Topic: ZZP LNF Cam Testing

[Kelu]

Some words from ZZP guys from Cobalt forum:

I installed a set of prototype ZZP cams in my motor a couple days ago. Yesterday and today, I got a chance to dyno test them. Here are the results so far-

On gas with stock cams, peak whp was 332.
On gas with ZZP cams, peak whp was 362.

However, boost was a little higher on the cammed test. I thought we had a maxed turbo test on gas with stock cams, but there weren't any tests with the same test procedure. Maxing the turbo on the stock cams should have put it somewhere around 336-340 whp.

Next, I switched back to E85:

On E85 with stock cams, peak whp was 359.
On E85 with ZZP cams, peak whp was 381.

I altererd the test a little by shortening the test and running a more agressive tune, but there was very little gain. Peak whp was 383.

Here are a couple dyno sheets:

ZZP cams, gas vs. E85. Notice the 428 ft lbs(sae corrected). Uncorrected torque was over 435!
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Highest whp pull
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

These cams are not huge by any means. They are about 8-10 degrees longer duration than stock IIRC. Lift is increased by ~.018". The tops of the lobes are a bit wider, keeping the valves vear max lift longer, which is where the majority of the gains come from.

Pricing should be reasonable. These will easily outperform a K04 compressor wheel upgrade dollar for dollar. Plus, they will still be useful if you decide to upgrade to a bigger turbo.
Hopefully these will be available to purchase before spring.

[Arabas]

interesting...
Kelu, you quote
On gas with stock cams, peak whp was 332.
stock turbo and engine with tune and peripherals is certainly not 332whp, so the starting line is with some extra mods.
what are these? do you know?

furthermore, what will be needed to place these cams, i mean what would the procedure be?
sorry, i m not a gearhead...

[MEGAS]

all this without specific tune for new cams..?

[MEGAS]

@arabas
roughly you need to drain the oil,pop up head etc..

[Arabas]

i m pretty sure, some tuning will be needed...
so Megas you have to pop up the head and replading internal engine parts.
other than cams would also need replacement to support this mod?

the most interesting part is "Pricing should be reasonable. These will easily outperform a K04 compressor wheel upgrade dollar for dollar."

[MEGAS]

cam timing is the trickiest part of installing new cams IMHO.

[Kelu]

Arabas: Cobalt LNF shows generally a lot higher values at the wheels compared with kappa. ZZP dyno is a mustang which shows around 230 for a stock cobalt and they make 330whp with stock turbo/engine with some boltons and tons of dyno tuning (Trifecta base + their custom HPT tuning). Remeber they did 11.95s with stock turbo (upgraded head and 109 octane gas) and 11.85s with stock head and E85 .
Their car now have boltons and stock head, nothing fancy.

They have awesome prices for their aftermarket parts for LNF.

I hope my memories are correct.

Megas: not sure but if the tune is required to gain power when using cams, I'm sure they did tune it on the dyno.

[Arabas]

Kelu, if we make 280-290 with stock engine-turbo and just bolt ons, and Cobalt does 330whp with the same, that's a 15% difference.
if we have 18% loss in drivetrain, does the Cobalt have only 3-5%?
coz the 230whp compared to 265hp is 14%....
confused....

[Kelu]

Stop comparing dyno numbers, they create a lot of confusion

[Arabas]

You are rigth Kelu.
so, to sum up, lnf cams, stock turbo, bolt ons and tuning, gains can be around 20-25 whp?
if this costs max 1000$ plus 300$ labour, then i think it will be a good offer

[Kelu]

You just did it again, you said 20-25whp, correctly would be 10% on top of a engine with bold ons, i presume the gains will be more important in the case with big turbo.

[snaponbob]

Something is VERY screwy.

1) LNF power output is the SAME on the Kappas and Cobalt. The WHEEL power is a bit different due to electric power steering and maybe a slight difference in loss in the different drive trains.
2) The Cobalt guy says he gained 30 whp with E85. Did he run 100% E85 or mix it in the existing gas? If he switched to straight E85, where did he get the injectors and pump to increase the fuel flow enough to not kill the engine?
3) What was his baseline power on the stock engine? He has done a LOT of mods to his LNF.

Sent the owner a PM, so I can't wait to hear from him.

[Kelu]

Can I try to answer based on their replies?

