09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine - Page 2
Cadillac
 

Cadillac Forums | Help Us Help You | Advertise | Cadillac Parts | Cadillac News | Cadillac Classifieds / (Old System)

Cadillac Technical Archive | Cadillac Dealers | Cadillac Reviews | Cadillac Dealer Reviews | Cadillac Vendors

CadillacForums.com is the premier Cadillac Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 34
2009-2014 Cadillac CTS-V General Discussion Discussion, 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine in Cadillac CTS-V Series Forum - 2009-2014; Originally Posted by Jayrcr3 At 1,200 rpm the LSA is already producing more torque than the 383lb-ft that the M5 ...
  1. #16
    Jpjr is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): Cadillac
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    728

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayrcr3 View Post

    At 1,200 rpm the LSA is already producing more torque than the 383lb-ft that the M5 engine makes at its 6,100 rpm peak, and it never really lets up.



    This trumps that 8500 rpm redline.
    That statement is true for almost any large displacement pushrod V8, including the Silverado's.

  2. #17
    Albertan is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): 2004 Cadillac CTS REDLINE 2006 CTS-V Infared
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Age
    65
    Posts
    873

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    JPJR
    I pretty much agree with you but for the fuel consumption idea. It takes X amount of fuel to produce Y horsepower. Large displacement/slower running=small displacement/high reving. If you got better fuel economy with the high rev/small displacement combo everyone would be doing it. You do get better fuel economy running a small displacement engine slower tuned for less horsepower.
    Also, I would think that a high reving, long living engine would be more expensive to build. If you want an LS engine to rev to 8000+, it can easily be built but the cam will produce power from 3500 to 8500 rather than 1000 to 6000. That would be a good thing for racing, but driving it in town would be a bit of a pain. Gas mileage wouldn't be great either. I can see myself: old guy driving 30 mph in low gear and maybe second. Lots of noise and everyone would be wondering if I was senile and forgetting to shift!

  3. #18
    Jpjr is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): Cadillac
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    728

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Albertan View Post
    JPJR
    I pretty much agree with you but for the fuel consumption idea. It takes X amount of fuel to produce Y horsepower. Large displacement/slower running=small displacement/high reving. If you got better fuel economy with the high rev/small displacement combo everyone would be doing it. You do get better fuel economy running a small displacement engine slower tuned for less horsepower.
    Also, I would think that a high reving, long living engine would be more expensive to build. If you want an LS engine to rev to 8000+, it can easily be built but the cam will produce power from 3500 to 8500 rather than 1000 to 6000. That would be a good thing for racing, but driving it in town would be a bit of a pain. Gas mileage wouldn't be great either. I can see myself: old guy driving 30 mph in low gear and maybe second. Lots of noise and everyone would be wondering if I was senile and forgetting to shift!

    I pretty much agree with you as well.

    You are right on fuel consumption, my only point is that to make X horsepower, a high revving motor is built to run more efficiently than a low revving motor with forced induction and backpressure. But the real issue is weight. Compare the displacement of the new M3 V8 motor (414hp/4.0L) to the V1 LS2 (400hp/6.2L).

    You are also right on expenses, technology costs more, but this is precisely why people are willing to pay up for it. GM could not offer the same performance value if they did not rely on large pushrod motors. Costs would skyrocket. They are cheaper to build, cheaper to fix, and should last longer (assuming equal quality componentry) than high revving motors. But this is also somewhat trivial. Today's high revving motors will last as long as 99% of buyers care to use them.. well into six figure mileage. The warranties are there if they didn't.

    I always question whether to reply, because some will inevitably think this is an american vs foreign debate. It is not.

  4. #19
    Albertan is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): 2004 Cadillac CTS REDLINE 2006 CTS-V Infared
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Age
    65
    Posts
    873

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    JPJR
    It does seem that the German cars are in the enviable position of being able to charge more or a lot more than the Americans. BMW is the car that everyone wants to compare there make against. (I actually went on a tour of the BMW factory in Munich last year -in English! I was hoping they wouldn't ask what cars we drove - they didn't)
    What this all comes down to is different companies go about building their cars differently. Today, every auto manufacturer is building very good cars and we are lucky to be in a position to be able to buy what we consider is the best.
    However, since you mentioned the new M3, is it worth the extra money for that versus the 335? Or should this be on the BMW forums?

