[Z06] LS7 OILING ISSUE Recent information
11-08-2009, 07:59 PM
#101
Pro
Member Since: Jan 2004
Location: Healdsburg Ca
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the design of the LPE solution much better. The ZR-1 solution has a single bi-directional flow piece of tubing between the main tank and the auxiliary tank whereas the LPE tank has two big holes drilled between the two tanks. A lot less restriction and I like the idea of gosintta and gosoutta holes.
John
John
11-09-2009, 01:32 AM
#102
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Oct 1999
Location: Charlotte, NC (formerly Endicott, NY)
Posts: 40,094
Received 8,928 Likes
on
5,333 Posts
I like the design of the LPE solution much better. The ZR-1 solution has a single bi-directional flow piece of tubing between the main tank and the auxiliary tank whereas the LPE tank has two big holes drilled between the two tanks. A lot less restriction and I like the idea of gosintta and gosoutta holes.
John
John
Bill
11-09-2009, 12:43 PM
#103
Le Mans Master
You would have to ask why does the oiling system need a bigger tank?- the oil capacity of the standard tank is perfectly adequate with regards to furnishing the basic lubrication requirements of the engine.
Could the reason for latest update and the need to carry more oil be - that under some circumstances, the oil level in the original tank will drain down too far, leaving the original setup vulnerable to the loss of pumping head and failure of engine oil pressure?
If the oil tank does drain down too far, then - well, if the oil is not in the tank, it must be somehow retained within the engine.
It is the task of the scavenge pump to return the oil back to the tank - so, if the oil is remaining in the engine under some circumstances, rather than being returned to the tank - then there must be a weakness in the design of the scavenge side of the oiling system.
Could the reason for latest update and the need to carry more oil be - that under some circumstances, the oil level in the original tank will drain down too far, leaving the original setup vulnerable to the loss of pumping head and failure of engine oil pressure?
If the oil tank does drain down too far, then - well, if the oil is not in the tank, it must be somehow retained within the engine.
It is the task of the scavenge pump to return the oil back to the tank - so, if the oil is remaining in the engine under some circumstances, rather than being returned to the tank - then there must be a weakness in the design of the scavenge side of the oiling system.
A bigger tank just allows more time for the high G situation to end before the engine goes boom.
11-09-2009, 01:09 PM
#104
Le Mans Master
Indeed, it seems that the problem is not in the oil tank, nor the size of the tank, nor the dry sump baffling, the problem is not having enough scavenge pumps in the dry sump (sysem). Ferrari engins have 2, one at the front aone at the back, each sitting in a (slightly) baffled reservoir. NASCAR engines have 3 or 4 scavenge pumps distributed along the bottom of the engine. If the oil gets to the pan, a pump will take it out of the pan.
A bigger tank just allows more time for the high G situation to end before the engine goes boom.
A bigger tank just allows more time for the high G situation to end before the engine goes boom.
You got it! That is the reason I have the Katech pump along with the ARE auxilary pump. Katech also installed larger lines and picked up a few HP. Good insurance if you drive he car hard lap after lap.Jim
11-14-2009, 09:07 PM
#105
Burning Brakes
Dealer Response on replacement tanks
I was discussing this with a highly respected aftermarket supplier recently. I asked his opinion about updating my 06 to the 09 stock system. He said that to make the oiling system truly reliable in those high G situations you need to spend approx $6k on modifications.(he wasnt selling the mods by the way). I have heard this from other vette specialists too.
He said he had grenaded "dozens" of LS7's in race modified cars before they resolved all the issues.
He also said he was very surprised a completely stock car could experience the problem.
My options I guess are
1. install the Lingenfelter extra capacity tank, without the extra baffeling. Cost approx $800
2. install the 09 GM system. Cost approx $2000
3. do nothing and hope it was a one time fluke that I had the failure in a bone stock car. I don't plan mods of any type as car is still on warranty. Then if I do lose another motor hope that GM will honor the warranty again and replace the motor.
Since popular opinion says 1 and 2 won't totally resolve the issue, and both may compromise the existing warranty, I am leaning toward 3.
He said he had grenaded "dozens" of LS7's in race modified cars before they resolved all the issues.
He also said he was very surprised a completely stock car could experience the problem.
My options I guess are
1. install the Lingenfelter extra capacity tank, without the extra baffeling. Cost approx $800
2. install the 09 GM system. Cost approx $2000
3. do nothing and hope it was a one time fluke that I had the failure in a bone stock car. I don't plan mods of any type as car is still on warranty. Then if I do lose another motor hope that GM will honor the warranty again and replace the motor.
