Bedouin

I'm looking for baseline Dyno results for stock '10-'13 GS's, Dry-sump LS3 only, preferably with NPP exhaust, no other mods.

Edit: Only looking for posts from people with dry-sump LS3's.

Kerrdogg

My 2011 GS made 340 rw on a friend's Mustang dyno, his dyno is 13% on average lower than the neighboring dyno jets (I have verified this myself now that my car is modded) so that would be 384 rwhp which from what I have seen is about normal, my car did not have NPP and that was a year ago (hot out) with 400 miles on the clock.

taken19

Not baseline, but my dry sump LS3 made 407/421 on a Mustang dyno with headers only. This dyno reads about 20 rwhp lower than a local Dynojet. Motor had about 1600 miles on it at the time and 10 weight oil for the track (that may have cost me 5 rwhp since the pulls were done at 150-160F oil temps).

I have read dry sump LS3's making from 380-405 rwhp stock with the norm being 385-395.

Bedouin

Thanks Kerr & Taken, & I've read that too, as well as some lower #'s, so let's see some owners of dry-sump LS3's posting thier actual results...

swvalleyguy

I have dry sump GS as well but on dyno don't think there will be any difference. The dry sump can produce more power in cornering than wet sump since oil is not sloshing to one side getting wrapped around crank causing windage losses. It would be interesting if someone would mount a wet sump engine on 45 degree angle (about engine axis) in dyno and then get HP numbers for comparison to dry sump. So on real road course or drag the benefit would show up. Obviously we all understand the benefits of dry sump in preventing oil starvation.

oldmansan

Responding to your duplicate post (please delete one). Do you have any dyno numbers to post (per OP's request)?

San

Vette Threat

The steel crank on the DS LS3 comes in handy too!

JCtx

All cranks are steel man. You meant 'forged', right?

JoesC5

You can't compare readings from a bunch of different dynos and draw any meaningful conclusions. To many variables involved.

JoesC5

There is a difference between cast iron and cast steel man, and between cast iron(used on the wet sump LS3) and forged steel(used on the dry sump LS3). Not all cranks are made of steel.

Kerrdogg

I agree but I think the OP was looking to see if there is a trend of GS dry sumps dynoing higher, I know there was a magazine article where someone claims to have had one dyno over 400 rwhp totally stock, to me that would be an amazing way to sell magazines .

FloydSummerOf68

Do you?

KneeDragr

Might have been a Chevy 'ringer' engine if they make them.

The motorbike manufacturers do that - when measuring for tolerances in the factory, they collect all of the tightest ones and use them when building the factory race engines. That way, in classes where the motors have to be 100% stock, they have a 5hp edge over the privateer teems. They also use these motors for the press demo bikes, so they dyno higher and impress the journalists more. If they can make 5 more hp on a 110hp bike engine, they can likely make 10-15hp more on a 400hp Chevy.

JCtx

Cast iron crank? Too brittle for that. The main difference on dry sump cranks is that they're forged. Give it a rest.

JoesC5

You give it a rest. Are you calling me a liar? The LS3 with the wet sump uses a cast nodular iron crankshaft. It is iron, it is cast. Do you believe the LS3 wet sump crankshaft is machined from billet? Or do you not believe it is cast or do you believe it is not made from iron?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crankshaft
Name: Paul Gelazin
Title: Design Responsible Engineer
Years with GM: 26

Other experience: 18 years as an Engine Structural Analysis Engineer

What LS3 part(s) are you responsible for? Crank, bearings, damper, flexplate, engine balancer

What LS7 and LS9 parts are you responsible for? Same

What other Corvette parts have you been involved with in the past? All Gen III and IV rotating cranktrain components (crank, bearings, damper, flexplate, and flywheel).

Why do you think your LS3 part is the most important part on the engine? The crank is the main component that takes the unnatural reciprocating events and transfers them into rotational power. The design has to be robust enough to handle all the punishment that eight power cells (piston, pin, and rod), working to create 430 hp, can throw at it under a multitude of speeds and conditions.


What is a focus area you watch when designing the LS3 part, especially knowing it is for a Corvette engine? Crank structural integrity is foremost. There was an additional focus on fatigue strength enhancements to meet durability requirements, since the LS3 is the most demanding application for the iron crank. This strength is created by inducing compressive residual stresses in the undercuts (the area where the journals meet the side of the crank throws) with rolling loads in the range of 6,000-7,000 newtons. This process significantly improves the fatigue strength in the critical sections of the main and rod journals.


For the LS3 dry-sump application, a steel crank is used and is actually machined from the LS9 forging. It is also an undercut and rolled design, and can handle anything you can throw at it in the Grand Sport.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read more: http://www.vetteweb.com/tech/vemp_11...#ixzz23TaGd0wm
Do some research instead of coming off as a tough guy. Check out the specs of the LS3 wet sump crankshaft. I'll help you get started by giving you a hint. part Number 12597569

swvalleyguy

No unfortunately I don't have dyno numbers. The point that I was making is just use dyno numbers from any LS3 since on dyno car won't be moving and dry sump engine,under those conditions should not produce more NET power.

stevebz06

I have a 2011 GS and the only mods I have is twin turbos and nitrous and I made 1,138 hp, but I forget what kind of dyno it was and I'm sure it was reading 150 hp low.

GEE, the guy was just trying to compare his engine to other similar engines to get an idea on whether it's a good engine or not.

PagePilot

2010 GS, 6SP dry sump, stock 10500 miles, "PCM for less" did the dyno.
400 HP RW / 400 TRQ RW.

Respectfully,
David

TorqHQ

They make about 375rwhp on our Mustang Dyno

JCtx

I never came off as a 'tough guy', and didn't call you liar. But in your quest to win an argument, now you come up with 'nodular cast iron', which is a VERY different material than cast iron. It's like adding 'wo' to 'man, and then you have a woman, which is the complete opposite. Ductile cast iron is MUCH closer to steel than cast iron, so it's commonly referred as steel; THAT was my argument. Cast iron is what engine blocks are usually made of, not crankshafts. That was all. You win. One more to the ignore list (wanted to do it a while back). Have a nice life.