Dougs turbo LS build

grumpyvette

Administrator
Staff member
http://www.amosauto.com/Articles/Gm/Tech/na-psi-hp


NA + PSI = HP
A solid foundation, plus proven power-adder, equals longevity and performance.

By Doug Flynn - September 17, 2012 10:46 AM








Factory LS blocks feature six-bolt main caps (two cross-bolted). Combine the iron 6L block with ARP studs and you have one stout foundation. The block was lined honed, decked, and bored to 4.006-inch.
dfl1.jpg


K1 Technologies H-beam rods, measuring 6.125 inches long with ARP 2000 series cap screws, will stand up to any punishment this engine will dish out.

dfl2.jpg


The 2618 alloy Wiseco pistons feature coated skirts, 1.2/1.2/3mm rings, and an 11cc dish for a static compression ratio of 8.8:1. The compression height is 1.300 inches, which keeps the top ring out of chamber heat. The chrome moly pins are retained with Spirolox.
dfl3.jpg


To measure main, rod, piston-to-bore and other clearances, I use a method that factors out any calibration error of the various gauges and allows the use of reasonably-priced measuring equipment. First, measure the bore with a dial bore gauge. This takes a light touch and can’t be done hastily.
dfl4.jpg


Next, measure the journal or piston and lock the micrometer. Again, you must develop a repeatable “feel”.

dfl5.jpg


Finally, insert the dial bore gauge in the locked micrometer. Subtract this reading from what the bore measured and you have your clearance. Always measure at least twice, and if you can repeat within .0001-inch, call it good.

dfl6.jpg


We file-fit the rings using this motorized filer. Speaking of rings, they consist of a tough nitride steel top ring, a Napier faced design second, and a standard tension oil ring.
dfl7.jpg


Always use a torque wrench in combination with a stretch gauge to fasten rod bolts. Using stretch is the only way to know that a rod bolt has the proper preload necessary. Torque alone does not assure that and can vary, due to many factors.

dfl8.jpg


The 3.622-inch stroke K1 Technologies 4340 crank, rods, and Wiseco pistons will make for a cost-effective and stout bottom end. I changed the reluctor wheel from the original 24x to a newer style 58x. The 58x design has better signal integrity at higher engine speeds.
dfl9.jpg


The K1 Technologies crank comes machined for a keyway for the harmonic balancer, something a factory crank does not have.
dfl10.jpg


The Straub Technologies-spec’d Bullet cam came in with 230/228 degrees at .050-inch, .544/.537-inch lift on a 112 lobe separation angle, installed at a 112 degree intake centerline. It degreed dead on the money.
dfl11.jpg


The LS2 three-bolt cam timing gear has four raised areas on it. The camshaft position sensor uses these to identify camshaft position. This is required when using a 58x crank.
dfl12.jpg


LS engines feature a gerotor-type oil pump driven off the front of the crankshaft. We used two .002-inch feeler gauges to keep the gear centered as we torqued the pump.
dfl13.jpg


The ARP head studs and Cometic MLS gaskets will have no trouble keeping serious cylinder pressures were they belong.
dfl14.jpg


Holley supplies a matching pick-up for their cast aluminum oil pan. The factory GM windage tray is an effective piece and was retained.
dfl15.jpg


The Holley cast aluminum LS oil pan uses the factory oil filter, has an oil pick-up baffle (not installed), and fits most any chassis for an affordable price. Most factory LS oil pans have a sump design that won’t fit most muscle car chassis.
dfl16.jpg

dfl17.jpg

dfl18.jpg


LS engines don’t come with a timing pointer. ALWAYS install a temporary one to make sure the ignition timing is correct when the engine is first started.

Image 1 of 18
2

We didn’t want a “one hit wonder” and insisted that the engine make at least 500 quarter-mile passes before we needed to go back inside the engine.

GM “LS” engines are all the rage these days with near-stock engines claiming big power whether naturally aspirated or boosted.

To see what all the hype was about, we decided to build one to replace the pump gas 491ci big block in a 1972 Nova street/strip car. Running 10.30s on motor and 9.50s with a small amount of nitrous is fast for a car without a trailer, but it really isn’t something you’d want to drive every day.

