Mike?
If so, can you cut and paste it with your next post. . . .

Also, are the cylinder heads ported, or stock?

Usually Mike asks you for the cylinder head flow.
If you gave him the flow numbers, what were they?

Also, Mike gives you the ICL. . . What is it?
And how much advance is ground into it?

Your interested in making ~900 rwHP.
At what engine RPM?
What Fuel?

Are you going to have a problem with a rough idle?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a couple of parting comments:
With a 3.825 stroke and a 2.165" valve, the cylinder heads
will really have to flow well. Even with a 2.204" valve, you
would be right on the verge of meeting the engine cfm demand.

Finally; this 244/259 @ .050 exhaust duration tells me
that Mike feels there is a problem with the exhaust side
of the cylinder head.

Please understand; Here I am not attempting to be negative
about your build, I am just attempting to point out where you
might desire to focus moving forward..;)

Cheers
First thanks for responding. Needless to say like many others I value your time and your input. FWIW - I picked up the LS9 block and heads on the cheap when they were discontinuing them so that was my starting point on the build.

Did you fill out the spec sheet for a cam online with Mike? Yes, see below
Also, are the cylinder heads ported, or stock? The heads are GM CNC Ported LS9 as they come from GM. I changed the springs but that's it.
Your interested in making ~900 rwHP. Actually crank HP, wheel HP would be a bonus.
At what engine RPM? 6500
What Fuel? 93 Octane but planning on running a flex fuel sensor so I can run E85 to get a little more out of it
Also, Mike gives you the ICL. . . What is it? He didn't give that in his response. I'll ask.
And how much advance is ground into it? He didn't give that in his response. I'll ask.

Here's Mike's response
"Here's what I recommend
Cam# LS1, HR75375-80360-116
244/259 @.050"
.375"/.360" Lobe Lift
.637"/.612" Valve Lift
116 LSA"

If you gave him the flow numbers, what were they? I gave him flow numbers based on reading this chart from EngineLabs. The only other flow numbers I could find were on a 4.125 bore and were higher than these so I went with the lower numbers.

"The CNC LS9 heads do away with the “swirl wing” and surpass even a CNC LS3 head with 322.7cfm at .600-in. lift on the intake and 218.2cfm at .700-in. lift on the exhaust."

Are you going to have a problem with a rough idle? I'm running a manual trans but would like it to smooth out by 1800 rpm to allow for cruising at highway speeds in 6th.

Here's the info provided to Mike Jones

EngineLS - Gen IV
Cam TypeHyd Roller
Lifter Diameter0.842
Cam Journal SizeStd LS9
Bore4.065
Stroke3.825
Rod Length6.125
Compression Ratio8.9
Rocker Ratio1.7
TransmissionManual
Stall Speed RPMN/A
Max HP RPM Desired6500
Max Engine RPM6800
Vehicle Weight3500
Intake Valve Diameter2.165
Exhaust Valve Diameter1.59
Intake Port Flow
@.400''275
@.500''305
@.600''322.7
Max Flow @ .xxx"Lift[email protected]
Exhaust Port Flow
@.400''185
@.500''200
@.600''208
Max Flow @ .xxx"Lift[email protected]
Exhaust header type and sizeLong tube 1 7/8"
Intake ManifoldKong LSA
Injected or CarburetedInjected
Injector/Carb Size1300 cc
Fuel type93 Octane/E85
Valve Spring seat pressure[email protected]
Spring Rate[email protected]
Spring Max liftCoil Bind 1.070
TurboNo
BlowerYes
If Yes, How Much Boost?Targeting 15-17 lbs
NO2No
Comments
LS9 Block/LS9 CNC Heads (flow numbers are approximate based on web info)
Callies/JE rotating assembly (ceramic coating on piston crown)
Johnson 2110 lifters
BTR SK006 springs
ID 1300 cc injectors
Flex fuel sensor
Kong 2650 LSA supercharger/Kong 112mm throttle body
Mostly street but some autocross and drag racing.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,972 Posts
There are many ways, or perspectives various engine builders
look at camshaft versus cylinder head compatibility.