  5. #20
    Jpjr is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): Cadillac
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    728

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Albertan View Post
    JPJR

    However, since you mentioned the new M3, is it worth the extra money for that versus the 335? Or should this be on the BMW forums?
    That is a BMW forum question.

    But I will say that I am buying a V2 and my reasoning is that 1) it is more muscle/$$ regardless of how they get there, 2) the car design and interior is far superior, 3) all else equal i support domestic products if they are as good.

  6. #21
    Albertan is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): 2004 Cadillac CTS REDLINE 2006 CTS-V Infared
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Age
    65
    Posts
    873

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    I'd thought about the new V as well. My problem is it would cost the price of the V PLUS the price of a new CTS 3.6 for my wife! Gotta do a lot more molding(my company) before I can afford that.

  7. #22
    jasaero is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2004 BLK Cadillac CTS-V
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    245

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Jpjr View Post
    An LSA with 8600 rpm redline will perform better than an LSA with 6200 rpm redline if it is built correctly, that is all I'm trying to say.

    But you can't compare power, because high rev motors don't require the same displacement. They generate power and performance from high engine speeds, avoiding increasing the size of the engine or using a turbo/super charger, which require increases in weight and fuel consumption.

    For people citing reliability, once again I don't think that BMW is having a problem losing money on warranty costs. Adding a blower to the LSA strains engine internals in a similar manner to revving, it all comes down to reliability. It's sort of a funny argument given nameplate reputations for quality.
    First of all an LSA with components good for an 8600rpm redline would probably be making near 700hp rather than 550hp. Of course it would be better.

    If you decrease displacement you are bound to decrease torque. This is where your arguement falls appart. It's all a different strokes for different folks thing rather than a one is better thing when it comes right down too it. BUT, once you start talking OHV vs DOHC instead of displacement and torque vs Revs.............................................. .................................................. ...................

    Displacement doesn't exactly add weight either if you go from DOHC to OHV in the process of increasing displacement. OHV has superior packaging attributes that allow a higher displacement design to take up less space and weight less over all. The 7.0L LS7 engine performs very similar to the M5 V10 or AMG 6.2L V8, while weighing about the same as the AMG V8 and less than the M5 V10 and taking up less space in probably every dimension than either. BMW and MB have slowly built their smaller cars out around their big heavy V8 and larger engines.

    An LS7 would probably fit in an old M3 that came with a straight six a lot easier than the BMW V10 would, IF you could even make the V10 work in the old M3. The LS7 doesn't weight much more than the current M3's V8 anyhow and probably takes up about the same amount of space, while displacing 3 more litre's, revving close to the same point, and making GOBs more torque and 90 more HP. Basically the M3 would cost BMW less to build, have 90 more HP, and STILL have the 50/50 weight distribution if BMW would have just called GM up for a REAL engine. Still, it's still a different strokes for different folks thing in the end. Although an LS7 powered M3 would be superior performance wise, many would probably miss the extreme race scream that comes from the current M3 V8. The LS7 gives a pretty extreme scream, but it's more of a controlled scream rather the psychopath race scream that comes from revves above 8000rpm.

    On the reliability front, I have never heard of extreme reliability claims for M cars, Italian sports cars, or really any other car that is known to rev beyond 7K in general. Even the much simpler high tune Type R Honda 4's that get into this region are not known to be nearly as reliable as their more pedestrian Honda siblings.

  8. #23
    Jpjr is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): Cadillac
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    728

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    All very good points. I certainly don't think the LS' are incapable engines. Right now I own an LS6 and LS2.

    But you are saying drop a 7L LS7 to an M3 with a 4L E92. What happens when BMW decides to build a 7L E92. I would rather see GM spend the money on engine technology rather than trying to get 1000lbs of low end torque to the ground lol.