The goals for the project were set: Build an LS engine to be a reliable and streetable daily driver capable of deep nine-second time slips while being competitive in Hot Rod’s Drag Week event.

After determining that it would require 800 to 900 hp to meet our performance goals, the first step was to find a suitable core candidate. A search produced a complete 6.0L iron block engine with a spun main bearing for cheap (free to be exact!), so all we had to do was research which stock parts to keep, and which would need upgrading to provide exceptional reliability along with all that power.

At first, we thought about a typical, cost-effective LS build with forged pistons, good rings, upgraded rod and head bolts and a turbo thrown on top. Although there are plenty of people making that magic 1,000hp number with those pieces, we didn’t want a “one hit wonder” and insisted that the engine make at least 500 quarter-mile passes before we needed to go back inside the engine. With thoughts of just one weak link ruining the reliability and being costly in the long run, a large amount of cost-effective aftermarket parts made their way inside.

You’ve heard it before, it doesn’t matter whether the best parts are used, the most important part of any engine build is having proper machine work done. The School of Automotive Machinists (S.A.M.) in Houston, Texas, is very familiar with high horsepower LS builds, as demonstrated by their low eight-second/170 mph ’99 Camaro SS that uses a naturally aspirated LS engine and a stick transmission. So, off went the short block components and cylinder heads so they could perform their magic on them.

The S.A.M. students determined the need for a new rear main cap due to the spun bearing. And since we were updating to ARP main studs (which require a line hone job to do it right anyhow), everything worked out fine. To ensure zero water seepage, the stout Cometic head gaskets required the decks to be machined perfectly flat with a surface finish finer than 55 Ra. Next, the cylinders were bored and then honed using torque plates with their Sunnen equipment to provide .006-inch piston-to-wall clearance on the 4.005-inch pistons.

After doing hours of research, it seemed our 900hp goal was at the edge of what the factory crankshaft could handle over time. Not relishing the thought of running over it at 140-plus mph, we looked to the aftermarket. Normally, this is when you would just move up to a longer 4.000-inch stroke for a final engine size of 402 to 410ci, but when adding boost, cubes don’t always win!

Longevity dictates other considerations for a forced induction engine and a shorter stroke can help. This helps by allowing for a piston design that keeps the ring pack further from the hot crown area without the need for oil ring supports. A shorter stroke also benefits ring stability and skirt wear by limiting how far the piston extends from the bottom of the bore at BDC.

With the decision made to retain the stock 3.662-inch stroke, I found one-stop shopping with a K1 Technologies’ rotating assembly with strength that will far exceed the expected power levels, while ensuring everything will fit and balance easily. In addition to the forged 4340 crank, the kit includes 6.125-inch long K1 H-beam connecting rods fitted with ARP 2000 rod bolts. Clevite bearings were used throughout with the coated mains set to .0022-inch clearance and the uncoated rods given a little extra safety clearance of .0027-inch. The center main bearing controls thrust and was sanded to achieve the desired .006-inch of crank end play.

Since piston and ring choice is critical with any forced induction package, K1’s sister division, Wiseco, provided the forged 2618 material pistons and 1.2/1.2/3.0mm rings with coated skirts. The nitride steel compression ring, combined with a Napier design second ring and a standard tension oil ring pack will endure all our abuse, and provide long term durability. The short-block finalized at 365ci with an 8.8:1 compression ratio and more built-in durability than I’ll ever need.

Camshaft selection is one of the most important choices of any engine build, and with a turbocharger, it’s vital. We contacted Chris Straub at Straub Technologies to spec a cam because Chris specializes in designing complete valvetrain packages for a specific combination, using his own computer simulation software as well as historical data.

Our requirements were: it had to be VERY easy on the valvetrain, with great street manners, make peak power around 6,500 to 6,700 rpm, work well with 10 to 18 psi of boost and, oh yeah, spool the turbo near instantaneously. A tall order, even for an LS-based foundation. He came up with specs of 230/228 degrees of duration at .050-inch valve lift, .544/.537-inch intake and exhaust lift, on a 112 degree LSA, installed straight up on a 112 degree ICL. These specifications result in only five degrees of overlap at .050-inch lift, which really helps a street turbo application spool up at lower engine speeds. Bullet Cams made the camshaft using Chris’ specs.

