PDA

View Full Version : Project Serta... the perfect sleeper



Ktlplxm
02-16-2009, 08:17 AM
I know alot of people on the board like the powerful sound of loping cams and loud exhaust. Some prefer sound to power, whereas some see sound as the necessary byproduct of power. From the onset of my modifications, I have had a few specific goals that are often quite contrary to most. I wanted a car with very good power through natural aspiration, no Torque converter necessity, good gas mileage, very little interior or exterior sound, and enough plausibility to admit having longtubes and CAI without anyone questioning any further. I made this claim despite almost everyone telling me you cannot have all of those together in one car, and I hate beig told I cannot do something.

Finally after 2 months of obstacles, we're done. For those of you who want huge numbers to brag about to friends, you will not be pleased, but afterall numbers have never won a race have they. The engine is of course a modest 427 LS3 based motor, 4.060 bore and 4.100 stroke. I chose this configuration for 2 primary reasons...
#1 Since I do not plan on spinning my engine above 6100-6200 rpm, the stroke to rod ratio is not an issue and the increased stroke vs bore is very good for off idle torque.
#2 An LS7 install is a dead giveaway at dealerships, car meets, and dragstrips
-Heads are stage 2 L92's utilizing stock rocker arms to maintain the appearance of stock.
-Camshaft is a Flowtech designed cam most of you have seen in plenty of people's signatures just under different names. 228/240 duration
-Induction is provided by an AFE Dry filter cold air set up, which will be replaced with a Vararam once they are available. Please do not take this as me saying the AFE isn't worth it, if it weren't for the ugliness of the filter tube, I would not change it. Even mocking up a big 4" CAI on the dyno to mimick a straight design there were no increases in hp or tq
-Exhaust is a Kooks Long tube header with Kooks HFC through a stock muffler system. The axle back was pulled for one final test and an increase of 8ft lbs and 11 hp was recorded. As soon as a quiet axle back becomes available it will be utilized.
While the vehicle was in the shop idling, 4 customers looked at the car and not a one of them suspected a thing was done other than the obvious. One even stated "When is he gonna do some engine work? It's a shame to see that much money in bolt-ons without changing cams". Perfect 800 rpm idle, no fuel smell like you find with a lot of cam cars.
Final numbers are 465 hp and 463 ftlbs at the wheels.
I'll admit, at first, I was a little let down by the hp till I spoke with Andy, Ed, and a few other guys on here, but then we really thought about it. 24mpg highway 20 mpg in town, taking into consideration the approx 20% drivetrain loss through 2 piece driveshafts with rubber couplers, IRS, and a 12"-13" factory converter that puts us at 581hp and 578 ft lbs at the crank. Two respectable tuners even said the loss could be closer 22-23 since my trans has been having issues; if that's the case we could be looking closer to 600 flywheel hp.
So although the numbers aren't where we would like, we all agree it is solely the camshaft and my prerequisite of "no -lope". For those of you wondering about performance while appearing stock, we did a few quick passes at a 1/8 mile track yesterday. Factory tires, good track prep, and a Challenger in the other lane for motivation, we ran a best of 7.80 at 96mph with a bad 2.3 60'.
The car pulls unbelievably with all of the torque on tap. All in all pretty good considering it makes more power than the advertised Magnacharger numbers of 460hp 440tq. Before anyone thinks I'm downing the Maggie, thats not the case, just drawing a comparison; if someone makes larger chamber heads for us, I will prob still go the way of the charger in the future.
Of course enough is never enough, so we are looking at cam changes in the next week or two. I'd like to be the first over 500 whp NA if no one else has done it yet lol. I'd like to thank the guys on the board who have been helpful through out this entire process. Andy, I'll be calling you about the cam again after lunch haha.

Featherburner
02-16-2009, 08:30 AM
Those are great numbers. I see you go by the saying "walk softly and carry a lot of HP" LOL. Good luck with your quest of over 500 rwhp.

PontiacDan
02-16-2009, 09:40 AM
very nice numbers---and build. I would deffinetly have to have the bigger cam/tq converter & one loud exhaust---but thats just me... ;)

GRRRR8
02-16-2009, 09:51 AM
Just get an even 550 at the wheels and I will be happy. Then I know what I have to do next! :)

MtbDoc
02-16-2009, 10:01 AM
My GTO sounds REAL stock...well, until the whooosh sounds begin!

The idea of a big-inch NA motor sounds nice. Less hassle than forced induction. Fuel system requirements are a lot easier too.

Give it some better breathing and you'll see 500rwhp easily.

Top Speed
02-16-2009, 10:21 AM
Sleepers are good! I prefer to attract NO attention myself.

99-LS1-SS
02-16-2009, 10:37 AM
My goal eventually is to have a legitimate 500 rwhp. I'll be happy with that.

G8GXP4now
02-16-2009, 10:39 AM
24MPG on freeway? Can I assume your vehicle does not have the DOD in place?

My stock GT barely gets 24mpg on the freeway and I don't even have 300 RWHP.

Ktlplxm
02-16-2009, 01:02 PM
My GTO sounds REAL stock...well, until the whooosh sounds begin!

