LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 12:26 AM
  #16  
Josh'95Z28conv's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,553
From: San Antonio, Texas
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by Z28LT1_Just_Nasty
That sucks! How did the call to the dyno place go?
"Hello, hey Corey, yea, um, you know of a good wrecker service"

Thanks a lot Bret, thats what I wanted to know. At least I didnt do any thing wrong, other than trust the guy selling me parts.
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 12:30 AM
  #17  
SStrokerAce's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

You could have checked the stuff, but most times you have to know what to check!

Bret
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 12:38 AM
  #18  
Z95m6's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 6,070
From: newton, kansas, USA
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by SStrokerAce
No the problem is who sold you the parts.... if you have never put that setup on a LT1 head before and checked install height then you could get into serious trouble. My math on your setup definately puts that into coil bind, which is what caused that. If that was a dual spring the SAME THING WOULD HAPPEN!!!! IrocSS85, no matter what you are going to destroy a motor if the wrong parts go in and setup the incorrect way and cause this, it's not the springs fault.... it's the parts that went with them and the install.

I've said this before and I will say it again.... just because you have a deal with Comp Cams for parts DOES NOT MAKE YOU QUALIFIED TO PICK OUT PARTS/CAMS/VALVETRAINS FOR A MOTOR.

If this was all done right then you wouldn't have to rebuild the motor.

It sucks but thats the truth.

Bret
Thats why this guy selected my cam and valvetrain package.
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 01:53 AM
  #19  
stroked383z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 422
From: Fort Worth, TX
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

IMO it's ultimately the installer's responsibility to check install height, clearances, etc. If you would have checked the install height you would have realized that you needed the 614-16 locks and NSA rockers on a bone stock head with stock valves with that cam. Yes they sold you a wrong part, but it's your fault that this happened. Sorry, it just bugs me when people start blaming others for their own mistakes. Like I said it's just my .02.
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 09:14 AM
  #20  
kingslam's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 305
From: Portage Wisconsin
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Yikes that sucks! E-Bay sucks too, have to watch the scammers!
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 10:06 AM
  #21  
roadtrip120's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 712
From: Amarillo Texas
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Dang that sucks, sorry to hear about your motor.

Build it bigger and better, but let someone else do it, and learn.
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 10:29 AM
  #22  
IllusionalTA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,542
From: Long Island, NY ; Norfolk, VA
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by stroked383z28
IMO it's ultimately the installer's responsibility to check install height, clearances, etc. If you would have checked the install height you would have realized that you needed the 614-16 locks and NSA rockers on a bone stock head with stock valves with that cam. Yes they sold you a wrong part, but it's your fault that this happened. Sorry, it just bugs me when people start blaming others for their own mistakes. Like I said it's just my .02.
Both yes and no... I understand that you should always double check everything.. I do it.. But the majority of those purchasing these "cookie cutter" cam kit's are going to take the word of the shop they buy from.. Assuming that they sent the right stuff. If the part no. matches then they're fine from there... It's the job of the shop to sell the right stuff the first time and if they're going to sell a kit to do a specific job w/ the specific cam it should all be matched component's... So regardless if he didn't check coil bind and installed height. .It still fall's on the store not giving him the right stuff.. They are however not liable to replace his engine due to this.. As far as i know...
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 12:07 PM
  #23  
stroked383z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 422
From: Fort Worth, TX
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Don't get me wrong...it sucks that this happened to you. Sorry to hear about it.
Old Feb 7, 2006 | 12:55 PM
  #24  
Josh'95Z28conv's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,553
From: San Antonio, Texas
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by SStrokerAce
No the problem is who sold you the parts.... My math on your setup definately puts that into coil bind, which is what caused that.

Bret
I just called combo motorsports. They said they sold me the right parts. They told me to call Cris Mays at Comp, I did. He said with his math they would be no where near coil bind

What #'s did you use to figure that this was coil bind? I trust you over them.
Old Feb 8, 2006 | 07:38 AM
  #25  
SStrokerAce's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Well I guess they never put that setup on a motor and ran it. The proof is in the pictures in this post.... that's exactly what a setup that has gone into coil bind looks like.

The 614-16 is the PN you need for the locks on a stock valve setup. I just used the numbers from my experience putting those springs on stock heads.