The only tricky part so far in this build was learning about LS timing chains. We originally purchased a stock LS2 GM timing set, since it has a great reputation for street applications. Upon installation, there was more chain slack than we are accustomed to and with further research, learned the factory fix was to install a tensioner to stop “chain whipping”. However, we found that the 6.0L (like most truck blocks) was not drilled and tapped for this arrangement.

Had we discovered this little tidbit before final cleaning and assembly, we could have drilled and tapped it, of course. Now paranoid about the possibility of chain failure without the tensioner, we discovered the most durable single row chain available was from the GM “C5R” racing program. Although it didn’t result in less slack, it is reportedly impossible to break, it fit well and degreed in perfectly. (Note to self: next time the engine is apart, machine it for the tensioner.)

The bottom end was buttoned up with a GM LS3 oil pump (snafu #2 to be discussed next time). At least there were no surprises with the Holley cast aluminum retrofit oil pan and pick-up assembly. It is designed to retrofit LS engines in almost any chassis. The SFI-approved ATI balancer was purchased from Mike Lewis Racing Engines. The balancer was honed to the required .0008-inch press fit. LS engines are not equipped with a factory “timing pointer” like older engines, as the ignition timing is “fixed” and can’t be adjusted on factory engines. It is always best to install at least a temporary pointer and make sure the timing is correct, so when the engine is fired, there are no surprises.

Next, we’ll install the top end of the engine as well as the turbo. We’ll dyno the engine naturally aspirated and then crank up the boost with the turbo.
 
http://www.amosauto.com/Articles/Gm/Tech/na-psi-hp-2

Last month we assembled the bulletproof bottom end for our turbo 6.0L LS engine build. This month we’ll cover the top-end assembly and see what she’ll do on the dyno with and without the turbo.

There are a lot of great aftermarket cylinder heads available for LSx engines, but they’re all out of my “family man” price range. The best budget option was a set of new L92 rectangular port heads (p/n 12582713) that have been sitting around, waiting for a project. The School of Automotive Machinists (S.A.M.) checked and assembled them. And just so there would be no shortage of airflow, the guys at S.A.M. left them in their CNC machining/porting center for a while, which increased airflow dramatically to 358 cfm on the intake and over 220 cfm on the exhaust.

After researching the various aftermarket valve options available, I chose a set of Ferrea 6000 series 2.16-inch intake and 1.59-inch exhaust valves, purchased from Mike Lewis Racing Engines, to fill the holes in the heads. The intake valves didn’t break the bank and are a hollow-stem design to keep weight down without a strength penalty. The valve springs, locks, retainers, and pushrods were purchased from Straub Technologies to match the camshaft. The valve springs are a dual-spring design with closed/open pressures set up at 160/360 lbs. The retainers are titanium to reduce weight.

I was going to use the factory hydraulic roller lifters, but my good friend Robin Lawrence donated a set of Morel low travel link-bar lifters to the cause. The factory rocker arms are decent pieces as-is, but they were upgraded to a new set of trunion and needle bearing units from COMP Cams. The engine was topped off with Holley’s new polished cast-aluminum valve covers that allow the unsightly factory coil brackets to be removed. I’ll sleep well knowing this package will easily handle the heat while being 7,000-plus rpm reliable.

The last thing any enthusiast wants to do is choke an engine that can breathe like this, especially while stuffing boost in it. While the factory GM composite intake manifolds are pretty good for their intended purpose, I needed something capable of gale force air movement for this build. A cost-effective, high-flowing alternative is Holley’s new versatile Hi-Ram series. They are serious pieces intended for big displacement, high rpm screamers as well as boosted applications such as ours. Feeding it is a stock GM Corvette 90mm drive-by-wire throttle body.

For our turbo, I contacted the folks at BorgWarner Turbo Systems for a recommendation. After going over the same parameters given to Chris for the cam, engineer Seth Temple recommended a S400SX3 unit with a 76mm compressor wheel, and 1.10 A/R turbine. Turbos are a lot like camshafts, you don’t just pick the biggest one at the bottom of the page. It may make bragging-rights power once it gets working at high rpm, but it will be lethargic and lazy at low rpm.

The huge turbos used on high powered heads-up cars require trans-brakes and a lot of effort to build boost when they launch. I don’t plan to use a trans-brake and need the turbo to build power immediately when I drop the hammer off the line.