Since popular opinion says 1 and 2 won't totally resolve the issue, and both may compromise the existing warranty, I am leaning toward 3.
I have to wonder whether the addition of the Lingenfelter lower tank is that obvious since the top stays stock. If it is not obvious, maybe the best course is to put it in and follow the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Those of you who have this tank, is it really that obvious from the top and bottom of the car? Obviously, you don't want the dealer doing oil changes anymore, as the capacity will be a giveaway.
11-15-2009, 02:35 AM
#106
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
I was talking to my dealer service manager for other reasons yesterday, and I brought the subject up. He professed no knowledge of the oiling issue at while pulling high Gs. I did ask questions #1 and #2 directly and he said that once a non- GM oil tank is installed, there is no warranty (presumeably just for the motor). He did say that he would have no problem with installing the 2009 GM sump tank and the warranty would be maintained. I ended the conversation there.
I have to wonder whether the addition of the Lingenfelter lower tank is that obvious since the top stays stock. If it is not obvious, maybe the best course is to put it in and follow the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Those of you who have this tank, is it really that obvious from the top and bottom of the car? Obviously, you don't want the dealer doing oil changes anymore, as the capacity will be a giveaway.
I have to wonder whether the addition of the Lingenfelter lower tank is that obvious since the top stays stock. If it is not obvious, maybe the best course is to put it in and follow the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Those of you who have this tank, is it really that obvious from the top and bottom of the car? Obviously, you don't want the dealer doing oil changes anymore, as the capacity will be a giveaway.
From the bottom it cant be seen because of undercladding.
I wnet the other way and had my dealer install it. They have assured me in writing and verbally that the LPE tank would not interfere with warranty at their dealership. I know it will be a GM service zone rep that will make the next call after the dealer.
11-15-2009, 07:49 AM
#107
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Dec 2005
Location: Baltimore Maryland
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The top view is identical. You would have to lean way over and look down the interior of the fender well and maybe you could see it.
From the bottom it cant be seen because of undercladding.
I wnet the other way and had my dealer install it. They have assured me in writing and verbally that the LPE tank would not interfere with warranty at their dealership. I know it will be a GM service zone rep that will make the next call after the dealer.
From the bottom it cant be seen because of undercladding.
I wnet the other way and had my dealer install it. They have assured me in writing and verbally that the LPE tank would not interfere with warranty at their dealership. I know it will be a GM service zone rep that will make the next call after the dealer.
11-15-2009, 11:41 AM
#108
Burning Brakes
The top view is identical. You would have to lean way over and look down the interior of the fender well and maybe you could see it.
From the bottom it cant be seen because of undercladding.
I wnet the other way and had my dealer install it. They have assured me in writing and verbally that the LPE tank would not interfere with warranty at their dealership. I know it will be a GM service zone rep that will make the next call after the dealer.
From the bottom it cant be seen because of undercladding.
I wnet the other way and had my dealer install it. They have assured me in writing and verbally that the LPE tank would not interfere with warranty at their dealership. I know it will be a GM service zone rep that will make the next call after the dealer.
I may have burned bridges with my closest dealer by discussing the LPE install with him. Is anyone aware of Houston area Chevy dealers that are installing the LPE tank and warrantying the result?
I can clearly manage the tank install job myself, though I would prefer to have a lift for the job. If I cannot find a Houston area dealer to install the LPE tank and warranty the result, I will probably go the way of doing the install myself and just not mentioning it during dealer service. Since my car has never been tuned and has less than 8000 miles on it, I do not see sufficient benefits to let GM off the hook on the engine warranty
I do respect that the ARE way is the better way to go for a car that is tracked regularly, but there seems to be evidence that the cars with the LPE tank, the LPE/Avaid insert, and even the 2009 sump tanks do hold up OK under road course use even with upgraded DOT-approved rubber. I just want to upgrade the design weakness that GM left in my 2008 - to at least the level that the 2009/2010 Z06s have.
11-15-2009, 01:19 PM
#109
Racer
From the Lingenfelter Performance site:
"This oil tank is not recommended for vehicles that do not see road coarse [sic] use with full slicks as the added oil capacity should not be needed on these vehicles since they should not be able to achieve high enough cornering loads for long enough periods of time to experience the oil pressure drop off problem" [my emphasis].