Something is VERY screwy.

Why?

1) LNF power output is the SAME on the Kappas and Cobalt. The WHEEL power is a bit different due to electric power steering and maybe a slight difference in loss in the different drive trains.

IMHO, it's all about dyno Bob, I generally try to read Cobalt dynos as crank numbers, one thing, one of the Cobalt guys visited Performance Auto Werks dyno and put down almost same as a Kappa.

2) The Cobalt guy says he gained 30 whp with E85. Did he run 100% E85 or mix it in the existing gas? If he switched to straight E85, where did he get the injectors and pump to increase the fuel flow enough to not kill the engine?

Yes, they use Trifecta base tune with fuel pressure raised around to 2800psi

3) What was his baseline power on the stock engine? He has done a LOT of mods to his LNF.

I asked him same question some time ago and he said stock cobalt puts down around 230whp on their dyno.

Keep us updated Bob.

[old goat]

You can't pay any attention to the Cobalt numbers like Kelu said, just look at the delta, and figure the percentage, should be roughly close. Lyndon can easily do tunes for any cam, he just needs the specs, then a dyno run and some tweaking.

[kennysabarese]

Please let's not pollute this thread with Cobalt vs Kappa. If they have gains, we will have gains. Just be glad SOMEONE is actually pushing the boundaries on the LNF engine.

[snaponbob]

I know different dynos produce different results. That said;

1) It would be helpful to know what his base line (stock) output was. I checked the forum he posted to and learned that he is involved in a LOT of mods to that engine. No harm, no fowl there. But no baseline  that I found.
2) There is NO way of knowing what the crank output is without putting the engine on a dyno. Then REAL numbers can be used, not synthetic figures using assumed loss numbers.
3) The claims of ~340 WHP on 109 octane gas is bogus on a STOCK engine, but ~340 CRANK HP is not. But, see #2.
4) Fuel pump pressure is one thing, but that will not be enough for E85 without bigger injectors. Maybe that is why there was only a 20HP increase on E85. Evos running E85 see 70-100whp increases over 100 octane, but that is with bigger pumps and bigger injectors. They also lose roughly 50% fuel mileage on the road !!!!
5) Kelu, if the guy said he was producing 230whp stone stock, then he is NOT producing 340whp on a "stock" LNF with just a bunch of tuning for 109. The power curves show clearly that he must be using an aftermarket turbo. Plus, prior to the cams he had stated that he had done a bunch of head work plus other mods.

All that said, if he will share what pump, injectors, and percentage of E85 he is using, I will be doing that to my car.

[kennysabarese]

he doesn't start running the dyno till almost 4,000 RPM

that distorts the curves a lot.

[Kelu]

Bob: they stated that they used E85 and they put down 360whp, those were the mods bringing them from 11.95s (with head work) down to 11.85s (without head work), but not sure if they used 100% E85 or a mixture with gas like IamBroke did on HPTuners forum until he reached E47 to be optimal.
Bob pay attention, this engine was modified (head work) in 2009 when they did 11.95 and than they used a S256 to test their big turbo maximum LNF limits, i have posted here:
http://www.kappaperformance.com/forum/index.php?topic=3700.0

In 2010 they switched to test their small turbo kit (S252) which was meant for general public with stock engine, they revert that engine back to stock (mainly the head) and using Vince fuel raiser as base map and not with their electrical mod of the pump.

They don't like to push the engine on the dyno from low rpm, that's why their graph looks weird, look at my dyno for example:
http://www.kappaperformance.com/forum/index.php?topic=5259.msg76115#msg76115
Because I don't like to WOT at lower than 3000rpm the scales looks a little bit later than I normally do (max tq at 3600rpm instead of 3200rpm).

They had many things which they shared to public, they could hide many aspects but they always answer to various questions on the forum and they invite their audience to the track when they go drag racing.

Besides that there are a couple of owners who are using their turbo kit for 6-8 months now, they reported to the forum from the beginning of their mod on a stock engine doing 430whp.

Bob one question for you: If balt guys are not doing that power how come this car made 11.9s ET? Or else how come people report 4.5s on HPT logs for 60-100mph runs?