For exhaust, I started with a set of Hooker Headers’ new cast iron LS exhaust manifolds flipped around backwards. I designed the rest of the “hot side” using 2½-inch by .063-inch stainless tubing from each manifold into a three-inch merge pipe right to the T4 flange on the turbo. Then I conned my friend Todd O’Neill into doing all the beautiful TIG welding. Controlling boost pressures is the job of a Precision Turbo 66mm wastegate along with a TiAL blow-off valve on the intake side. The four-inch downpipe from the turbo outlet runs to a single muffler at the rear bumper.

Engine and powertrain management is being handled by Holley’s Dominator EFI system. I’m using all the features this system offers: plug-and-play capability for the LS engine, boost control, nitrous control, drive-by-wire control, electronic transmission control (4L80E), and water/methanol injection, along with a full data acquisition system on the car. For the water/methanol injection, I decided to reduce a lot of intercooler plumbing complexity and weight by replacing it with two small solenoids and a small fluid reservoir of 50/50 water/methanol to cool the intake charge. The methanol also increases octane as well.

The day finally came when it was time to strap this thing to the dyno for its first break-in pulls without the turbo. With low static compression, a turbo spec cam and a high rpm intake, I had no illusions of big horsepower numbers while in this naturally-aspirated configuration. Also unexpectedly, as soon as the engine fired, the oil pressure pegged the bypass at 122 psi at 4,000 rpm. After some discussions and a few phone calls, I couldn’t resist and chanced just one quick dyno pull. With only 25 degrees of timing and no tuning, it was great to see 455 hp at 6,300 rpm with things still climbing. Torque was 412 lbs-ft at 4,800 rpm. Not bad for an 8.8:1 compression engine.

The high oil pressure issue turned out to be self-inflicted, due to the use of a GM displacement-on-demand oil pump. These have a very high oil pressure relief spring internally, and an additional lower pressure bypass spring in the oil pan, which of course I didn’t have. Luckily, the engine was still on the dyno, making it simple to install a Melling standard volume pump with the optional high pressure spring.

With that handled, it was time to bolt on the hairdryer and see what this thing had in it! Once running, things were incredibly quiet and docile with the turbo in place and holding a steady 15 inches of idle vacuum. On the street, I’ll tune for 10 psi of boost and 93 octane pump gas, but for safety 116 octane race gas was used while boost, timing and water/meth tuning was accomplished. I started with a 9 psi wastegate spring, 22 degrees of timing and the display read 669 hp at 6,500 rpm and 577 lbs-ft at 5,200 rpm. Next, we connected the Holley Dominator boost control so we could increase the boost over the 9 psi wastegate spring. In this configuration, intake pressure is controlled by the EFI via increase and decrease solenoids that are added to the top of the wastegate diaphragm. This allows instant boost changes with just a few clicks of the keyboard.

As boost was increased, the engine initially responded well. But as more pulls were made back to back, power was dropping around 5,500 rpm, compared to previous runs. Certainly concerning, there was nothing in the data logs indicating trouble, except it was consuming less fuel and making less power on each subsequent pull. The spark plugs looked fine, and showed little heat. One of my friends, who is very sharp at analyzing data, suggested I may have been injecting too much water/meth mixture, with the excessive amount reducing the volumetric efficiency of the engine. Back-to-back pulls could be compounding the problem as higher temps will evaporate the water/meth mix earlier than previous pulls. The system was definitely doing its job, reducing the intake charge from 190 to 200ºF to 120 to 125ºF. I had to take a break for the day to think it through.

Bright and early the next day, I set about testing the new theory. I first made a baseline pull at lower boost levels, and then reduced the water/meth flow rate by 50 percent, which immediately added 30 hp, even though the intake temps were up eight to 10 degrees. I reduced the water/meth again, but power stayed the same with higher intake temps. At this point I’d found the sweet spot, so it was time to increase boost again. Power was up everywhere!

