08-22-2016, 10:27 AM | #85 | |
Drives: 2021 Tesla Model 3 LR Join Date: May 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 968
|
Quote:
To my understanding, the manual Camaro SS's LT1 has the hardware for AFM, but it is just simply disabled. |
|
08-22-2016, 11:30 AM | #86 |
|
Port injection which is where the injectors sit upstream from the valves in the intake manifold just in front of the intake ports in the heads.
Direct injection is where the injector sit inside the cylinder combustion chamber between the valves. Thus the fuel is "directly" injected into the combustion chamber at or near TDC (top dead center) as the piston is finishing the compression stroke and the spark plug fires.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS Hyper Blue 6MT NPP
2010 Camaro 2SS Cam/Headers/CAI/3.91 gears 476 rwhp/440 rwtq (sold) Last edited by SSDan; 08-22-2016 at 11:57 AM. |
08-22-2016, 11:34 AM | #87 |
|
I believe you have that right. Its the same LT 1 engine whether the car is an A8 or M6. On the A8 the AFM hardware is active and on the M6 the AFM hardware is there but does not engage for cylinder deactivation.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS Hyper Blue 6MT NPP
2010 Camaro 2SS Cam/Headers/CAI/3.91 gears 476 rwhp/440 rwtq (sold) |
08-22-2016, 11:47 AM | #88 | |
Drives: White Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 251
|
Quote:
I was only saying that it is a feature of the engine whether or not the transmission has the electronic capability to make use of it. |
|
08-22-2016, 11:56 AM | #89 |
"Lohla"
|
Having owned both a cammed LS3 and a stock LT1: Just based on performance, LT1 is better in every way.
__________________
OG Trans and Diff but all else is upgraded. Twins bring wins ;-)
|
08-22-2016, 12:04 PM | #90 |
|
I agree as I have owned a cammed LS3 and now the LT1. Other than missing the awesome sounding chop at idle from my old cammed LS3 - I like my new LT1 much better. The long flat torque curve of the LT1 with 455 ft. lbs at peak make this a great engine paired against the gearing choices in the M6.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS Hyper Blue 6MT NPP
2010 Camaro 2SS Cam/Headers/CAI/3.91 gears 476 rwhp/440 rwtq (sold) |
08-22-2016, 12:19 PM | #91 |
Drives: 2016 Camaro 2SS Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 771
|
I'm a little late to the thread... but the only thing that really matters:
For some reason official GM dyno charts start and end at different RPMs, but you get the idea and you can see the LT1 is still building power when the LS3 already dropped off.
__________________
|
08-22-2016, 12:34 PM | #92 | |
Drives: 2019 Shock ZL1 Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: here
Posts: 800
|
Quote:
The service new replacement part numbers are THE SAME for A8 and M6 Camaro for the LT1. Its just a software calibration that makes the difference.
__________________
From Super Chevy mag, April 2002: "Most of the weekend Settlemeire was meeting and greeting and quickly became known as simply "The Camaro Dude" (note, even his initials are SS)."
|
|
08-22-2016, 12:55 PM | #93 |
Drives: Coupeless :( Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: SWFL
Posts: 980
|
That torque curve is a thing of beauty.
|
08-22-2016, 03:54 PM | #94 | |
Drives: White Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 251
|
Quote:
Here's what happened, someone mentioned that the LT1 had AFM and the LS3 didn't. Someone ELSE said 'yeah but the M6 doesn't get the AFM, only the A8'. My point was the transmission has nothing to do with the engine. The question was 'what is different between the LS3 and LT1', and if we start talking about transmissions as part of that conversation, then we might as well include the available differentials and suspensions, etc. Nothing I said in any of my posts is wrong, yet people keep quoting them and 'correcting them' saying the exact same thing I said in my posts. I am so confused. edit: I am curious about the TR6070, this is the first time I've read anyone saying that about the packaging problems, and I have always wondered about it. Is the TR6070 specifically designed to be installed in a transaxle setup? Or is there just more space in the Corvette? I assumed they didn't put it in the Camaro to keep some differentiation between their top sports car and lower tier sports car. Your post indicates that is incorrect. Looking for any more info on that. Thanks! Last edited by aestil; 08-24-2016 at 10:55 AM. |
|
08-24-2016, 02:09 AM | #95 |
Drives: 2016 2SS Garnet Red Camaro Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 840
|
Very impressive tech talk. These kind of posts remind me of why I belong to Camaro6 forum.
__________________
Ordered: 8/8/15, 2SS Garnet Red
Built: 10/14/15 Current: Took Delivery, 12/24/15 Added Procharger supercharger. |
11-18-2016, 10:37 PM | #96 |
Drives: Blue Velvet 2SS, 8A, No Options Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: South Florida
Posts: 57
|
Danss24, to answer your question, above:
I believe Ford dropped the 302/5.0 motor from the Mustang GT in '96, in favor of the 4.6 liter "modular" motor ... I think they called it. Power went down from something like 225 hp to around 215, if I recall correctly. Indeed, I had a '95 Mustang GT for a couple of years: Replaced it with a beautiful new '98 Z28 when that year's model came out, with the groundbreaking, all aluminum LS1 power-plant making 305 HORSEPOWER! I still have that bad boy sitting in my garage, right next to my brand new, '16 Blue Velvet Camaro 2SS with the new LT1 -- which i think is the THIRD small block to be so designated. Indeed, before i had my '98 Z28 with its LS1, and way, way before my new Camaro SS with the LT1 arrived, I owned a '92 'Corvette, with the then-second small block to have been labeled as the "LT1." It made 300 HP, and was considered quite the hot dog for a stock car at the time. So among others, I've had two LT1s -- the second and third motors so designated -- along with the last Ford 302/5.0 they made ... well, until the 5.0 DOHC (right?) "Coyote" motor came out. AND I had the pleasure of owning the 5.7 "Hemi" in a Dodge Charger R/T, which I just replaced with the (wonderful) 2SS Camaro. I felt love of some sort for each of these cars, EXCEPT FOT THE 'STANG. Sorry, Ford guys. I love Chevrolet. I can also be a Dodge Man, Dodges can be dead cool and I accept them. But Mustang? Again, sorry.... |
11-18-2016, 10:55 PM | #97 |
Drives: Blue Velvet 2SS, 8A, No Options Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: South Florida
Posts: 57
|
i have -- STILL HAVE -- a '98 Z28; it was the inaugural year of the LS line of motors that continued proudly, I believe, until the recent advent of the new (and third) LT1. This first-ever LS motor in my Camaro never used any appreciable amount of oil. Never, not in over 220k miles. Maybe hard for some of you to believe, but true. (I aways used full synthetic FWIW....)
|
11-18-2016, 11:48 PM | #98 |
Drives: 2016 SS Convertible Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: California
Posts: 1,108
|
yup - my second LT1 as well. I had a '69 Camaro pro-touring car with a C4 based front clip and a 94 Corvette LT1 with hot cam and long tube headers. Made around 380hp or so. Wasn't all that fast, but at least was a light car. Sounded fantastic at idle tho!
The first LT1 was a solid cam 350 making I think 370hp (old gross rating scale) in the 1970 Corvette. It was also available in the Z/28 starting in 1970. Great motor, but very much old school! I also think it was technically slated the LT-1 Lots of great motors from chevy over the years, and they just keep getting better! |
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|