[snaponbob]

Spoke with ZZP. There is more to it than that, Kenny. BTW, the upper most curves are torque while the second (flat) curves are hp. Still, odd curves, and the ZZP guy was playing his cards VERY close to the chest on that. They DO have a Sky Redline in their shop right now. They have my phone and e-mail and said they WILL contact me when they are done with it. They even said they were not sure about all that has been done to that Cobalt engine since they have not done all of the work. Also, the driveability is lousy on the street as the tuning is still being worked on.

[Kelu]

They DO have a Sky Redline in their shop right now.

They have it from the beginning of this year.

[snaponbob]

Bob: they stated that they used E85 and they put down 360whp, those were the mods bringing them from 11.95s (with head work) down to 11.85s (without head work), but not sure if they used 100% E85 or a mixture with gas like IamBroke did on HPTuners forum until he reached E47 to be optimal.
Bob pay attention, this engine was modified (head work) in 2009 when they did 11.95 and than they used a S256 to test their big turbo maximum LNF limits, i have posted here:
http://www.kappaperformance.com/forum/index.php?topic=3700.0

In 2010 they switched to test their small turbo kit (S252) which was meant for general public with stock engine, they revert that engine back to stock (mainly the head) and using Vince fuel raiser as base map and not with their electrical mod of the pump.

They don't like to push the engine on the dyno from low rpm, that's why their graph looks weird, look at my dyno for example:
http://www.kappaperformance.com/forum/index.php?topic=5259.msg76115#msg76115
Because I don't like to WOT at lower than 3000rpm the scales looks a little bit later than I normally do (max tq at 3600rpm instead of 3200rpm).

They had many things which they shared to public, they could hide many aspects but they always answer to various questions on the forum and they invite their audience to the track when they go drag racing.

Besides that there are a couple of owners who are using their turbo kit for 6-8 months now, they reported to the forum from the beginning of their mod on a stock engine doing 430whp.

Bob one question for you: If balt guys are not doing that power how come this car made 11.9s ET? Or else how come people report 4.5s on HPT logs for 60-100mph runs?

I am not questioning the quality of their products or results. I am aware of the history of the engine. As far as the dyno results, they appear to have been generated yesterday per the date stamp. Not to worry, I am certainly paying attention.

[snaponbob]

They have it from the beginning of this year.

Well, that is odd, as they told me they "started working on a Redline that a customer just dropped off". I am not challenging anybody on this forum or anybody at ZZP. There have been some pretty outrageous claims on various Cobalt and HHR forums, so skepticism is not unwarranted. Just as in the electronic and digital media, there are headlines, and then there are the REST of the stories!!!!!!!!!!!

[kennysabarese]

Interesting. They bought a Sky earlier this year, which is what Kelu was referring to,  and they haven't done much work on it, customer cars always take preference.

I didn't know they had a customer's Kappa, so hopefully that means they'll have some results soon. 

[Kelu]

I am not questioning the quality of their products or results. I am aware of the history of the engine. As far as the dyno results, they appear to have been generated yesterday per the date stamp. Not to worry, I am certainly paying attention.

Nice to know I'm not the only one scanning possibilities to upgrade our cars 
As far date of the dyno: http://www.cobaltss.net/forums/2-0l-lnf-performance-tech-153/zzp-lnf-cam-testing-233589/

We did purchase a Saturn Sky.  We should have it here in the next week or so.  We will be developing the common mods such as downpipe, intake, intercooler, etc...  Then we will move forward with our turbo swap.  It will be interesting to see what happens when we have a car that can actually use 500+ ft lbs of torque without simply spinning the tires every time.

This is my mail from 27 May, I kind of lost the hope that they will release parts for Kappa.

Bob spill it out, I think here is room for skepticism and I would love to hear opinions, my brain was forced to think that all those big numbers showed by Balt are crank hp to be able to "compute" them, even so 330hp with stock engine/turbo is viable, 360hp with E85 is good also, 10% gain from cams is great, at least we have something which is far better than nothing.

[Kelu]

I should have mentioned in my first post, but forgot- both E85 tests(stock cams and ZZP cams) were done with our added fuel rail.  With the stock cams, max HP was exactly the same with DI only or 2 rail.  However, the powerband was a little better with the 2 rail setup.  This was because the DI system was a little past it's max.  With the ZZP cams, DI only was not capable of keeping up, so all full pulls were done with 2 rails.

That clarifies the E85 path?