-from my perspective-
I might have more to say if needed, but the Jones lobe fits your
head flow (Engine Supply Side) almost 'Dead On'.

You wrote:
"Your interested in making ~900 rwHP. "Actually crank HP", wheel HP would be a bonus.

900 fwHP will require a minimum of 1350 cfm. Generally speaking, if we divide
that value
by four (4-Cylinders fire per each 360° of crankshaft rotation) we arrive
at a 'General Port
Flow (Supply) of 338 cfm. This should all be 'In' so to speak at
convergence lift with these LSA / LS9 heads, as they tend to go into velocity
choke at higher lifts.

Convergence lift for a 2.165" valve is 0.541" of valve lift.

You wrote:

Intake Port Flow
@.400''275
@.500''305
@.600''322.7
Max Flow @ .xxx"Lift[email protected]

So the above tends to indicate your in the 'Ball Park'
and the Jones Lobe fits the above (as I would expect
of Mike)

You wrote:

At what engine RPM? 6500 <= That might be a bit low regarding 'establishing a
sufficient Piston CFM Demand'. However, you are going to use a good blower
which might overcome the insufficient piston / engine cfm demand.

-let's break the above down-

Your piston speed / piston cfm Demand is not
sufficient to generate the required engine flow.

But your 'Demand Side' could be increased,
if you increase your engine rpm.

Then the 'Supply Side' which is your heads and
cam would be fully used.

Now the blowers task of 'Pushing' air into the engine
would be reduced, as would the associated heat of
the roots style blower.


What Fuel? 93 Octane but planning on running a flex fuel sensor
so I can run E85 to get a little more out of it.


I would highly suggest using E85 not only for the extra RON that
E85 has, but also the high evaporation rate of an oxygenated fuel
which carries away the heat."


Cheers
 

· Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #49 ·
There are many ways, or perspectives various engine builders
look at camshaft versus cylinder head compatibility.

-from my perspective-
I might have more to say if needed, but the Jones lobe fits your
head flow (Engine Supply Side) almost 'Dead On'.

You wrote:
"Your interested in making ~900 rwHP. "Actually crank HP", wheel HP would be a bonus.

900 fwHP will require a minimum of 1350 cfm. Generally speaking, if we divide
that value
by four (4-Cylinders fire per each 360° of crankshaft rotation) we arrive
at a 'General Port
Flow (Supply) of 338 cfm. This should all be 'In' so to speak at
convergence lift with these LSA / LS9 heads, as they tend to go into velocity
choke at higher lifts.

Convergence lift for a 2.165" valve is 0.541" of valve lift.

You wrote:

Intake Port Flow
@.400''275
@.500''305
@.600''322.7
Max Flow @ .xxx"Lift[email protected]

So the above tends to indicate your in the 'Ball Park'
and the Jones Lobe fits the above (as I would expect
of Mike)

You wrote:

At what engine RPM? 6500 <= That might be a bit low regarding 'establishing a
sufficient Piston CFM Demand'. However, you are going to use a good blower
which might overcome the insufficient piston / engine cfm demand.

-let's break the above down-

Your piston speed / piston cfm Demand is not
sufficient to generate the required engine flow.

But your 'Demand Side' could be increased,
if you increase your engine rpm.

Then the 'Supply Side' which is your heads and
cam would be fully used.

Now the blowers task of 'Pushing' air into the engine
would be reduced, as would the associated heat of
the roots style blower.


What Fuel? 93 Octane but planning on running a flex fuel sensor
so I can run E85 to get a little more out of it.


I would highly suggest using E85 not only for the extra RON that
E85 has, but also the high evaporation rate of an oxygenated fuel
which carries away the heat."


Cheers
Let's see if I'm understanding this correctly. On the demand side in order to get to 338 CFM, I'd need to be around 6965 rpm. The supply side, given the valve diameter/lift/duration, would flow the 338 CFM so then the supply/demand are then matched, Correct?

