[Puddin]

Originally Posted by Crushin_LT1

I've definitely noticed most mods appear to be either looks/sound-based with small benefits or wildly expensive.

Why I'm keeping it somewhat simple, it is a daily driver after-all, just looking down the road for post-warranty and when I might have a second car.

Apologies, not purposefully derailing just trying to customize my car to a reasonable degree.

If your not wanting to spend a ton just do bolt ons. Do a msd manifold, 95mm throttle body, e85 and some headers and it will feel like a whole new car. Don't be scared to modify that's part of the fun of owning these types of cars. Some of us like doing this stuff just because we like to tinker with things and it wouldn't matter what car we had we would still tinker on it.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

I think this is a key point, look at other folks' mods and see what you think.

You used to be able to build a whole new motor that would likely double the hp of the stock motor a few decades ago, these days people are spending similar money on cam, heads, etc. to get 10-20% more power, and in the process losing warranty and making the car incapable of passing emissions.

IMO, you're better off buying a ZL1 if you want more power, and if you have a ZL1 and want more power you got to think about spending 6-figures on your car and what else you could get for that cash, like a 911 Turbo S that can do the 1/4 in low 10s stock, with warranty and reasonable resale value. Your cost of ownership is likely to be less than a modded ZL1 in the end. Modifying modern cars is going down a path of diminishing returns and mostly not worth it, imo.

Loving the original ZL-1 aside (yes - I know that was an engine, not a model), this was part of the reason I chose this model. It had the most power and would be the "easiest" to get to the power level I was hoping for, AND stay within this state's compliance. Even pulley'ing the 1740 wouldn't have been too bad, in terms of stock-appearing.

I'd be interested in as much information about manifolds/LTs as is out there. From what I recall reading, manifolds were pretty dang good, and it was the stock cats' that would eventually start killing power around 650-RWHP. I think it was JRE saying they start to get hot and trap heat and you start getting into timing problems in the combustion chamber. Then you have to start retarding timing, and start killing power.

[NA18CamaroSS]

Originally Posted by Crushin_LT1

So can someone help me understand what changing to a ported intake manifold or to the LT2 or MSD IM does? Is it similar to the Ported Throttle Body where it allows more airflow, or are there further differences?

Trying to understand what mods are cost effective and street legal, lol.

My background is in Honda B-series engines. I have lots of experience building and tuning these motors. The various intake manifolds available for these engines are a perfect way to illustrate how intake manifold design affects power and torque.
Let's start with the Integra LS intake manifold. It has a relatively small plenum and long, thin runners. This intake manifold makes good torque down low, but runs out of air above about 6,500 (the stock rev limiter on those motors is 7,200).
Next, we have the Integra Type-R intake manifold. The plenum is larger and the runners are shorter and fatter. This manifold will give up a little bottom end torque, but pulls pretty strong up to about 8,800 RPM or so-provided you have enough cam and a decent header/exhaust combo.
Last, we have the Edelbrock Victor X. The plenum is huge and the runners are extremely short and fat. Below 8,000 RPM these things are dogs on N/A motors. To take advantage of this manifold you have to run a very large cam and rev the motor to 9,500. This manifold also works well on turbo motors, but that's a story for another day.
With the Camaro LT1 motor, the stock LT1 intake manifold would be the Integra LS manifold, for the sake of comparison. The MSD intake manifold would be the Integra Type-R intake manifold in this demonstration. The Holley high ram would be the equivalent of the Victor X.
The stock LT1 intake manifold peaks around 5,700 or so. The MSD peaks around 6,000 RPM or so and starts beating the stock intake manifold from about 5,000 RPM on up. At 6,5000 RPM the MSD is better by about 30+ HP. Finally you have the Holley high ram. You give up a bunch of torque down low, but it makes a ton of power up top. All of this is subject to camshaft/header/exhaust and tune variations, but overall this should give you an basic idea of what you are dealing with.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Not surprised with the results. Factory headers with cat delete pipes are a pretty good setup. Most gains I have seen are those moving to cat less headers. There was a member that picked up 19whp on a 650-700whp supercharged car coming from stock headers and cat deletes to cat less headers.

Now If you have to run cats then headers with high flow cats definitely gains over completely stock exhaust.

As mentioned by another member, cat less headers or cat delete stock headers passes emissions with Ethanol fuels. I believe most would run Ethanol fuel if it was available.

So perhaps instead of giving people shit for wanting to modify exhausts to make more power you should be asking our government why are we continuing to run all of this expensive emission equipment to clean up shit pump fuel? Clean burning fuels have been around for years that would not require catalyst to pass emissions.

Where’s the evidence of any fuel that could meet current NOx, HC, CO, CO2, & PM standards without a catalyst? I’m calling BS on this statement.

[cmitchell17]

How can we port our stock manifolds? I know they are double wall and I believe the cat downpipe is double wall as well which makes things almost impossible to do anything significant with.

Given how big the cross section is on the manifolds and cat pipe, I don't see how you could do much besides finish the rough let over edges and things from manufacturing and clean up the burrs and other sharp edges?

