BlackRocket

Does anyone know how to build a dry sump system for a ZO-6 or anyone that has a kit. Seems like the Accusump's are band-aids for track use and that a dry sump would be better providing extra clean oil and cooler as well.

Would the best set-up be to run the stock oil pump with a secondary belt driven pump?

0Vector Vette

ARE make a very nice kit with everything you need to do the job right. Costs around $3000 and the ss lines will add another $500+ to the job.
Robert

trackboss

If you have interest in doing the dual stage scavenge aviaid system that uses the stock pump for pressure I have the aviaid pump for sale:
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/auto...-for-sale.html

96CollectorSport

If you have a LS6 there is no need for a dry-sump, the LS6's in T1 ran (are running) without the need of a dry sump for years. You really don't even need an Accusump although they are nice for pre-oiling.
Now if you are doing a motor swap or something that's a different story.

ARE does have some nice kits out there but don't forget that - depending on the kit and location of the dry sump tank - you may have to re-locate your battery and buy new motor mounts (Pfadt or solid) so you have room to route your scavange hoses.

No-one really has a pre-packaged dry-sump for a C5, pretty much everyone who has installed a dry-sump in a C5 has had to figure out there own way to do it. There is a good thread on these pages that helped when I installed one. But it's still pretty much a custom deal.
Best advice would be to find a shop that has already done one.

0Vector Vette

I would respectfully dissaggree with my friend Joel on this issue. It is true that the LS6 does last longer then the LS2 or 3 in a racecar. I know that when the LS6 first started racing in TCC, most were losing one just about every season. The ASA crate motors were blowing up on a regular basis as well. That all went away when everybody went to the drysump system and engines began lasting 3 seasons.

The ARE system does use the stock pump for pressure and is only a scavenge pump. You will need to relocate the battery and remove the air conditioner. This is probably not desireable in a street car, but is the way to go in a racecar. Joel is correct, it isn't as simple as just bolt this here and there and away you go. There is some fabrication that needs to be done and if you aren't doing it yourself, you should seek someone who has done it before.
Robert

OKsweetrides

Quoted for truth.

C5Z's pose fun and $$$ challenges. Multiple threads and posts are about this. Not a wallet friendly process in the least.

96CollectorSport

Robert,

I haven't heard of the issues that the LS6's had in TCC, but a dry-sump isn't legal in SCCA for C5's in T1 and those guys haven't had the issues you describe. It may be due to the fact that most of the C5Z's in T1 have original engines or GM crate motors. My experiance with LS6's have been great - we haven't had any issues with oiling, maybe we're just not pushing them as hard as those guys in TCC.

The only time that guys seem to have problems with there LS6's in SCCA is when they balance and blueprint them, they just don't last as long as the GM crate's do. So for the T1 guys like Joe, Jason, and the Cali Club guys with crate motors they seem to work fine.
I'm never going to say that a dry-sump is a bad idea for a racing motor, I just feel like they are not needed like they are on LS2's and 3's.

Not sure of any good race shops in Cali that could help you with the install, you may want to find one of the Cali Club guys and see who they would recommend.

Joel

Maynor29

I know Wally's LS6 has been pretty damn reliable and I think he even set a new personal best at VIR in Oct. when I saw him.

What is it that makes wet-sump LS6s so tolerant of oil pressure fluctuations verus LS1-3?

John
E36 LS2

vette6aut0x

With all due respect, you are giving bad advice to the poster. If that were the case why doesn't everyone who has race engines just use the batwing design on all race engines and save the 3 to 8grand for the dry-sump system

JVetthead

After your 3rd or 4th engine you will understand that drysump is the only option

vette6aut0x

Been there done that. We run on our race car a Dailey pump. It is a work of art and works perfectly. I had to build a motor mount for it to work where the pump is located. Also something else that helps is to sleeve the lifter bores which we did.

96CollectorSport

Why is this bad advice? I'm telling him the truth, the guys running C5's in T1 that are running LS6 GM crate motors are not blowing up engines due to oil starvation. Period. Ingle got over 4 years out of his original LS6 before he replaced it with a crate motor and he didn't even run an Accusump. The guys that are running balanced and blueprinted engines in T1 don't seem to get the same kind of durability that the crate motors do, I will say that. Would a dry sump have saved them or were they just building hand grenades for a few extra hp, who knows?

Also if a dry sump was needed to keep a LS6 from blowing up why aren't dry sumps SCCA legal for the LS6? Like they are for the LS2 and LS3? Maybe because they feel that they aren't necessary?

Now once you crack open your LS6 and install a bigger cam, ported heads etc. then I can't say how reliable things are going to be. I'm really speaking about the GM crate motors.

