MadBill wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 9:16 pm
One apparent weirdness is that with a wet sump, the gauge reading psi will drop by 1/2 the "Hg. of pan vacuum, however the operating pressure differential between the pan and bearings will remain the same. In other words, if you enclosed the gauge in a sealed plexi box plumbed to the pan, the gauge would then not be affected by pan vacuum.
202ci EH wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:53 pm
True, sounds more like CGT's seeing a windage or cavitation problem though
Screenshot (40).png
Exactly
This screenshot shows the difference in pressure with and without vacuum, so yeah they're is more going on than just a conversion or reference. The good news is that upon inspection it doesn't appear that the cavitation has damaged anything. But I really do need to get it resolved or improved significantly.
202ci EH wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:53 pm
Can't complain about the results thus far, stout regardless of the stock parts. How's the valve train looking so far with that much lift?
Well it sounds flawless, as far as how it looks not sure. 30 or so dyno pulls...didn't pull the valve covers, still haven't
I made a couple pulls to 7700 which inherently gets passed up by a bit and everything sounds real nice up there.
202ci EH wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:53 pm
Did you pull some duration out of it at all?
No. The cam I ordered this week is 4 degrees bigger on each side, spread the LSA a couple degrees, and used a slightly more aggressive exhaust lobe. So...bottom line, once I finally go solid roller I will have some weird-ass one-off hydraulic rollers laying around that will be good for nothing else.
They don't really have enough lobe lift to be reground into good solid rollers without getting into the base circle too hard , and too much lobe lift for most street stuff.
I think a solid roller for this engine would look quite a bit different than this hydraulic. To get a hydraulic roller somewhat happy in a deal like this, it seems you have to accept some penalties...excessive seat duration and much slower lobe speed or just a couple this engine has for sure, but I'm learning as I go.
202ci EH wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:53 pm
Also, any reasoning behind keeping the ls3 sprung chain guide? Stability or?? We normally remove them and fit the ls2 chain block as they tend to fail with high mileage.
Hard headedness
. I work at a fairly large Chevy dealer, been in the business for a long time. I think I've seen 1...maybe 2 of these chain guides laying in the bottom of the oil pan. They were on very high mileage, ill maintained stuff. I'm not saying they don't or haven't failed outside of that.
I've put them on quite a few things(opposite of what is conventionally done)... which is what you stated..remove the tensioner and replace with the LS2 style damper . I haven't been bit....knock on wood.
Sometimes the internet tends to make epidemics out of incidents that are relatively isolated in the grand scheme of things. I like the idea of keeping the chain tight for accuracy and getting rid of some (noise) in the vicinity of the cam sensor.
GM put enough trust in the tensioner to place it on the LS9 equipped cars, and ALL of the new Gen V based engines are equipped with one, which is able to be retrofitted back to the Gen IV based stuff best I can tell. Cloyes is the manufacturer of the new tensioner, part# 12630107. When this one breaks on my engine I'll reconsider the use of it.