Now for the dumb question, if the two are matched how does the supercharger come into play or was it required to get to the 338 CFM for the supply side?
Also is the cam is going to play well on the street (i.e. still have descent performance on the lower end) vs being more on the max effort side? I assume the ICL would help determine this.

It's starting to make a little more sense why Lingenfelter uses a Kenne Bell 3.6L on their 900hp, pump gas engine since it's 376 cubic inches and it looks like they use a fair amount less lift and duration on their GT22 cam.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,972 Posts
Let's see if I'm understanding this correctly. On the demand side in order to get to 338 CFM, I'd need to be around 6965 rpm. The supply side, given the valve diameter/lift/duration, would flow the 338 CFM so then the supply/demand are then matched, Correct?

Now for the dumb question, if the two are matched how does the supercharger come into play or was it required to get to the 338 CFM for the supply side?
Also is the cam is going to play well on the street (i.e. still have descent performance on the lower end) vs being more on the max effort side? I assume the ICL would help determine this.

It's starting to make a little more sense why Lingenfelter uses a Kenne Bell 3.6L on their 900hp, pump gas engine since it's 376 cubic inches and it looks like they use a fair amount less lift and duration on their GT22 cam.
You wrote:
"Let's see if I'm understanding this correctly. On the demand side in order to get to 338 CFM, I'd need to be around 6965 rpm. The supply side, given the valve diameter/lift/duration, would flow the 338 CFM so then the supply/demand are then matched, Correct?"

Pretty much correct; however to generate 338 CFM of Piston Demand,
with an NA Engine, you would have to shift higher than that..lol

So then the question is; how much lower can you
shift when using a 'Roots Style Blower', as the blower
needs to fill the gap so to speak, between the piston
cfm demand (Demand Side) by forcing in air from the
'Supply Side."

But little 'Roots Blowers' are limited in what they can do. . .

-----------------------------------------------------------------

You also wrote:
"Also is the cam is going to play well on the street (i.e. still have
descent performance on the lower end) vs being more on the
max effort side? I assume the ICL would help determine this."
***You meant LSA not ICL.

Well now, I asked you the following question within my
post number 46. . .
"Are you going to have a problem with a rough idle?"

If your not going to like a rough / choppy idle, then
you might desire to consider a camshaft with a
wider LSA. However, with an exhaust duration
of 259°, widening the LSA is going to generate
some negative issues.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

You also wrote:
"It's starting to make a little more sense why Lingenfelter uses a Kenne Bell 3.6L on their 900hp, pump gas engine since it's 376 cubic inches and it looks like they use a fair amount less lift and duration on their GT22 cam.

Those Lingenfelter cams are very old camshaft designs.

They also used closing ramp rates / velocities
that hammered the valve train to death.

And yes, you can run both a lower flowing cylinder head, as
well as a milder camshaft when you use a real Supercharger
such as a Kenne Bell 3.6L "Twin Screw', instead of a
simple 'Roots Blower' which is nothing more than a big
fan which simply blows (hence the term blower) air into
the intake manifold.

So then; if one has a HP Number in mind when they begin
the build, there would be differences in how one would map
out the build when using a 'Twin Screw Supercharger', versus
a simple 'Roots Style Blower'.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

A suggestion for you.
Instead of going with the Jones Cam and using pump gas,
go with E85 and contact Matt / GP Tuning for your camshaft
and valve train needs.

Mike Jones is a very smart and very busy man who designs
camshafts for serious engine builders. He is one of only two
people I use to purchase my cams from when I was building
race engines.

Matt has built his reputation on helping the earnest 'Street Iron'
crowd, such as people like yourself.

Finally; E85 has an additional benefit that many don't
recognize. It burns quicker and cleaner than does
a cylinder head chamber filled gasoline.

When one has a low static compression ratio as these
engines do, when you pack more and more gasoline
into that chamber, it takes longer for that fuel to burn.

Static compression ratios, greatly impact an engines
efficiency via the ASE%, as well as the burn angle.