Bret
Old Feb 9, 2006 | 05:56 PM
  #26  
CMSDave's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 283
From: Las Vegas
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by SStrokerAce
Well I guess they never put that setup on a motor and ran it. The proof is in the pictures in this post.... that's exactly what a setup that has gone into coil bind looks like.

The 614-16 is the PN you need for the locks on a stock valve setup. I just used the numbers from my experience putting those springs on stock heads.

Bret
Actually we have ran it, on more than enough cars in this city.
Let alone the parts that have gone out of here.

A couple of key things I noticed, the assumption of what is being said on our end.
Several, and I mean several, people call to order parts with part numbers.
God forbid we start talking them out of the parts they've already got in mind then we're not right according to the internet.

I guess the other problem would be my assumption that he had an NSA RR based on the lift he was talking about @ .568, but that info wasn't given.
Not once was Crane Golds brought up(let alone used with damage), if they were then I would've voiced my opinion on those based on what I've seen happen to those in the past.

Either way, somebody installing those should check them before going in for exactly what you said, a possibility of the numbers being off. But the attack on us before knowing all the facts would probably be useful before making your own assumption Mr. Bauer.

I respect your knowledge on motor issues, I've even searched for archived posts, the least you could do is possibly hear more details before a public thrashing.
Old Feb 9, 2006 | 06:36 PM
  #27  
Josh'95Z28conv's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,553
From: San Antonio, Texas
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by CMSDave
I guess the other problem would be my assumption that he had an NSA RR based on the lift he was talking about @ .568, but that info wasn't given.
Not once was Crane Golds brought up(let alone used with damage), if they were then I would've voiced my opinion on those based on what I've seen happen to those in the past.
Whats wrong with NSA Crane Golds? They did have a little cosmetic wear on 2 of them, but I put them on cylinder # 1, and this problem happened on #7. I asked lots of questions when ordering these springs, so I wouldnt have a problem. I would think if NSA RR's were a problem, you would have asked the question to me.

Anyway, the springs had an install height of 1.675". With .568 lift, that puts the spring at 1.107". These springs coil bind at 1.085". Thats .022" difference. Is that a little too close for comfort?

Id really like to know if this really was coil bind, or if a spring was defective. Either way I appreciate you working with me in trying to pinpoint the problem, and hopefully you will work with me in building the engine I will replace this one with.
Old Feb 9, 2006 | 06:46 PM
  #28  
Dave89IROC's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,676
From: Melvindale, MI, US
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by Josh'95Z28conv
New pics!!

http://i1.tinypic.com/ncmlvp.jpg

http://i1.tinypic.com/ncmmav.jpg

http://i1.tinypic.com/ncmmiu.jpg

Looks like worst case scenario. The head is trash It looks like the block may be ok, just needs a good bore. Hopefully .030 will take those grooves out from the piston pin. I found a part of the piston in the intake, the rest is in the pan I guess.

Damn that all happened really quick. It started making loud valvetrain noise, then died seconds later. Crazy.

Bret, those are the part #'s they sold me, along with the CC-4705-16 locaters. The guy at the shop that was going to dyno it said the locaters looked a little thick. If that caused coil bind, thats what went wrong. Should different springs been used? Id really like to know what happened. I looked over the other rr's, and they look fine. Im starting to think it was coil bind that went wrong...
if it is a good(read heavily ported or aftermarket) it should be able to be repaired by a competent machine shop
Old Feb 9, 2006 | 10:11 PM
  #29  
roguedriver's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,194
From: Albuquerque, NM.
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Was that .568 lift with a 1:5 rocker or a 1:6? Cause if it's 1:5 and then you put a 1:6 on, you'd be a lot more then .568 lift, in which case that might put you in coil bind. Just curious.

Ken R.
Old Feb 9, 2006 | 10:34 PM
  #30  
Josh'95Z28conv's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,553
From: San Antonio, Texas
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by CMSDave
A couple of key things I noticed, the assumption of what is being said on our end.
Several, and I mean several, people call to order parts with part numbers.
God forbid we start talking them out of the parts they've already got in mind then we're not right according to the internet.
I hope you are not referring to me. It sounds like it since this is my problem and my thread. I didn't call with part #'s. I called with questions. You recommended this setup to me. I had nothing in mind when I called you. I just got cam specs and made the call. I answered every question you asked me, and bought every part you recommended to me.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:32 AM.