Homepage Garage Wiki Register Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > V8 LT1 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons


Bigwormgraphix


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-15-2016, 02:38 PM   #57
Speedy1975
FASTER!
 
Speedy1975's Avatar
 
Drives: Challenger Hellcat, 2SS Camaro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 2,245
That sucks. Grab a can of "Race Gas" additive and keep on hand?
__________________
-Speedy
2016 Go Mango Challenger Hellcat (PB E.T. in 1/4 Mile 9.83 @ 140MPH)

Speedy1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2016, 02:39 PM   #58
Silverz281974
 
Drives: 2016 Camaro 1SS A8 Hyper Blue
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Tallahassee
Posts: 11
I installed a catch can on my 100% stock 1ss a8 around 2000 miles. I just emptied it today with 4048 miles on the car. 2 or 3 tablespoons of oil inside. Not sure if that's good, bad, normal or not but that's how much was inside.
Silverz281974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2016, 03:05 PM   #59
Garys16SS
 
Garys16SS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 SS, BLACK, MANUAL
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: pittsburgh, pa
Posts: 277
I am amazed that Sunoco Gas is not on the list.
__________________
2016 Black/Black SS, 6speed, MRC, Roto-Fab air intake, Vitesse controller,
1 7/8" headers and exhaust from Stainless Works complete with nonNPP mufflers and 5"outlets, Katech ported TB, Moroso catch can, MRR M017 polished powder wheels, Eibach lowering springs, and BMR upper/ lower trailing arms and upper control arms. ZL1/1le sway bars and Magnusson Supercharger with Jannetty tune. Stay Tuned!!!......More to come.
2014 Camaro Ashen grey, 3.6, 6 speed, Vararam intake, Elite catch can, chrome wheels, and Vitesse controller.
2003 SSR red,
2016 Vette
Garys16SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2016, 03:19 PM   #60
SuperSound


 
SuperSound's Avatar
 
Drives: '17 Camaro 2SS A8
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 5,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverz281974 View Post
I installed a catch can on my 100% stock 1ss a8 around 2000 miles. I just emptied it today with 4048 miles on the car. 2 or 3 tablespoons of oil inside. Not sure if that's good, bad, normal or not but that's how much was inside.
Sounds normal to light based on what I've seen.
__________________
Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP
Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3

"Voices in your head are not considered insider information."

3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!)
6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!)
SuperSound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2016, 09:36 AM   #61
Elite Engineering


 
Elite Engineering's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,381
Thought it was time to address the OP on what is occurring in these engines, and how GM has addressed it all:




The response is correct in his description of the dry sump LT1 engine and the wet sump Camaro, and the only separation the Camaro has different aside from the dry sump is it has a "tank" that the cleanside line comes from the drivers side of the air bridge assy, and then runs to the tank and then slits to each valve cover. This cleanside, or fresh side "tank" is empty plastic and has no separation features internally. Also, that tank only helps when crankcase pressure builds and is then forced to seek the path of least resistance, which is backwards out the cleanside lines from each valve cover:


Now, lets address the "returning" what is caught internally to the crankcase/oil pan.


All GDI engines have huge issues with un burnt fuel washdown and contamination as well as the hard abrasive particulate matter that is forced past the piston rings and enters the crankcase as blow-by. In the port injection engines of the past, this was minimal, and the carbon was a "soft carbon" unlike the sand like abrasive baked on crystalline deposits of the GDI engines today so the PCV system would evacuate these effectively from the crankcase before most could settle and mix with the engine oil contaminating it. Now, as GDI introduces the fuel directly into the combustion chamber just before spark ignition, it is at 2,000-3,000 PSI and this forces many times the fuel past the rings. Add that to the 11.5:1 and higher compression ratios of most GDI engines today and much most particulate matter also passes the rings.


When these new engines are being designed to internally separate and return these abrasive and damaging compounds back to the crankcase overloads the engine oils ability to protect like in the past. GM recently dropped engine warranty on GDI engines to 60k miles from 100k miles (should tell a good story) and Ford down to 35k miles. You CANNOT return the concentrated mix of these compounds to the oil w/out accelerating wear and damage over time.


Lets look back first at the history of the PCV system and what id does, and how and why it was implemented and mandated in the mod 1960's.