The idea of a big-inch NA motor sounds nice. Less hassle than forced induction. Fuel system requirements are a lot easier too.

Give it some better breathing and you'll see 500rwhp easily.

I assume by better breathing you are referring to the cam also?

GeorgeInNePa
02-16-2009, 06:37 PM
Final numbers are 465 hp and 463 ftlbs at the wheels

Yea the hp could be higher and 500 would be nice, but the torque number is HUGE.

Congrats. Makes me want a 416 or 427 even more.

GRRRR8
02-16-2009, 06:40 PM
I would like to see my cam in his motor with some really good heads.

GeorgeInNePa
02-16-2009, 08:11 PM
I would like to see my cam in his motor with some really good heads.


I agree. Serious lift with good flowing heads...


If this house ever sells, I'm thinking 7 or 8K is going to disappear. But the car will be magically faster.


:nah:

GRRRR8
02-16-2009, 08:14 PM
If this house ever sells, I'm thinking 7 or 8K is going to disappear. But the car will be magically faster.


:nah:

OH HELL NO! I am selling everything and living in a tent.......in your backyard! lol

Ktlplxm
02-17-2009, 04:44 AM
Actually contrary to belief, the L92's don't respond as well to lift as their LS7 counterparts. Thats why if you look at Livernois cams for both set ups the L92 always have more duration and less lift. Also, when comparing cams, a few of us decided that yours wouldn't quite make the difference we need Charlie lol. The plan now is to utilize another of the Livernois grinds and do a trick exhaust system to keep things quiet when necessary and open it up when the pedal is down. LOL Fortunately the excellent flow characteristics of the existing heads doesn't need to be updated quite yet. Does anyone know if there is a larger combustion chamber head we can get our hands on yet?

99-LS1-SS
02-17-2009, 05:06 AM
Do you feel like the 1 3/4's are hurting you a little? It seems like your combo would be a perfect candidate for 1 7/8 LT's. Either way, you have a bad ass car!

Ktlplxm
02-17-2009, 06:22 AM
Do you feel like the 1 3/4's are hurting you a little? It seems like your combo would be a perfect candidate for 1 7/8 LT's. Either way, you have a bad ass car!

I do not think they are hurting as much as some would believe. Too large of an exhaust on a car has always been a peave of mine, and I have discussed this plenty of times with customers of my own. I always give them an example of my own experience. Often we see, especially in mustangs and vette's, where people think they need huge exhaust by following the method of bigger is better. I also had an LT1 Trans am that made over 820 rwhp and 745 ftlbs of torque, despite the common thought on alot of Fbody sites that a single 3" would not support that power, it did. The car also had 1 3/4 primaries with 3" collectors. eventually after another cam change, we finally installed 1 7/8" with 3.5" collectors on the car and fabbed a true dual 3" over the axle exhaust. The HP difference was only 1012whp compared to 981 whp. So I often look at it as, if a roughly 1000whp car only picked up 31hp from redoing the entire exhaust, just increasing the primary size probably will not do much at all. Having said that, down the line when the inevitable forced induction finally rears its head, a much larger exhaust will be used. But at this moment, the price incurred by buying new headers just isn't worth it. However, I do appreciate the suggestion. there are still a few other things that I could add such as the ported intake and TB, I just don't see them adding that much power either. If someone can show definitive proof that an underdrive balancer, throttle body, and intake would make MUCH difference I would do them in a heartbeat. Or better yet, if any of the manufacturers would guarantee an increase or my money back I would do it LOL

GRRRR8
02-17-2009, 06:37 AM
Actually contrary to belief, the L92's don't respond as well to lift as their LS7 counterparts. Thats why if you look at Livernois cams for both set ups the L92 always have more duration and less lift. Also, when comparing cams, a few of us decided that yours wouldn't quite make the difference we need Charlie lol. The plan now is to utilize another of the Livernois grinds and do a trick exhaust system to keep things quiet when necessary and open it up when the pedal is down. LOL Fortunately the excellent flow characteristics of the existing heads doesn't need to be updated quite yet. Does anyone know if there is a larger combustion chamber head we can get our hands on yet?

There is always a better cam for every combo! I chose Kirk for this reason. He has more LS cam experience then most. In my experience a cam that makes the most power will be based on the combo you have, but might not be what the customer wants/needs. You have the cubic inches to have a lot more lift then a stock 6.0. Years ago we took a COMP 270 cam and installed it in 3 motors and as the cubes went up it didnt even sound like it had a cam in it.

MtbDoc
02-17-2009, 06:40 AM
I assume by better breathing you are referring to the cam also?

Yes, specifically more duration on your cam (as you have since noted in another post). These heads really do flow quite well. Also, I would suspect that a ported intake would be more important to you as it is likely a fair restriction in your system.

Or just go ahead and shove some boost down it's throat and quite messing around :woohoo:

Ktlplxm
02-17-2009, 01:49 PM
Once someone shows a significant increase from the ported intakes I will order one in a heart-beat!! The new cam Andy and I were discussing does have a decent amount of increased duration. The engine displacement wasn't really the reason for limited lift, but rather the cylinder head design. The LS7 heads like lift, whereas the LS3/76/92 heads do not for the same reason.