  9. #24
    buf05CTSV's Avatar
    buf05CTSV is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): 2005 Cadillac CTS-V LS6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    49

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Jpjr View Post
    Since group think continues to rear its ugly head...

    A motor that can rev to 8650 is a sign of superior technology and design.
    It has nothing to do with american vs foreign, lol. Read: It is a good thing, not a bad thing.

    In real life, this motor can drive the Audi around corners without changing gears as often since it makes power along a wider band. This reduces the need for extra displacement and makes the vehicle lighter, a double benefit.
    Ford won Lemans in the 60s because the GT40 had a big low-rev engine, whereas the Ferraris simply tired out because they had higher redlines and less displacement.

  10. #25
    jasaero is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2004 BLK Cadillac CTS-V
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    245

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Jpjr View Post
    All very good points. I certainly don't think the LS' are incapable engines. Right now I own an LS6 and LS2.

    But you are saying drop a 7L LS7 to an M3 with a 4L E92. What happens when BMW decides to build a 7L E92. I would rather see GM spend the money on engine technology rather than trying to get 1000lbs of low end torque to the ground lol.
    I have only an LS6. Love it. Some day it would be cool to have a high revving take on the 400hp+ world, but really like the low revving approach better from a technical/engineering standpoint.

    BMW would never touch an OHV engine and they would almost have to for a 7L E92 to become a reality. If not OHV it would need the 8000+rpm and 700-800hp to compensate for the increased weight and bad balance of the car also.

    GM already has the tech to build a high revving engine. The LS7 and DI 3.6L V6 are good enough proof of that. The LS7 uses advanced light weight components to make 7000k rpm and the 3.6L DI is a plain jane DOHC that can make 7000k. If you used some of the advanced lightweight production techniques of the LS7 for components of a V8 derived from the 3.6L DI you would probably have well over 8000rpm capable engine. The engine would be very expensive, even compared to LS7, though and not give you any real advantage OVER LS7 other than revability. Such a design minus all the lightweight components and extreme revving is on the shelf at GM, but they canned it because of lack of funding and high fuel costs diverting funds from any thing more than 4 or 6 cylinders. If they ever revive their Ultra V8 program it could very well be the sorta engine you are suggesting. Something more like GM's take on the non-M BMW and non-AMG MB V8's that could surely eventually get a derivative like the M and AMG engines.

    I don't think they should bother with such an engine though. It's a lot of cost with not much return. Even if Caddy ever brings a REAL S-class competitor to the game eventually, I think they should put an LS? derived OHV V12 or even V16 engine in it as the top engine rather than copying the Euro cars. Maybe make even the V8 for engine for such a car special to Cadillac, with greater refinement tuning and such, but based on the LS? Doubt it will ever happen anytime soon with todays fuel crunch and tomorrow CAFE though. Eventually maybe they will get enough presence worldwide to attack BMW and MB more car for car, but those cars need to be very different from MB and BMW for Cadillac to really make a statement.

  11. #26
    Jpjr is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): Cadillac
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    728

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by jasaero View Post
    I have only an LS6. Love it. Some day it would be cool to have a high revving take on the 400hp+ world, but really like the low revving approach better from a technical/engineering standpoint.

    BMW would never touch an OHV engine and they would almost have to for a 7L E92 to become a reality. If not OHV it would need the 8000+rpm and 700-800hp to compensate for the increased weight and bad balance of the car also.

    GM already has the tech to build a high revving engine. The LS7 and DI 3.6L V6 are good enough proof of that. The LS7 uses advanced light weight components to make 7000k rpm and the 3.6L DI is a plain jane DOHC that can make 7000k. If you used some of the advanced lightweight production techniques of the LS7 for components of a V8 derived from the 3.6L DI you would probably have well over 8000rpm capable engine. The engine would be very expensive, even compared to LS7, though and not give you any real advantage OVER LS7 other than revability. Such a design minus all the lightweight components and extreme revving is on the shelf at GM, but they canned it because of lack of funding and high fuel costs diverting funds from any thing more than 4 or 6 cylinders. If they ever revive their Ultra V8 program it could very well be the sorta engine you are suggesting. Something more like GM's take on the non-M BMW and non-AMG MB V8's that could surely eventually get a derivative like the M and AMG engines.