GM invented the PCV system in WWII to prevent engine damage and crankcase "flash" explosions in the tanks used during the war. Prior to the mid 1960's, all engine used a "vented" system consisting of a "road draft" tube that vented pressure (and oil, etc.) out and it spilled onto the roadway creating the black oil lines down all road lanes in the "old days". Back then the average engine lasted 40-50k miles before a total rebuild was necessary. Valve jobs due to intake valve coking of carbureted engines were done commonly at 20-30k miles as the guides would wear from the coking deposits on the stems was cycled up into the sift guides with each stroke. The PCV system was mandated purely for pollution control as really the first step in what today is a very robust engine. This was only to address the run-ff of the oil spilled from draft tubes..but it was not until afterwards that it was found these same engines, running same oils and drain intervals, were now lasting well over 100k miles. Study of this soon found that the PCV system was now removing the damaging compounds that enter all internal combustion engines as blow-by, before they could settle and mix with the engine oil contaminating it. Now, as GDI is here to stay, the automakers have been struggling to address the issues they have all denied existed until the past few years when they could not explain away what we as techs and engineers were seeing first hand. The wear to valve guides, although much better materials are used, that had disappeared from modern cars for the past 30 or so years with the advent of port fuel injection which washed and cooled the valves constantly with detergent fuels, is now back worse than ever before.


The compounds that enter as blow-by are as follows, and GM and others are now returning these in concentrate to the crankcase!!! Crazy!!


Water: Released during the intense heat and pressure of the combustion process.


Un-burnt fuel: Washes past the piston rings, with GDI much higher than past port injection engines.


Sulfuric Acid: Created as the water mixes with other hydro carbon compounds.


Abrasive soot/ash/carbon: GDI not only produces hard crystalline deposits as abrasive as sand, but the higher cylinder pressures force more past the rings into the crankcase.


Oil mist becomes part of the PCV vapors from the windage present inside the crankcase, and the DOD (displacement on demand) also contributes to the presence of oil mist from the lifters bleeding past, etc.


The oil along with the added compounds that enter as blow-by produce the hard and large deposits on the back sides of the valves. Only properly separating these from the PCV vapors can prevent most of the coking and related issues. And this CANNOT be done internally w/out substantially shortening engine longevity!


The stance that all consumers are as dumb as "sheep" is the way the industry looks at today's buyer, and that mat be pretty accurate as most do not know how to even check their engine oil and other fluids. This along with not doing an oil change by 1000 miles to remove assy debris and wear particles from ring seating, etc. has contributed to engine failure and excessive engine consumption on many of today's engines. Now we cannot stop all of the coking as the EGR emulation function of VVT timing events allows some back filling of burnt gasses to the back sides of the intake valves, and that will always cause some coking, and to add small port injectors in to new GDI engines is not having much positive impact, is allowing greater incidence of pre-ignition (detonation) and greater timing is pulled to address this with knock retard, power and fuel economy suffer as well negating much of the GDI engines benefits.


What about the oil filter? Well, most internal engine wear (app. 70%) is caused by particulate matter in the 2-10 micron size, and as the average oil filter only traps down to 15 microns, most of this is left in the oil to constantly circulate through the engine wearing parts prematurely. Then the fuel and water does not get filtered out, and as the new standards of separating and retaining the oil and these other contaminates internally, this dilution and added contamination also overwhelms the engine oils ability to protect.


Here is an example of GM's latest internal separation and how effective it really is:





Watch the first section several times and pause it to see the valves at almost no miles accumulated. And further, here is a before and after dyno graph of a 2015 LT1 with 20k miles on it before and after a manual intake valve cleaning proving the false statements Tadge and other PR heads have made that they had tested these for hundreds of thousands of miles with NO coking or reduction in performance:








So this is why most GDI engines will only last a fraction of the miles a Port injection would.




All Automakers are down playing the effects and hiding this, but ALL are working overtime to find solutions. The average vehicle buyer will never accept an external system needing to be drained. So only the "enthusiast" will take the time to maintain these solutions.


Anyone doubt the impact? Look at a LY7 3.6L V6 engine at over 120k miles. This was GM's last port injection V6 engine that became the LLT, LFX, and today's LGX:





Now look at a LGX or LT1 V8 engine and see at 5k miles how severe the deposits already are:





And look back at the video on youtube.


Doubt yours look this bad? No need to "take the engine apart", simply take 15 minutes or less and remove your intake manifold and your valves are right there ti see up close and personal.


How do these deposits affect the engine?


First, as the deposits form more severely on the valves closet to the point of ingestion, those cylinders will receive less air charge than the ones furthest with the least, and will run richer than the rest as the upstream O2 senor for that bank will read the entire bank as a whole and the ECU will command the injectors equally. The cylinders with the least deposits will run lean for the same reason as more air charge enters those.


