260DET Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Yeh I saw the lifter misalignment BRAAP, with the scuffing that would induce perhaps an old school oil would have done better. Anyway, its a side issue I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 9, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 9, 2009 Yeh I saw the lifter misalignment BRAAP, with the scuffing that would induce perhaps an old school oil would have done better. Anyway, its a side issue I guess I didn't think of it in that light, my apologies. The old school oils may have been just good enough to allow the lifters/cam to live past 200,000 miles... Hmmm... I am considering using a semi-synthetic, possibly full, not sure this 150,000+ mile short block is worth that sort of attention as it will only be in the car for maybe 2 years tops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Synthetics are too thin for a high mileage block, IMO. I wouldn't use Synthetic on anything with more than 100,000 miles. It'd just be a waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
260DET Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 The Shell oil I use is readily available in 20 liter drums so it works out cheap enough to encourage regular oil changes. Shell tech said it was good for a race engine if changed regularly, I hope they are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 10, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) LS2 GTO exhaust manifolds arrived yesterday, (as well as another cool goodie. An OE GM .525” lift LSx camshaft with matching springs and pushrods...) First things first, a few GTO exhaust mani glamour shots, then a quick and dirty mock up. After that, the question of manifold outlet size popped into my head… I’ll skip the boring details and save that of the LSx swappers guide supplement later. Short version is the driver side GTO manifold could be made to work, though will require creative down pipe fabrication to clear the steering shaft and rerouting the P/S steering hard line. Passenger side GTO manifold “just” contacts the frame rail. Angle milling the passenger head flange would tuck that side in little closer and clear fine. These are unique in that the out let is aimed aft, not down or partially down. Down side to these manifolds is the small outlet size! Even the outlet of the my stock 5.3L truck manifolds is ½” larger ID!?! For my weenie little 5.3, these exhaust manifolds may not be restricting it too much. But for those of you with an LS2 GTO with stock manifolds, you have more mid to upper RPM power available in getting rid of those manifolds for a set of properly fitting headers! For those wanting a simple Z-32 LSx, not concerned about every last ounce of 400+ HP, these manifolds might be a viable option. Here are some shots I took today… Here are the Z32 GTO exhaust manifold fitment shots. Driver side; Passenger side; Till the next update when the Caddy CTS-V and Vette LS2 manifolds arrive which according to online tracking will be next week some time for both. Awaiting a reply about a set of F-bod exhaust manifolds with possibly a pair of scrap LS heads for mock up only purposes. Edited April 10, 2009 by BRAAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 Wow.. I knew that GM made it so you couldn't go WOT all the time with the LS2 GTOs, but smaller exhaust too??? Geez. The power steering hard line shouldn't be a big problem, but clearing the steering shaft might be. I think the LS2 Vette manifolds are going to be the winner in this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 14, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 14, 2009 Ok… I am pretty sure there is no doubt that I probably for sure should have my head examined… Future of this particular project is looking a little bleak at the moment. Nothing to do with the car, but everything to do with my future daily driver plans. Every time I start thinking, I always get into this sort of trouble… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 Oh come on! Don't be so vague, you're killing me. What are these "future daily driver plans"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 WTF?! Bleak??? You mean you're not going to do this project now??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 14, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 14, 2009 Short and sweet versions is this; That $#&*’n rack & pinion is making it VERY difficult to hit my intended target with the Z-32. That target being N/A LSx powered capable of tickling the 12 second barrier at the strip in N/A trim, quiet, unmolested, i.e. all factory systems in tact and functional such as climate control, ABS, yadda yadda yadda. As close to a factory offered LSx powered Z-32 as possible. That means no cutting the firewall, no altering the suspension geometry to any great deal etc. I love this car with its drop dead gorgeous sex appeal, spirited handling traits, and it’s a Z, but being a HybridZ guy, spoiled rotten with a low 12 second daily driver HybridZ in the past?... At this point, I am looking into the possibility of converting it to a front steer rack, (rack that is in front of the front axle line just like the S-30 cars). That would mean possibly making the forward facing T/C rods, rearward facing. Altering/custom fabbed cross member for the new rack, (possibly a BMW rack as they are front steer and known for their quality of “feel/feedbackâ€). With the steering knuckles cast in the spindle I would have to swap the spindles left for right. With the caster, it looks as though the steering knuckle ball joint would end up even higher in the car resulting in a rack that would need to be higher as well to keep steering and suspension geometry changes and bump steer to a minimum! Raising the rack higher in the car only compounds the problem I’m running into now, even further, i.e. the future of this project isn’t looking good. Sorry guys. Granted, if I would just succumb to gutting the dash side of the firewall, cutting the firewall to locate the engine properly, and then dealing with whatever systems end up being deleted because they no longer fit under the dash, this would be much easier. I’m not 25 years old any more. Those are not compromises I’m willing to make in my daily driver. Regardless of the outcome, the LSx is the power-plant of my future daily driver and I will continue with my LSx research and engine build. Hmmm.