The LPE tank was developed in response to a particular issue: "Under prolonged high cornering loads such as those found on a banked race track with a vehicle with racing slicks, some customers have reported low oil pressure on the 2006-2008 Z06 Corvettes. The Lingenfelter Performance Engineering modified oil tank design was developed to help eliminate this problem" [my emphasis].
http://www.lingenfelter.com/mm5/merc...Category_Code=
"This oil tank is not recommended for vehicles that do not see road coarse [sic] use with full slicks as the added oil capacity should not be needed on these vehicles since they should not be able to achieve high enough cornering loads for long enough periods of time to experience the oil pressure drop off problem" [my emphasis].
The LPE tank was developed in response to a particular issue: "Under prolonged high cornering loads such as those found on a banked race track with a vehicle with racing slicks, some customers have reported low oil pressure on the 2006-2008 Z06 Corvettes. The Lingenfelter Performance Engineering modified oil tank design was developed to help eliminate this problem" [my emphasis].
http://www.lingenfelter.com/mm5/merc...Category_Code=
11-18-2009, 07:30 PM
#110
Intermediate
I have an 08 ZO6 with no engine mods that I track in the midwest at tracks that do not have any significant banks (Road America, Gingerman, Autobaun, Putnam Park, Mid-Ohio). I put on about 1,000 track miles a year and run on Kumho Ecsta V710's without any oil pressure problems. Do I need to worry about the dry sump starvation at the tracks I run at?
11-18-2009, 08:20 PM
#111
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Unfortunately I have never driven any of those tracks..... I know them somewhat...... but that is it.
Considering the price of an LPE tank or 2009 Z06 tank and an Aviaid baffle and the ease of installation I wouldnt do any tracking without those upgrades. Less than the cost of a set of tires and it will greatly reduce the possibility of an oiling issue.....
JMHO
Considering the price of an LPE tank or 2009 Z06 tank and an Aviaid baffle and the ease of installation I wouldnt do any tracking without those upgrades. Less than the cost of a set of tires and it will greatly reduce the possibility of an oiling issue.....
JMHO
11-18-2009, 08:38 PM
#112
Pretty much any track with long duration left hand turns will cause some starvation if the car is driven to it's limit & the dash gauge is not fast enough to tell you when this happens. The problem is aggravated if you have any tire or suspension mods & are a fast driver that pushes it to the limit. Even if you do not experience starvation, you risk sucking aerated oil into the pressure pickup which is bad. Unfortunately both the scavenge pump pickup & pressure pump inlet are in locations that make them susceptible to "sucking air" in long left hand turns. If you're going to track it, run better & thicker oil than GM's rec and do the oil tank mod before suspension upgrades.
I think Lingenfelter's warning above is more of a release of liability for them than real advice. If the car is tracked, it's a good idea to use their upgraded tank, or GM's new tank.
I think Lingenfelter's warning above is more of a release of liability for them than real advice. If the car is tracked, it's a good idea to use their upgraded tank, or GM's new tank.
11-18-2009, 10:17 PM
#113
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Indeed, it seems that the problem is not in the oil tank, nor the size of the tank, nor the dry sump baffling, the problem is not having enough scavenge pumps in the dry sump (sysem). Ferrari engins have 2, one at the front aone at the back, each sitting in a (slightly) baffled reservoir. NASCAR engines have 3 or 4 scavenge pumps distributed along the bottom of the engine. If the oil gets to the pan, a pump will take it out of the pan.
A bigger tank just allows more time for the high G situation to end before the engine goes boom.
A bigger tank just allows more time for the high G situation to end before the engine goes boom.
Sorry but I disagree. All these issues mentioned are inter related. You are probably correct that IF :
- the scavenge pump was higher capacity
- the pan had some baffling
- the pan had more/larger pickups
THEN
- the standard oil capacity might be adequate.
BUT
The oil will still slosh away from the tank outlet without a baffle.
So I dont think it's fair to say that the issue is not oil capacity or tank baffling because in otherwise stock configuration the LPE tank and Aviaid baffle do provide some benefit........ not a total solution for sure but much better than stock.
JMHO
11-03-2014, 09:15 AM
#115
Le Mans Master
09-14-2020, 10:13 AM
#116
5th Gear
Member Since: Jan 2019
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the design of the LPE solution much better. The ZR-1 solution has a single bi-directional flow piece of tubing between the main tank and the auxiliary tank whereas the LPE tank has two big holes drilled between the two tanks. A lot less restriction and I like the idea of gosintta and gosoutta holes.
John
John
09-14-2020, 10:10 PM
#118
Le Mans Master