Plus, I could make back-to-back pulls with no reduction in power and the intake temps were still being reduced from 200ºF to 130ºF. “Only” 38 pulls since initial break-in had produced an optimized timing curve and the proper water/meth flow rate. We ended the day making 797 hp at 6,500 rpm and 693 lbs-ft at 5,600 rpm with 16 psi of boost. Full boost was available around 3,500 to 4,000 rpm. The engine ran perfect during every hard dyno blast and while I know there is more power available with a more aggressive tune and more boost, my part selections were able to deliver the response and reliability I wanted. Who would ever complain about an 800hp engine that idles like a stocker, and is capable of 25 mpg?
 
DOUG FLYNN POSTED THIS


THE THREAD ABOVE IS SHOWING DOUGS LS BUILD

"Been busy for the last 9 months with work and building a new drive train for the Nova. Wanted to build something to run Hot Rod Drag Week, a bucket list item for me. Decided to try the turbo LSx route and started gathering parts around Oct 2011. Didn't get the engine together until mid-summer. Drag Week was a couple of weeks ago, and didn't end up getting it to the track until the friday before drag week started, I had to drive it to Tulsa 625 the next day?! Pretty dumb. Someone was watching out for me and didn't end up having any big problems.
dougf1.jpg

dougf2.jpg

The short block build is below in the following link for anyone interested, the heads, turbo and dyno are in the next month.

http://www.amosauto.com/Articles/Gm/Tech/na-psi-hp

The car ended up gaining 100 lbs over the big block :(, due to changing to a full cage, 4L80E, and other items. Weighs 3850 with me in it. It's a pig.

Drag Week is a whole nother post, but somehow I ended up 2nd in the street race small block power adder class, which I never expected and was very cool. The car averaged 9.79@140. I couldn't 60' at all, no boost at the hit, best was 1.57.

Averaged 14 mpg towing a trailer loaded with stuff at 70-75mph.

Now I can sort the car out here at the track.
"



Doug_F.jpg

viewtopic.php?f=69&t=591


HERES A LINK POSTED JUST ABOVE,IS TO DOUGS BIG BLOCK 491 ENGINE


Doug your comparing an older 491 BBC to a newer,supercharged LS,
(yes the LS is impressive and looks great, but I can,t help thinking that giving up 100 plus cubic inches of displacements not a great idea,) (and yes Im aware that one reason for the build was to potentially display and sell LS components Holley developed)
both engines I assume used nitrous , Ive got to wonder what that 491 BBC, that was set up correctly would have done with similar supercharging,and nitrous or what ever you used on the LS, with that smaller displacement LS engine, I can,t help but think a well designed supercharged big block on similar supercharged boost,would be competitive, and even superior , In a different post ,you asked about the cost of EFI VS carbs , and at what price level would most guys no longer be thinking of only using a carb, but considering swapping to EFI, and thats a good question

In my opinion,most of the guys I know are well aware of the advantages of EFI, but its cost or fear of having to learn to use a computer to tune the EFI thats preventing the swap, the newer self learning EFI, eliminates one restriction,but a complete bolt on system, intake,manifold, throttle body injectors,computer control,s sensors and fuel rails that sold for about $1500 would be priced low enough to be competitive, as theres some advantages to running EFI, but once you exceed that price level, your really well above what a good carb and intake costs, and I talk to guys constantly who would love to swap, but just can,t justify the cost, theres enough difference to make the choice to swap to EFI rather economically prohibitive.
As Im sure your aware a good running carb and intake can be had for well under $1000-$1200 for even a rather high hp engine
 
DOUGS POSTED REPLY"
Sure more cubes would make more ultimate power. One goal of the build was to make a more streetable, better mpg engine. Definately this engine is way more streetable than the solid roller bbc. On the LS I ran the nitrous for 1 second at launch, to get a better 60' time. So other than that, I have a 364" engine running the same MPH as a 491 with nitrous. I could run more nitrous on the BB and go faster. I could also put a HR cam in the 491, make it more streetable, and put a turbo(s) on it, and make 1200 HP.

Half the reason was to do something different for sure, and to learn about turbos on my own engine. The BBC is stuffed in the corner for now.

The LS engines definately have some better attributes stock, over SB and BBC engines, the heads for sure, no gaskets to leak, a great block.

YOu're right, more cubes can make more power, but making 800+ with a 364" engine that I can drive anywhere was definately an objective with this build.

Either engine, on street tires, is useless on the street. Barely getting into it with either in second gear is a waste."
 
Back
Top