GM had BETTER NOT...
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 715
From: Martin Mi
Thats the problem with catagorizing people or cars. Everyone on here knows the differance between a car guy that now has the money for better things, and the guy that now has money and goes out and buys a fast car and "thinks" hes a car guy. Eric L
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
No they offer a modification package for the CTS-V. This has nothing to do with the Camaro.
http://www.hennesseyperformance.com/...ctionReq=Where
http://www.hennesseyperformance.com/...ctionReq=Where
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 287
From: Richmond, VA
Clyde
Last edited by wildpaws; Sep 30, 2009 at 06:33 PM. Reason: text correction
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
I disagree about the LS7 being more economical. Cost-wise its a wash, until you include the LS7's dry sump oil system. Furthermore, being a bigger engine that's fairly close to the limits of the bore-size the LS block can handle, there's a bigger potential for parts breakage. No doubt, I'd rather see a detuned LS9 than the LSA because of the forged internals, however the LS7 would need more internal mods to increase performance, whereas the LSA and LS9 would merely need a pulley swap. (See below.)
Besides, blown engines always cost more to build and maintain than NA engines. That's fact.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Besides, cast pistons aren't great for blown applications. It's common knowledge. It's like a hand grenade waiting for somebody to pull the pin...
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
A blown GM V8 NEEDS forged steel pistons. PacerX knows what he is talking about.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Besides, HSV have already developed a dry sump system for the HSV W427... you know that right? So some of the development would be carried over to the Z/28 I would imagine.
Last edited by SSbaby; Sep 30, 2009 at 07:15 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Actually I'd say "modified" engines cost more to maintain, blown, NA or turboed. Factory engines cost less to maintain than "modified" engines, blown, NA or turboed. Our 96 Mustang with a Vortec S/C was a money pit. However, I'd never compare it to a factory supercharged Mustang.
Just because Joe Blow bolts a supercharger on his stock engine doesn't mean it can handle the boost. However a factory supercharged engine that is engineered and designed to handle the boost is a different animal altogther.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Fact?
Actually I'd say "modified" engines cost more to maintain, blown, NA or turboed. Factory engines cost less to maintain than "modified" engines, blown, NA or turboed. Our 96 Mustang with a Vortec S/C was a money pit. However, I'd never compare it to a factory supercharged Mustang.
Just because Joe Blow bolts a supercharger on his stock engine doesn't mean it can handle the boost. However a factory supercharged engine that is engineered and designed to handle the boost is a different animal altogther.
Actually I'd say "modified" engines cost more to maintain, blown, NA or turboed. Factory engines cost less to maintain than "modified" engines, blown, NA or turboed. Our 96 Mustang with a Vortec S/C was a money pit. However, I'd never compare it to a factory supercharged Mustang.
Just because Joe Blow bolts a supercharger on his stock engine doesn't mean it can handle the boost. However a factory supercharged engine that is engineered and designed to handle the boost is a different animal altogther.
A cam upgrade on the LS7 would be not much different cost-wise than your average cam upgrade for the LS3. Uber power without the top heavy blower in a tight package... should be enough power for most. LS9 would almost be overkill... but having said that, Ford seems to be committed to the 5.0L EB...
Really, I'm not fussed whether GM decides to slot an LS7 or LS9 as I won't be an influential target person for that type of car. I'm just offering my 2c, FWIW.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 287
From: Richmond, VA
Clyde
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Knowing what you are talking about and documentation are two ENTIRELY different things. I personally like to see facts and documentation rather than "understanding". I frankly have not heard any info about CTS-V LSAs "grenading" themselves, nor have I seen it mentioned on any other forums, that's why I wanted a source for this info.
Clyde
Clyde
If you want examples of blown-up LSA engines, I dunno, but I'm sure there are many tech forums of racers sharing their personal experiences...
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
An interesting back-and-forth about cast LSA pistons can be found here:
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums...p-846tq-3.html
The OP is apparently running 821 HP (on nitrous) through his stock bottom end...will be very interesting to see how long that lasts, as others seem to be a bit skeptical as well....
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums...p-846tq-3.html
Originally Posted by Prof
IMO if you are going to go much beyond 10 lbs of boost, it is fool hearty to not forge the rods and pistons in an LSA...but I have never stayed in a Holiday Inn Express...