Look back at the picture above of the LY7 port injection engine....ZERO deposits after over 120,000 miles.


Also, highfivemike is 100% correct as all fuels come from the same distribution farms or ports. Shell and other add additional detergents at the bulk tank or at the station underground tanks, bit they are all the same gasoline with Federal mandated minimum detergent amounts. That said, as none of this fuel touches the valves...it has absolutely NO effect on deposits formation nor can any clean the valves as advertised...or the engine. What they do give benefit for is to prevent formations forming in the fuel injectors as the spray pattern and atomization level is easily disrupted from even tiny deposits in the injectors. If this occurs, even greater fuel wash down occurs.


In closing, only you the new vehicle owner can take the proper steps to enjoy long life as in the past, these are not the same as most are used to lasting with little care for hundreds of thousands of miles, these are here to stay and there is no proper solution to date from any automaker aside form some of the Super Cars.


Need further explanation on any of this? Just ask, but educating yourself is the best in understanding what your dealing with here.


Do it once, do it right, Elite Engineering USA
Elite Engineering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2016, 10:38 AM   #62
Hyper1SS

 
Hyper1SS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 Hyper Blue Metallic 1SS M6 NPP
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Indiana
Posts: 891
@EliteEngineering so as on your other post on installing a catch can you recommend going with the 3 port versus the 2 port on the new 2016 Camaro LT1 engines right? I wish there was a better place to install your can catch because I like the style better on your 5th Gen can where you had to unscrew to empty. But where you show the can on the LT1 engine there would be no way to unscrew and empty can because of room so you went with a sealed can like the RX cans with a drain valve and tube. Still don't see the system you showed available on your site yet for the 2016 Camaro. I have used your catch can on both of my 5th Gen Camaro's and loved them!! Thanks
__________________


2016 Hyper Blue Metallic 1SS M6 with body color hood vents, Silver broken 5 spoke wheels, NPP dual exhaust, Dark Night Interior Spectrum Lighting, Illuminated door sills plates.

Upgrades include: Roto-Fab intake, Mishimoto catch can, MBRP cat-back Race exhaust, TSP 1 7/8 headers, EFI E85 Flex Fuel, MRR M017 graphite wheels with Nitto N555 G2 tires, Goodridge stainless steel brake lines, Powder coated Brembo calipers, BMR suspension, Eibach sport springs, Emblempros fender badges


Order ID: TDHQMS
1100 on 01/07/2016 at Penske Chevrolet
6000 on 02/23/2016 Delivered to customer
Hyper1SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2016, 12:25 PM   #63
oldman


 
Drives: SS 6 speed of course
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Hilo, HI
Posts: 4,316
excellent, I would take up the other nose fittings, but I'm paranoid.
__________________
Forged short block, large duration sub .600 lift Cam Motion cam, 7200 RPM fuel cut, Pray Ported Heads, 3.85 pulley D1X, stage II intercooler, DSX secondary low side, DSX E85 sensor, Lingenfelter big bore 2.0 pump, ported front cats, 60608 Borla, LT4 injectors, ZL1 1LE driveshaft and Katech ported TB, ported MSD intake, BTR valvetrain, ARP studs, ProFlow valves, PS4 tires.
oldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2016, 01:44 PM   #64
6spdhyperblue


 
Drives: 6th gen
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: US
Posts: 3,664
can you show us a LT1 with 5,000 miles that had a catch can please?
6spdhyperblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2016, 06:10 PM   #65
mikeSS


 
mikeSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 c7
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: MI
Posts: 7,462
I do think these DI engines have valve coking problem.

BUT people have to realize the new GM LT1 specially is not as bad as pass DI engines. Vendors love to post pictures of major valve coking of other engines. the picture above that elite posted of a valve with 5k miles isnt a LT1 engine. in fact if all engines were that bad at 5k miles, companies would loss money in warranty work.

Heres the latest we have discovered on the corvette forum.

37k miles LT1 engine. Some coking, not major coking.

http://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/...or-test-4.html
mikeSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2016, 07:02 PM   #66
SuperSound


 
SuperSound's Avatar
 
Drives: '17 Camaro 2SS A8
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 5,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeSS View Post
I do think these DI engines have valve coking problem.

BUT people have to realize the new GM LT1 specially is not as bad as pass DI engines. Vendors love to post pictures of major valve coking of other engines. the picture above that elite posted of a valve with 5k miles isnt a LT1 engine. in fact if all engines were that bad at 5k miles, companies would loss money in warranty work.