I'm not saying don't buy a dry sump, we all know they work. They are working great on the LS3's which won't last without one. Heck GM even knows since they installed dry-sumps on the Grand Sports. I've installed them in the past, but if someone asked me if there stock LS6 needed one I would say no. Especially if they were not pushing there car as hard as T1 cars get pushed.
We have been running our LS6 crate in an ex-T1 car for over 3 years (reving up to 7100 RPM) with an Accusump and never had an issue. We have done maintenace like valve springs and a timing chain. But we haven't had an oiling issue. Maybe those are the issues that people are seeing with LS6's, not keeping up with the maintenace.

If you look around -especially in T1- you will see a lot of non-dry sumped LS6's running just fine. And those guys are pushing hard! Heck Raftracer didn't even run a dry-sump in his car when it had the original LS6 in it, he didn't put the sump in until he put his big motor in.

To OP if you want some pics of an install of the dry sump in a C5 PM me your e-mail and I can send you some.

wallyman424

My motor (ls6) is going on 6 years of racing w/o a dry sump.

Dry sump on a crate ls6 is overkill.

vette6aut0x

Then tell me sir, if what you say is true, buy blueprinting the ls6 what have they (engine builder) done to lesson the durability if all they have done is blueprint the engine.? I will agree that if you take the c5 to its limit with race rubber and bushings, shocks and so on the engine life is less. But I have done a lot of research and there is more going on in all ls engines than just oil starvation from high G loading.

0C5stein

We have installed ARE dry sump systems on both C5s and C6Zs. While they are not absolutely necessary, they do extend the life of the engine and add a little bit of horsepower.

ARE now has kits that keep the AC, and moving the battery on a C5 to the right rear cubby improves weight balance. If you can afford the initial investment, it should save you money in the long run.

vette6aut0x

That's wonderful I have a fellow racer who has a 2000 T/A and his engine let go last year. He had been racing it for 4 years and tracked it the rest. But he drives it at 7/10ths. So I can see how it could last a long time.

OKsweetrides

96CollectorSport,

What exactly are the differences in the blocks between the LS6, LS2 and LS3 in regards to oiling paths?

But nowhere did the OP state that he was running spec T1. So we can throw out that argument.

I look at it like this, will the motor pop due to oiling due to lateral accel? Yes. Go look at those 2500lb RX7's that run gen3 LS engines on stupid wide stickies.

96CollectorSport

I would say that if someone is going through the trouble of blueprinting and engine they would try to "loosen" up the engine to try to free up a few hp. (Otherwise the owner will wonder why he paid to have the engine gone through). You may see an extra 5-10 hp by doing this but the reliability takes a hit.
There's a reason Tom Sloe's C5 was 3 seconds faster than any other C5 at Run-offs this year at Road America and it wasn't just the driver. His engines are balanced and blueprinted and make some "extra" power, he's also the only guy to have to replace his LS6 this year. Again gernades!

I also think there is a reason that GM has machines that torque main caps bolts and cylinder head bolts all at the same time. I think the crate motors are assembled tighter and more evenly than anything you can get from your typical engine builder.

I will also say that I think the reason you don't see as many oiling issues with LS6's is due to the block itself and the way oil returns to the bottom end.
If it was a head issue then the LS2's would be more reliable than they are. For some reason the LS6 just seems to work, weather it's the block or the bat-wing oil pan, something about them is just plain better.

Again I'm not saying dry-sumps don't work or anything crazy like that, if you can afford it why wouldn't you do it? But a LS6 long block sells for $3300, I can buy 2 crate motors for the price of installing the dry-sump. I'll take my chances with my Accusump and my reguarly scheduled maintenance. It's worked for 3 years, so far so good.

96CollectorSport

I think the T1 argument is valid because it shows how hard people have pushed one of those engines without failure. There are very few people running HPDE's that can run lap times with T1 cars and the T1 cars are making it up in the corners since they are usually only running about 380 - 400 rwhp (now with headers).
We all know some LS motors are more likely to have an issue than others LS3's it's a given, LS2's slightly less, LS6's even less. I don't know of any of the RX7's you're talking about, which LS engines and what oiling systems they are running? But are they running as fast as T1 cars? They should be weighing 680 lbs less!
The OP hasn't even told us what is done to his car, is it stock does it have any suspension mods? Heck we don't even know what engine he has in the car!
What if he's running RA1's with stock suspension does he need a dry-sump then?
I really don't mean to get anyone worked up, I'm not saying there is no chance that you will blow up your engine if you track your car, that's true weather you have a dry-sump or not. All I'm saying is that depending on the situation it may be overkill.
So far history has proved that a car set-up like a T1 car with a crate motor you are pretty safe.
Now if you have worked had work done to the motor and you are running aero you might be pushing it.
But if you are still on street tires and stock suspension then the answer is simple.
And this is just my opinion, take it for what it's worth.

wallyman424

The problem is (i'm 99% sure) they have to run the F body/CTSV pan. They cant run the vette's batwing pan.

To me, it seems simple. LS6's seem to hold together very well, save for the occasional timing chain failure. LS2/LS3 have pretty bad oiling problems (both non batwing pans).