    I don't think they should bother with such an engine though. It's a lot of cost with not much return. Even if Caddy ever brings a REAL S-class competitor to the game eventually, I think they should put an LS? derived OHV V12 or even V16 engine in it as the top engine rather than copying the Euro cars. Maybe make even the V8 for engine for such a car special to Cadillac, with greater refinement tuning and such, but based on the LS? Doubt it will ever happen anytime soon with todays fuel crunch and tomorrow CAFE though. Eventually maybe they will get enough presence worldwide to attack BMW and MB more car for car, but those cars need to be very different from MB and BMW for Cadillac to really make a statement.
    Well first keep in mind that the E92 V8 is one of if not the lightest OHC V8 on the road today. It actually weighs less than the V6 it replaced.

    We will agree to disagree. LS motors make a lot of power, but they are fundamentally no different than truck motors (and they have been used in many trucks as we know). Throwing a large displacement motor in a small Corvette is a great formula for power, but it is simply nowhere near state of the art.

    The high speed motor has more advantages all things considered. The combo of DOHC and high rev *does* give the motor a broader powerband, which *does* give the driver more options when it comes to non-oval racing. I am citing tecnological advances and not preference, and I wish GM would build one so that this can stop sounding like an us vs. them argument.

    I can't argue ultimate performance, since the Viper (8L motor) just set a record at Nurburgring. But if you have ever driven an M3, you know the difference in every day driving. The M3 is nimble and effortless through traffic and corners, whereas a Z06 or Viper are torque steer monsters that get violent fast. It's a great thrill (remember, i own them), but reaction times are simply not the same for anyone but 100% trained professional pushrod road-racers.

    All my opinion.

  12. #27
    coolcaddy1's Avatar
    coolcaddy1 is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): 1988 Brougham De Ellagance (sold) 2006 CTS-V (still looking)
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Age
    31
    Posts
    56

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    so back to the original topic on this thread. Inorder to get a V2 to ZR1 powerlevels you would need to

    1 drop in forged internals ....crank, pistons, valves, main caps

    2 switch intake manifods

    3 switch to larger zr1 blower and intercooler although it seemes the caddi cooler flows better..i though i read that??

    4 fuel presure would need to be upgraded. is that a computer limited boundry or is that the caddies mechanical limit? possible fuel pump upgrade

    looks like we cn leave out the dry sump as more room in the engine bay and the caddi has the same oil squirters on the botom of the pistons to keep em cool and not burned through like the zr1

    The ECU would need to be reflasher or would the vettes work?

    while your in there may as well do a cam and headers. Asuming most of the caddi and zr1 parts are interchangable what is the cost of upgrading to vette power?

    then after we have all this power on tap will the new diff hold up? Can we get the magnetic ride to handle the hop and ge it to hook up? Man I can't wait to see what we will be able to do with the new V2

  13. #28
    Jpjr is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): Cadillac
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    728

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by coolcaddy1 View Post
    so back to the original topic on this thread. Inorder to get a V2 to ZR1 powerlevels you would need to

    1 drop in forged internals ....crank, pistons, valves, main caps

    2 switch intake manifods

    3 switch to larger zr1 blower and intercooler although it seemes the caddi cooler flows better..i though i read that??

