Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have a 2018 Silverado e assist l83

mods:

speed engineering headers (castles)

voolant CAI

e85 conversion

stock resonator 

magnaflow muffler

tuned by BBP

 

so I finally took the stock muffler off and added a magnaflow and kept the stock resonator. It sounds great but I feel like I lost a little power since now I have more exhaust flow. My question is do you think if I add a l86 ported intake manifold with a ported l86 throttle body it’ll make up for the loss of power.

 

im thinking that I’m getting more exhaust flow but I’m not pulling in enough air to match it but then again I don’t know. Anyone else have this problem after longtubes and aftermarket muffler??

 

Posted

I've been a David Wizard fan since I was a teenager. More recently, I've seen every episode of Engine Masters on Motortrend. Most of my "experience" is gleaned from others. I have built an engine and worked on/tuned a lot of fast cars/trucks that I've owned over the years. That's the credibility behind my response.

 

To clarify, are you experiencing a loss in part-throttle? Or it feels lazy everywhere? You might just need to rework your MAF/VVE now that there's no restrictions. My following pontification is based on an assumption that you've lost part-throttle, low-mid rpm power/tq.

 

An NA 5.3 will only flow so much air. I, personally, feel that 1.875" primary long tube headers merging into a basic 4-1 3" collector is TOO large for an NA 5.3. The primary length helps make up for the primary diameter but any velocity is lost once it hits those massive collectors. Something more appropriate might be a merge/choke collector similar to what ARH uses along with 1.75" primaries. Personally, I'd love to see 5.3 headers that were even smaller with 2.5" collectors and secondary pipes. 

 

Though my above comments seem tangential, it's important to note that any given engine and exhaust combo must be looked at as one. In your case, I think you perceive a power/tq loss from the Magnaflow muffler because you lost a restriction which was helping velocity, which aids in torque production. Let me be clear, back pressure is not important, but, velocity is very important. 

 

I think an L86 manifold would only exacerbate your perception of lost low-mid range. Increasing plenum volume that much will likely hurt your bottom end. 

 

Lastly, engines are fickle and so are people. Some will completely disagree with everything I've said. I'm not claiming I have all the answers or that I'm right. Just an opinion :) 

  • Like 3
Posted
49 minutes ago, lucas287 said:

I've been a David Wizard fan since I was a teenager. More recently, I've seen every episode of Engine Masters on Motortrend. Most of my "experience" is gleaned from others. I have built an engine and worked on/tuned a lot of fast cars/trucks that I've owned over the years. That's the credibility behind my response.

 

To clarify, are you experiencing a loss in part-throttle? Or it feels lazy everywhere? You might just need to rework your MAF/VVE now that there's no restrictions. My following pontification is based on an assumption that you've lost part-throttle, low-mid rpm power/tq.

 

An NA 5.3 will only flow so much air. I, personally, feel that 1.875" primary long tube headers merging into a basic 4-1 3" collector is TOO large for an NA 5.3. The primary length helps make up for the primary diameter but any velocity is lost once it hits those massive collectors. Something more appropriate might be a merge/choke collector similar to what ARH uses along with 1.75" primaries. Personally, I'd love to see 5.3 headers that were even smaller with 2.5" collectors and secondary pipes. 

 

Though my above comments seem tangential, it's important to note that any given engine and exhaust combo must be looked at as one. In your case, I think you perceive a power/tq loss from the Magnaflow muffler because you lost a restriction which was helping velocity, which aids in torque production. Let me be clear, back pressure is not important, but, velocity is very important. 

 

I think an L86 manifold would only exacerbate your perception of lost low-mid range. Increasing plenum volume that much will likely hurt your bottom end. 

 

Lastly, engines are fickle and so are people. Some will completely disagree with everything I've said. I'm not claiming I have all the answers or that I'm right. Just an opinion :) 

Honestly everything you’ve pointed out makes perfect sense to me and helps me understand what is going on. With the stock muffler the truck felt very fast and now it feels quick on top end but the mid range is ehhh to me now. Maybe a different muffler would help. That and possibly a retune would help clear this up a little. Worst case scenario I can go boost and just forget all these problems lol

Posted
39 minutes ago, Christian Olguin said:

the mid range is ehhh to me now. