[george]

Originally Posted by Mark R

Pump failure is not complicated. The pivoting ring inside the pump, the part that bears against the pump vanes, will crack. Once that does, it is a matter of a few seconds or a few hours until the pump has a catastrophic failure.

Other vehicles with the same pump aren't reporting such a high failure rate. Could it be the stress the LT4 engine puts on the pump is the reason?

[Mark R]

Originally Posted by george

Other vehicles with the same pump aren't reporting such a high failure rate. Could it be the stress the LT4 engine puts on the pump is the reason?

Well, increase the stress enough on any component and you will break it.

[55chev]

Originally Posted by george

Other vehicles with the same pump aren't reporting such a high failure rate. Could it be the stress the LT4 engine puts on the pump is the reason?

MAYBE ,but more than likely a harmonic frequency issue.due to being supercharged,if you think about the blower belt attached to the front pulley.

[george]

Originally Posted by 55chev

MAYBE ,but more than likely a harmonic frequency issue.due to being supercharged,if you think about the blower belt attached to the front pulley.

Interesting!

[ZX-10R]

Originally Posted by Katech_Zach

They did make revisions, there are 7 part numbers I believe. So I do think the later model years have improved pumps, but they still have chances of failure. Just at a lot less probability. Every time GM releases a new version, we buy one and test it like the rest. We have been able to break every pump we have stressed so far. The newer pumps are harder to break, but they still break.

Cracked housing (center left)

[Mark R]

Originally Posted by ZX-10R

Cracked housing (center left)

There you go. A picture is worth a thousand words.

[george]

The TSB (https://gm-techlink.com/?p=12041) describes there may be no or low oil pressure along with DTC P06DD (Engine Oil Pressure Control Solenoid Valve Performance). The two issues including the cracked housing must be connected somehow. I read in a subsequent GM Authority article about KATECH and it has some good numbers regarding tolerances.(https://gmauthority.com/blog/2019/05...engines-video/). It would be nice if a recall was eventually done, but I doubt that.

[Katech_Zach]

Originally Posted by Z OH 6

Dry sump or wet sump has nothing to go with the oil pump failures in 2017 and 2018. There are no advantages to dry sump other than space savings as long as both system have similar oil capacities. The Camaro has enough ground clearance to get away with a wet sump oiling system to reduce the cost and complexity vs a dry sump system. If GM engineers felt a dry sump was needed in the Camaro, it would have been there.

The is extremely inaccurate information.

The only reason to go wet sump is simplicity, pricing, and packaging. It is typically easier to package a wet sump oiling system because there is no dry sump tank. It would have added $2,000~ or more to the base price of the Camaro that they needed to keep competitive with Mustang/Charger/Challenger/etc.

Having a dry sump is extremely advantageous, especially for a tracked vehicle. You are pulling your oil from a full tank of oil, and all engine oil is scavenged out of the pan and pushed back into the tank after being filtered. There is 0 change at oil starvation if everything is functioning properly, regardless of track conditions.

GM engineers put a factory corvette dry sump oiling system in the GT4 Camaro because the wet sump was inadequate. There is a reason why a lot of the seriously tracked 6th gen Camaros are scattering on large highspeed sweepers or uphill straights. Oil is returning to the sump and the g-force is keeping the oil away from the pickup tube.

For the large majority of 6th gen owners, they will not push the car past the limits of the wet sump oiling system, so it is adequate for most users which is why GM kept it the way it is. The only reason the track-heavy ZL1 1LE did not have a dry sump oiling system, was the packaging involving the supercharger front drive and dry sump tank. They would have had to redesign the entire front rad / duct assembly to package a tank in front of the engine like the Z28.

[Z OH 6]

Originally Posted by Katech_Zach

The is extremely inaccurate information.

The only reason to go wet sump is simplicity, pricing, and packaging. It is typically easier to package a wet sump oiling system because there is no dry sump tank. It would have added $2,000~ or more to the base price of the Camaro that they needed to keep competitive with Mustang/Charger/Challenger/etc.

Having a dry sump is extremely advantageous, especially for a tracked vehicle. You are pulling your oil from a full tank of oil, and all engine oil is scavenged out of the pan and pushed back into the tank after being filtered. There is 0 change at oil starvation if everything is functioning properly, regardless of track conditions.