The factory manifolds and cat downpipes I think are the only thing that can make the car sound good. I know I am going to get bashed for this but every single aftermarket header makes the car sound like crap. I am not talking about the same sound that comes from the back of the car to me headers make zero difference in that sound besides it being louder and more obnoxious with no cats. The stock exhaust has a lot of good engineering in it to keep away these bad sounding ticks and crappy work van sounds. I don't believe there is any engineering at all that goes into aftermarket headers period.

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

Where’s the evidence of any fuel that could meet current NOx, HC, CO, CO2, & PM standards without a catalyst? I’m calling BS on this statement.

It's not the first time I've heard it. Lund Jr also made the same statement about his catless mustangs when the Epa visited his shop. Now I don't know about hc, co , co2, &pm but he did specifically mention the NOx.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by Puddin

It's not the first time I've heard it. Lund Jr also made the same statement about his catless mustangs when the Epa visited his shop. Now I don't know about hc, co , co2, &pm but he did specifically mention the NOx.

Talk is cheap though. I want to see the data to prove it. Which fuel was he referring to. Meeting one constituent doesn’t cut it.. you need to meet ALL to certify.

[cmitchell17]

Originally Posted by Puddin

It's not the first time I've heard it. Lund Jr also made the same statement about his catless mustangs when the Epa visited his shop. Now I don't know about hc, co , co2, &pm but he did specifically mention the NOx.

I thought NOx would just be dependent upon combustion temperature so would be independent of type of fuel?

I think synthetic fuels have a lot of potential to reduce a lot of "emissions" that are probably not nearly as prevalent as the usual ones just because the fuels would be more pure.

I think given how efficient the modern three way catalyst is in flow, yes I know that's what we are talking about how much power it takes, but relatively this is not much. Also the fact that its on every vehicle so they can be produced in significant quantities and they are very recyclable. The do gooders don't want to hear this though and continue for banning and 100% electric no exceptions.

[Motor Fast]

If it was only about acceleration then people should just buy a Tesla. For me that's not why I buy toy cars. It also has to do with the sound which is why every toy car I own the exhaust was the first thing I changed out. I've driven many bone stock Corvette's and Camaro's and they're just okay. With headers, which make a huge difference in sound, and a good exhaust they are a thrill to play around in. Some cars don't sound all that great with a stock camshaft and dumps but headers and a good exhaust really elevate the driving experience of a car for a lot of people, but it's all personal preference. Never thought I'd see bashing of louder cars on a performance forum, much different days from LS1Tech. The performance industry is such a small percentage of the car population as a whole. If pollution was a true concern perhaps polyester, styrofoam, plastic bags, and many other materials should be the focus over modified cars. The performance world is a small group of people just trying to have fun.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

Where’s the evidence of any fuel that could meet current NOx, HC, CO, CO2, & PM standards without a catalyst? I’m calling BS on this statement.

Call BS all you want I don't give a ****.

[Motor Fast]

Originally Posted by cmitchell17

I thought NOx would just be dependent upon combustion temperature so would be independent of type of fuel?

I think synthetic fuels have a lot of potential to reduce a lot of "emissions" that are probably not nearly as prevalent as the usual ones just because the fuels would be more pure.

I think given how efficient the modern three way catalyst is in flow, yes I know that's what we are talking about how much power it takes, but relatively this is not much. Also the fact that its on every vehicle so they can be produced in significant quantities and they are very recyclable. The do gooders don't want to hear this though and continue for banning and 100% electric no exceptions.

If I remember correctly from my automotive classes NOx is largely driven by the temperature of the combustion chamber, which is why diesels emit a lot more of this gas. Higher combustion temperatures equate to higher levels of NOx being emitted. I recall in one of my automotive classes the instructor had a heavily modified Mustang without catalytic converters and his car was burning cleaner than the Honda we connected up. Not saying catalytic converters don't clean the gas levels up but rather a well tuned car is not as bad as some may think.

[s346k]

Originally Posted by cmitchell17

I am not talking about the same sound that comes from the back of the car to me headers make zero difference in that sound besides it being louder and more obnoxious with no cats.

i will disagree with this 100%. headers will provide a much cleaner and smoother exhaust note vs a manifold (same muffler) every time. im drawing my conclusion from the fact that i've owned several vehicles with cat deletes and switched to headers. not going to lie, that was one of the main reasons i put headers on this car so soon.

[Chrome383Z]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Call BS all you want I don't give a ****.

I plan on actually running CATs (CSP w/ HF CATS) but only because some tuners are making that a requirement now. I’m going 100% E85. Like you I wish this fuel was considered more seriously, and not because I’m just an Indiana farm boy it really does burn cleaner.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by Chrome383Z

I plan on actually running CATs (CSP w/ HF CATS) but only because some tuners are making that a requirement now. I’m going 100% E85. Like you I wish this fuel was considered more seriously, and not because I’m just an Indiana farm boy it really does burn cleaner.