miata_racer

FWIW from what I've seen...only about 20-25% of corner workers are really incompetent as the one in the story...but that's just the ones in this state that I've worked with. And I mean physically not mentally...

Leafy

iTrader: (1)

Not sure if the vette is like the rest of GM cars but the low oil pressure idiot lights is 8psi on the cars for mere mortals. Its the "you already done fucked it up light".

Whats the deficiency with the ls7 dry sump? Is it the pan, the pump, or the reservoir, or a fail on all fronts?

1BAD96

iTrader: (5)

My good friend just had his C6 blow up coming into turn 1 at Road America (I was sitting passenger). Car only had 8000miles on it and still under warranty. < Funny story actually

Anyways the LS7’s are prone to valve failure and he dropped his exhaust valve in 2 cylinders. He got a new motor under warranty and is sticking about 15k on top for better valves, exhaust, clutch, better dry sump system… blah blah blah

tomiboy

iTrader: (3)

GM built a batwing for the non-dry sumped LS3 and scrapped the project cause it didn't work. There are a half dozen floating around. It's not the oil pan. The oil pools in the top of the head and doesn't drain back to the pan in time on high G left hand (I think it's left) corners. No one has come up with a cheap fix. Acusumps don't work in real race cars only a aftermarket dry sump is a sure bet. The word is if you have an LS3 (I do) don't put on race tires without a dry sump! I do run an extra quart on track days, but that won't save you either if your on slicks. Corvettes cost way too much to put tires and brakes on, and you have to do it frequently. Just some RE-11s run $1500. Heck RS3s for the Miata are only $400+ and how long will they last? I have just as much fun in my near stock Miata and if I ball it up I won't be out $40K.

Leafy

iTrader: (1)

Wonder if adding one more hose to the ls7 dry sump that pulled from the head with the pool would fix it. That seems so obvious that I'm sure its been tried.

nickt93

iTrader: (5)

I read up on this a while back on LS1Tech - short story seems to be what has been mentioned in a few posts above: LS1/LS6 = no oiling issues during track use; LS2 and beyond = major risks with no silver bullet fix (guys that have added an Accusump and/or the "batwing" pan are still blowing motors.

I wish I knew that before I did the two track days in my LS3 IS300, but luckily I did add an additional half quart (add'l quart is too much with the hacked pan to clear the cross member). Knowing what I know now, I won't put that car on the track unless I upgrade the lube system...which I don't plan on doing.

Savington

iTrader: (31)

Supposedly the 3s have drainback issues. The 1/2/6s still have them, but not nearly as bad as the 3s do. I think I remember reading that the 7 is a different issue (something having to do with the pickup tube).

In any case, I don't regret sticking with a turbo BP in Theseus.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

I presume that it's necessary to drill into the heads and install scavenge ports on them in such a situation as well, no?

hustler

iTrader: (6)

I've seen more than on C6GS puke a motor at the track, now I know why.

soviet

iTrader: (10)

This thread is kind of eye-opening to me.

also lol'ed at this -
LS7 statistical failure rate, things to look for with high miles.. - Corvette Forum

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

I had a srs LOL moment at people using terms like "pioneer" to describe the guy hitting over 100k miles. I mean....come on.

Edit: I seriously thought that the LSx track miatas and LSx cars had almost no issues. This is surprising.

shuiend

iTrader: (24)

I wasted to much time reading that thread.

GeneSplicer

iTrader: (14)

This happened at RA a year or so ago in front of my buddy... guess he was bouncing it off the rev limiter all weekend. 'Goodness, gracious, great ***** of fire!'

Corvette Engine Explosion from Road Atlanta on Vimeo

DeerHunter

People often ask me why I didn't go with an LS3 conversion instead of my build. My stock answer has always been that a turbo four suits the character of the car more. Perhaps I'll start citing the propensity of the Corvette motors to "blow up real good" when tracking hard.

All-in-all, I prefer to have stud issues than ventilated block issues. No more stud issues, BTW.

k24madness

iTrader: (6)

While not the norm I know someone who has popped 3-4 LS motors in his Miata. Something really strange is going on with that car. I suspect a dry sump would solve his problems.

Midtenn

iTrader: (15)

I know a guy who popped I can't even remember how many LS6 motors with the returnless fuel systems with a too extreme tune. Everytime I turned around he was swaping motors from burning out the #7 cylinder (or which ever is the last one)

chpmnsws6

iTrader: (12)

[QUOTE=tomiboy;920850]GM built a batwing for the non-dry sumped LS3 and scrapped the project cause it didn't work. There are a half dozen floating around. It's not the oil pan. The oil pools in the top of the head and doesn't drain back to the pan in time on high G left hand (I think it's left) corners. No one has come up with a cheap fix. [QUOTE]

Drill the lifter trays?

An oil pump with too much flow can pump the pan dry also. Melling pumps are good for this.

k24madness

iTrader: (6)

That's what I was told by a NASCAR mechanic. He said the only real solution is dry sump with external drains from the heads.

ZX-Tex

iTrader: (15)

So to update this thread... After three years of racing the LS1 Miata, including some very decent lap times in A6s (way under SM times), I took it to a dyno facility for some tuning and some new certification runs.

Using the same dyno (Dynojet), SAE 5% correction (same as before), the new plot, and plot from three years ago, are essentially identical. Point being, there is no degradation in power. I am still not having problems with oil pressure or fouled plugs, or any other signs of oiling issues.

All I have is the accusump and the oil cooler. I have just switched to a V8 Roadsters steel oil pan to clear my new V8 Roadsters subframe, but that just happened. All the last three years of track time was with the stock 2002 Camaro oil pan.

So, go dry sump if you think you have to. In my experience, the oil cooler and 3-qt accusump are just fine.

Now, I heard about one Accusump equipped LSx car that recently blew up a motor from oiling issues. However, the problem was not with the Accusump. The problem was with how the engine oil was refilled after an oil change. You cannot just drain the Accusump, then add new oil to fill the pan. What you HAVE to do is:
1. Fill the oil pan to the full mark.
2. Start and run the engine, increasing RPM until you hit the max pressure limit (about 62 psi for my motor @ ~3000 RPM or so). Run it like this for a minute or so. This fills the Accusump.
3. Shut off the Accusump, then shut off the engine. Shutting off the Accusump first makes sure it stays full, which is how shutdown should always happen anyway. Check the Accusump pressure gauge. It should read 62 psi (or whatever your max oil pressure is).
4. Check the dipstick, and add oil to the engine until it is full again. It should be about 3 quarts (what it took to fill the Accusump).

If you do not do it this way, and just fill the oil pan without filling the Accusump, then you start off running 3 quarts low. Clearly that is a bad idea.

I freaking LOVE LSx motors, and GM for making them. For a V8 they are relatively cheap, compact, light, durable, and make lots of power. Mine is bone stock, with shorty headers, 2.5" duals, and a custom tune (on the stock ECU), and makes 325 WHP on pump gas.

1993ka24det

I am looking at going the LSX route here in a bit and reading the first part of this thread it seamed discouraging. So one car had a problem with the injector and another with oiling issues, is there any other reoccurring problems. Thank you ZX-Tex for encouraging the swap and that you like it so much, sorry LOVE it.