GM engineers put a factory corvette dry sump oiling system in the GT4 Camaro because the wet sump was inadequate. There is a reason why a lot of the seriously tracked 6th gen Camaros are scattering on large highspeed sweepers or uphill straights. Oil is returning to the sump and the g-force is keeping the oil away from the pickup tube.

For the large majority of 6th gen owners, they will not push the car past the limits of the wet sump oiling system, so it is adequate for most users which is why GM kept it the way it is. The only reason the track-heavy ZL1 1LE did not have a dry sump oiling system, was the packaging involving the supercharger front drive and dry sump tank. They would have had to redesign the entire front rad / duct assembly to package a tank in front of the engine like the Z28.

10-4, just going by the 1,000 other articles I've read on wet sump vs dry sump. Good to know they were all wrong. That being said, I don't think wet sump vs dry sump has anything to do with the oil pump failures since that seems to be an oil pump design issue.

[Mikesvt04]

Katech_Zach


Can you please expand on the revisions of the stock pump and where/ what stresses cause failures in 19+ cars?

[Katech_Zach]

Originally Posted by Z OH 6

10-4, just going by the 1,000 other articles I've read on wet sump vs dry sump. Good to know they were all wrong.

There is a purpose for both systems. Wet sumps are typically not suggested for any sort of road racing. COPO uses a wet sump in their drag engines, but they have special pans designed for oil sloshing while launching. There is a reason Corvette hasn't had any wet sump engines since 2014.

You can improve the wet sump oiling system via baffling in the pan (improved racing, not released for gen 6 yet), but this is a band-aid.

Here is a good overview of both if you wish to further educate yourself on the subject:

[ZX-10R]

Higher viscosity oil spec for the 1LE is another band aid

No reason to run a modern engine with higher oil viscosity than 10W-30 imo, 10W-40 for racing maybe

[george]

Originally Posted by Katech_Zach

The is extremely inaccurate information.

The only reason to go wet sump is simplicity, pricing, and packaging. It is typically easier to package a wet sump oiling system because there is no dry sump tank. It would have added $2,000~ or more to the base price of the Camaro that they needed to keep competitive with Mustang/Charger/Challenger/etc.

Having a dry sump is extremely advantageous, especially for a tracked vehicle. You are pulling your oil from a full tank of oil, and all engine oil is scavenged out of the pan and pushed back into the tank after being filtered. There is 0 change at oil starvation if everything is functioning properly, regardless of track conditions.

GM engineers put a factory corvette dry sump oiling system in the GT4 Camaro because the wet sump was inadequate. There is a reason why a lot of the seriously tracked 6th gen Camaros are scattering on large highspeed sweepers or uphill straights. Oil is returning to the sump and the g-force is keeping the oil away from the pickup tube.

For the large majority of 6th gen owners, they will not push the car past the limits of the wet sump oiling system, so it is adequate for most users which is why GM kept it the way it is. The only reason the track-heavy ZL1 1LE did not have a dry sump oiling system, was the packaging involving the supercharger front drive and dry sump tank. They would have had to redesign the entire front rad / duct assembly to package a tank in front of the engine like the Z28.

Zach:
Your recommendation for those of us with extended warranty on a 2017 ZL1 regarding the oil pump replacement?

[Katech_Zach]

Originally Posted by george

Zach:
Your recommendation for those of us with extended warranty on a 2017 ZL1 regarding the oil pump replacement?

If you do not modify your car, or you work with a dealership that has more leeway, I wouldn't worry with the extended warranty. You should be covered.

If you do have a failure, I would highly suggest for a new complete engine, and not a repair. Junk runs through the engine at varying levels from the failure, and you do not want to just slap a new pump on and go.

Originally Posted by Mikesvt04

Katech_Zach


Can you please expand on the revisions of the stock pump and where/ what stresses cause failures in 19+ cars?

I won't go into extreme detail, but the same failure happens in the 19+ cars, just far less frequent. We can cause them to fail the same way as the first revision, it just takes a lot more effort/stress to do so.

We have had a handful of 17-18 cars come in with pump issues, only 1 19+ car with a failure, which happened to be a 2021.