-with e85-
Now you can use a high duration exhaust lobe to offset
the poor flowing exhaust ports we have on our heads,
and if required to maintain low engine rpm manners, we
can also spread the lobe centers (LSA / LCA) as might
be needed, and not lose energy still burning during the
blow-down event..;)

Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: random84 and jcs003

· Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
@Rubber Duck

Thanks for the insights and bearing with me on the learning curve (i.e. asking dumb questions). Mike did come back and said "you would need to degree the cam in on a 112 ICL"

Matt reached out and explained a bit of what his thinking is. It looks like I'll put the BTR cam up for sale and go with Matt or possibly Mike's cam. I don't mind the choppy idle but I do want to make sure I'm still good for a road trip or two. That's one of the main reason I want to be able to run on pump gas and not have to find an E85 station. With my gearing I should be at 2K rpms at 70mph so I want to make sure it will cruise without issues at that rpm.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,972 Posts
@Rubber Duck

Thanks for the insights and bearing with me on the learning curve (i.e. asking dumb questions). Mike did come back and said "you would need to degree the cam in on a 112 ICL"

Matt reached out and explained a bit of what his thinking is. It looks like I'll put the BTR cam up for sale and go with Matt or possibly Mike's cam. I don't mind the choppy idle but I do want to make sure I'm still good for a road trip or two. That's one of the main reason I want to be able to run on pump gas and not have to find an E85 station. With my gearing I should be at 2K rpms at 70mph so I want to make sure it will cruise without issues at that rpm.
None of your questions were dumb, and your pretty smart to reach out for help.

Just a final comment; these engine platforms really require
E85 to reach 900 fwHP, even with your 396 cid build.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,972 Posts
E85 is the miracle drug!
Yes, but remember; only the RON Value, along with
the ability to keep internal engine temps down from
the high cooling / evaporative effects are the miracle.

The MON Value, which is more meaningful for people who
push the accelerator pedal down and hold it there, will find
that to much heat can be generated within the cylinder versus
time, resulting in a 'Big Bang' which can cause big problems for
your engine..:eek:

Cheers
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,972 Posts
Just a quick update. I sold the BTR cam and ordered a new custom cam from Matt yesterday. Went ahead and popped for the 8620 core.

Thanks again Duck for the guidance.
Cam Motion or Comp?
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,972 Posts
Haven’t ground any LS stuff with Comp for many years
I had thought you had moved away from Comp.
Good to know for sure. . . .

===============================

Discussion Starter · #56 · 57 m ago

Just a quick update. I sold the BTR cam and ordered a new custom cam from Matt yesterday.
Went ahead and popped for the 8620 core.

Thanks again Duck for the guidance.

-----------------------------------

Between Matt and Cam Motion your in good hands now..:)

For this 'Crowd' Cam Motions Technologies are very suitable
and Matt's knowledge of this engine platform can't be beat. . . .

Again, for this crowd the 8620 is a good choice,
as spring pressures are above the norm used
for the likes of a 5150 core, but not high enough
to require tool steel. . . .

Finally; last time I looked, the polishing of the lobes
on the Cam Motion camshafts were much better than
on the Comp.

---------------------------------------------

Don't feel like getting in trouble today.. . . .
So not going to say much regarding lifters here. ;)

-however-
There is a reason that when we install higher spring
pressures, use cheap lifters and then find later that
the lifter turned sideways. . . .

But paying attention to both lifter diameters, as well
as the polishing of the lifters roller is something that
we all should not just take for granted.

Cheers
 

· Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #60 ·
Don't feel like getting in trouble today.. . . .
So not going to say much regarding lifters here. ;)

-however-
There is a reason that when we install higher spring
pressures, use cheap lifters and then find later that
the lifter turned sideways. . . .

But paying attention to both lifter diameters, as well
as the polishing of the lifters roller is something that
we all should not just take for granted.

Cheers
What are your thoughts on Johnson 2110 lifters?
 
41 - 60 of 84 Posts
Top