Heres the latest we have discovered on the corvette forum.

37k miles LT1 engine. Some coking, not major coking.

http://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/...or-test-4.html
Right. In my experience turbo motors have the biggest problem with it. But then it usually doesn't show real symptoms (depending on your driving style) until late or after the warranties expire. So not directly impacting the OEMs.

Based on the pics of that LT1, seems by 60k miles things will be definitely impacting fuel economy and power.
__________________
Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP
Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3

"Voices in your head are not considered insider information."

3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!)
6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!)
SuperSound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2016, 08:52 PM   #67
mikeSS


 
mikeSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 c7
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: MI
Posts: 7,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSound View Post
Right. In my experience turbo motors have the biggest problem with it. But then it usually doesn't show real symptoms (depending on your driving style) until late or after the warranties expire. So not directly impacting the OEMs.

Based on the pics of that LT1, seems by 60k miles things will be definitely impacting fuel economy and power.
i just wanted to share some pictures of a actual LT1 engine. instead of catch can sellers posting the typical coked beyond believe valves from different engines.

i would think doing a manual cleaning of the valves every 50k miles is probably the best bet. Now i am sure a engine that was running a catch can will have cleaner valves. but at this point its all based off theory how cleaner the valves will be.

For my LT1 engine. It would take me 4 years to put 50k miles on this car. but at that point I will probably want something new. Worse case i get the valves manual cleaned and keep the car.
mikeSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2016, 07:24 AM   #68
6spdhyperblue


 
Drives: 6th gen
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: US
Posts: 3,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSound View Post
Right. In my experience turbo motors have the biggest problem with it. But then it usually doesn't show real symptoms (depending on your driving style) until late or after the warranties expire. So not directly impacting the OEMs.

Based on the pics of that LT1, seems by 60k miles things will be definitely impacting fuel economy and power.
was your experience with a BMW?
Why does a turbo make a difference? Can you explain? interesting point.


On a different subject, I have seen plenty of 350s, LS motors, and pontiac engines that have coking after 50,000 miles. Coking is nothing new, what is new, is the extreme coking we have seen from Audi/VW 4cyl and BMW DI engines. Those engines look horrific after 100k. I remember almost 8 years ago the first VW DI 4cyl we tore down and everyone in the shop looked mortified. this was on a K04 Jetta with meth that had a catch-can
the pics of the valves on corvette forum look normal enough to me from a picture.

Last edited by 6spdhyperblue; 07-19-2016 at 07:39 AM.
6spdhyperblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2016, 08:38 AM   #69
mikeSS


 
mikeSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 c7
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: MI
Posts: 7,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicul15 View Post


On a different subject, I have seen plenty of 350s, LS motors, and pontiac engines that have coking after 50,000 miles. Coking is nothing new, what is new, is the extreme coking we have seen from Audi/VW 4cyl and BMW DI engines. Those engines look horrific after 100k. I remember almost 8 years ago the first VW DI 4cyl we tore down and everyone in the shop looked mortified. this was on a K04 Jetta with meth that had a catch-can
the pics of the valves on corvette forum look normal enough to me from a picture.
I manly focus on the LT1 engine, but from what i heard turbo engines have more "blow by".
mikeSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2016, 09:52 AM   #70
SuperSound


 
SuperSound's Avatar
 
Drives: '17 Camaro 2SS A8
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 5,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicul15 View Post
was your experience with a BMW?
Why does a turbo make a difference? Can you explain? interesting point.


On a different subject, I have seen plenty of 350s, LS motors, and pontiac engines that have coking after 50,000 miles. Coking is nothing new, what is new, is the extreme coking we have seen from Audi/VW 4cyl and BMW DI engines. Those engines look horrific after 100k. I remember almost 8 years ago the first VW DI 4cyl we tore down and everyone in the shop looked mortified. this was on a K04 Jetta with meth that had a catch-can
the pics of the valves on corvette forum look normal enough to me from a picture.
VW funny enough. Sounds like you have seen and had the same experience I did. I had a '09 2.0TSI in a Jetta. At 30k miles it had lost a couple of MPG average on each tank and some loss of power. Had them perform the upper intake cleaning while replacing the defective intake manifold. Immediately MPG returned to normal.

Like MikeSS said, turbos force more blow by (likely because of the increased pressures of FI). Someone probably has a better answer as to why.
__________________
Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP
Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3

"Voices in your head are not considered insider information."

3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!)
6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!)
SuperSound is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.