    4 fuel presure would need to be upgraded. is that a computer limited boundry or is that the caddies mechanical limit? possible fuel pump upgrade

    looks like we cn leave out the dry sump as more room in the engine bay and the caddi has the same oil squirters on the botom of the pistons to keep em cool and not burned through like the zr1

    The ECU would need to be reflasher or would the vettes work?

    while your in there may as well do a cam and headers. Asuming most of the caddi and zr1 parts are interchangable what is the cost of upgrading to vette power?

    then after we have all this power on tap will the new diff hold up? Can we get the magnetic ride to handle the hop and ge it to hook up? Man I can't wait to see what we will be able to do with the new V2

    no one knows what supporting mods will be required necessarily because no one has modded an LSA yet. but i am guessing that you can easily get the LSA to 636 hp with a more efficient blower (or possibly even a port), a smaller upper pulley, and a tune. in the grand scheme of things it would be very easy to make 650hp with the LSA, and I would expect the 2011 CTS-V to debut with at least 600hp just from extra boost.

  14. #29
    jasaero is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2004 BLK Cadillac CTS-V
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    245

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Jpjr View Post
    Well first keep in mind that the E92 V8 is one of if not the lightest OHC V8 on the road today. It actually weighs less than the V6 it replaced.
    Yes it is, but it still weighs 445lbs compared to an LS7's 458lbs I think. So basically a 13lb advantage with about 80-90hp disadvantage. And MASSIVE torque disadvantage. Also I am pretty sure many of the dimensions of the LS7 are similar or smaller. It's a high displacement engine, but is VERY compact and lightweight at the same time. An inherent and undeniable advantage of OHV arrangement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jpjr View Post
    We will agree to disagree. LS motors make a lot of power, but they are fundamentally no different than truck motors (and they have been used in many trucks as we know). Throwing a large displacement motor in a small Corvette is a great formula for power, but it is simply nowhere near state of the art.

    The high speed motor has more advantages all things considered. The combo of DOHC and high rev *does* give the motor a broader powerband, which *does* give the driver more options when it comes to non-oval racing. I am citing tecnological advances and not preference, and I wish GM would build one so that this can stop sounding like an us vs. them argument.

    I can't argue ultimate performance, since the Viper (8L motor) just set a record at Nurburgring. But if you have ever driven an M3, you know the difference in every day driving. The M3 is nimble and effortless through traffic and corners, whereas a Z06 or Viper are torque steer monsters that get violent fast. It's a great thrill (remember, i own them), but reaction times are simply not the same for anyone but 100% trained professional pushrod road-racers.

    All my opinion.
    First of all, the M3 V8 isn't so much state of the art, as it is just plain expensive and complicated. They have been making race engines configured very similar to the M3 engine with the per cylinder throttle bodies and such for a LONG time now. Ferrari has been making similar engines for road cars for a long time now. Pure and simple. It's just more expensive to do because of the high number of parts and fancy lightweight materials needed to accomplish it, not exactly state of the art though. Probably some of the most state of the art processes used on the M3 V8 have more to do with manufacturing lightweight components in greater than race engine volume than anything to do with the overall design. Those same manufacturing processes are also used on engines like the LS7 that also need similar lightweight components though. The only real point you might be able to make against the LS7 in an arguement like this is that it probably isn't quite at the same refinement and NVH levels for everyday putting around as something like the E92 V8. But, from everything I have read, it is a lot closer than it's predecessor the LS6 and probably within spitting distance even on this measure. It's more along the lines of the LS3 that has used extra displacement to allow the tune of the cams to be less aggressive and more civil. Really the LS3 is probably a better overall match to the E92 V8 than the LS7. It probably is still within 15lbs of the E92 engine while making 10 more hp and probably having matched NVH and refinement characteristics.

    Now your last paragraph is just silly. Has nothing to do with the engine at all hardly. The differences in such cars approach to making good times around race tracks is much more in the chassis and suspension designs and such than anything to do with the engine. Sure, when you have 400-600lbft of torque to exit a corner with, it's going to take more skill to do it right compared to a car with less than 300lbft and not end up off the road. But at the same time you could also just hold higher gears and focus on getting through the corner with such a car and let the higher gear compensate for your floor happy right foot and not loose much time while if you did that with a 300lbft car you will just fail to regain momentum. I will admit that a car like the Z06 uses a much more crude approach to suspension tuning than a car like the M3, but can't say the engine is any less state of the art!! And you seem to be ignoring the CTS-V2 this thread is being discussed about. Everything I have read about it makes it sound like just as civil and refined an overall package as the M5 or M3 while beating both around the 'Ring using a very similar more refined and civil, but adjustable, chassis and suspension tuning approach, JUST like the BMW's. ALL using another derivative of this LS? engine that is so low tech and truck derived.