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShaggyZ Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 Z31 EDIT: ...and just so the first thing that comes to mind isn't a ragged out Z31 owned by a 17 year old, here's a decent example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 Why not get that bellhousing and sit the motor back just a little further? That may solve most of the problems and you shouldn't have to cut into the firewall. The bellhousing wraps close around the clutch (maybe 1/2" off total) and it's mostly flat. The biggest benefit is obviously that it's a shorter bellhousing, but it's also SIP. There's also the option of the quicktime bellhousing too which looks much smaller (and it's a lot lighter) which may get the job done as well. But it's not SIP and who knows what may happen if the flywheel came loose! Either way, two options for moving the motor back a little more and not molesting the firewall. The McLeod bellhousing is what I've chosen for my swap for the fact that it's SIP, stronger, and readily available everywhere. $450 isn't bad when it may be removing the need to dice up the firewall. (Maybe just a little tapping from a rubber hammer?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 14, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 14, 2009 (edited) Z31 EDIT: ...and just so the first thing that comes to mind isn't a ragged out Z31 owned by a 17 year old, here's a decent example. Shaggy, Thank you for the inspiration. You nailed my ideal Z-31 perfectly! WOWZERS! I’ll be honest. I’m VERY torn right now. I LOVE my Z-32… but… Edited April 14, 2009 by BRAAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 14, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 14, 2009 (edited) Caddy CTS-V LS6 exhaust manifolds arrived today. Interesting manifolds these are. The outlets are 2 different sizes. Driver side is 2 3/8” opening, passenger is 2 5/8”?!?! On the driver side, there is quite a bit of material in the casting around the header pipe flange to open up the one side that is fed by the front 3 cylinders therefore balancing the outlet dimension a bit. It is quite clear GM spent more time and attention on Vette exhaust manifolds. It'll be interesting to see the LS2 Vette manifolds when they arrive later this week. Now on to the really cool part. These manifolds fit the Z-32 LSx with the engine sitting in this position PERFECTLY! (If you are moving your back, forward, up or down from the this location, no guarantee these will fit this nice). Here be the pics, Cadillac CTS-V LS6 exhaust manifolds; Parallax in the pic, actual measurement is 2 5/8" ID, not 2 9/16" as depicted Here is the fitment in the mock up Z-32; Driver side; Clears the steering shaft. Passenger side; Sorry about the blurred shot. It fits perfectly! Edited April 14, 2009 by BRAAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 That IS a pretty nice Z31 and I'm not a fan of those models at all. I'd still rather do the conversion to a Z32 because of it's suspension and styling. But if I had to go back a generation, that Z31 looks really temping. Even in that color. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 Wow... Looks like the manifolds will solve quite a few problems. Does this mean it's still on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 15, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 15, 2009 I had no sooner posted the CTS-V info when Fed-Ex dropped off the Vette LS2 manifolds.. Got them unboxed, took a few pics, measured the outlet, quick and dirty mock up in the Z-32 mock up mule… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 15, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 15, 2009 LS2 C6 Vette Exhaust manifolds… This one is for CRASH, knowing he has been patiently waiting the LS2 manifold update, (previous post was purely a teaser to torment CRASH… Surprised he wasn't screaming for the details yet... ) Outlets are 2 3/8” for both, with a cool header flange gasket. Note the recess in the header pipe flange. Not sure if the Vette pipe flange will be needed or just a flat flange. They seem to be for the most part symmetrical like the other Vette manifolds. Fitment in the Z-32 looks pretty good. The CTS-V manifolds are a better fit, but these Vette LS2 manifolds are a close second place and look like can be made to work. The biggest issue is the driver side and getting the down pipe to clear the steering shaft and hydraulic lines. Down pipe to be an immediate offset towards the block should be enough. LS2 Vette exhaust manifold mock up; Passenger side; Driver side; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 If the motor is set back to where it'd normally be, do you think the down pipe would clear the steering shaft? I don't really know how many inches forward your motor is sitting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted April 15, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted April 15, 2009 This is with engine sitting in the least compromising position as depicted in post #3, first page in this thread. It wont go back any further without cutting the firewall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.