    As a side note, your wide power band point on the M3 engine is also silly. A wide power band is just another way of saying a flat torque curve usually. Technically it is the rev range between peak torque and peak HP. But in the end power band is really determined more by just how much torque you have at any given RPM. So really a very high torque engine with a somewhat flat torque curve and ability to rev pretty high is going to probably have a wider REAL power band than a rev happy engine that has a flat torque curve, but torque deficiency. The M3 has 295lbft at peak and can rev 4400rpms from there. The LS7 AND LS3 have 300+lbft from just off idle at 1000rpm. The LS3 can rev 5300rpms from there and the LS7 can rev 6000rpms from there. This higher torque curve essentially gives you a FLATTER power curve in the end. So in the E92 M3 at 4000rpms you have maybe 220hp while an LS3 has 300hp already. And it's the same through out the graph. So basically if put the M3 HP graph on top the LS3 graph the LS3 graph would have more area under it's curve. Particularly in the lower and middle of the rev ranges. So basically the LS3 will have around 20-50hp advantage just off idle all the way to the middle of it's power band and get a 100hp or more advantage near the peak of the LS3's revs. So basically where the LS3 loses area under the curve after it's redline it more than makes up for it with the extra area it has from start to redline.

  15. #30
    jasaero is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2004 BLK Cadillac CTS-V
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    245

    Re: 09 CTS-V LSA Engine -> 09 ZR-1 LS9 Engine

    Quote Originally Posted by coolcaddy1 View Post
    so back to the original topic on this thread. Inorder to get a V2 to ZR1 powerlevels you would need to

    1 drop in forged internals ....crank, pistons, valves, main caps

    2 switch intake manifods

    3 switch to larger zr1 blower and intercooler although it seemes the caddi cooler flows better..i though i read that??

    4 fuel presure would need to be upgraded. is that a computer limited boundry or is that the caddies mechanical limit? possible fuel pump upgrade

    looks like we cn leave out the dry sump as more room in the engine bay and the caddi has the same oil squirters on the botom of the pistons to keep em cool and not burned through like the zr1

    The ECU would need to be reflasher or would the vettes work?

    while your in there may as well do a cam and headers. Asuming most of the caddi and zr1 parts are interchangable what is the cost of upgrading to vette power?

    then after we have all this power on tap will the new diff hold up? Can we get the magnetic ride to handle the hop and ge it to hook up? Man I can't wait to see what we will be able to do with the new V2
    Sorry for taking over this thread with OHV vs DOHC talks.

    Pretty sure the LSA could hit ZR1 power with a lot less than you are touting. Not sure of the reliability of just doing a pully and tune and such, but that would probably get you there and still give you a pretty reliable setup if you don't push the car all the time. I'm pretty sure the CTS-V2 and even more so the ZR1 engines are designed so one could actually race them many weekends in SCCA and whatnot without worrying too much about reliability issues during the 100,000 mile warranty term. If you only really push your car really hard once in a blue moon, you could probably get away with the shortcut routes and not have to worry too much about how the engine holds up. The ZR1 is actually probably ready for 700+hp without much work and still hold up well as you know people who might have spent $200k plus for a Ferrari or something but decided to try the somewhat more pedestrian looking, but just as fast in the ZR1 might be very inclined to spend the savings tweaking things.

    The LSA won't have as extreme the head room as the LS9, but it will probably be able to goto LS9 power levels without much work and still be pretty reliable. Never can know for sure though until people start going beyond OEM tune and really pushing the car.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Bookmarks

Cadillac Posting Rules

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Read about Lincoln | Buick | Kia Forte Forum
Need products for your Cadillac? Check out your options at the links below:

custom floor mats | Cadillac Chrome and Black Chrome Wheels | window tinting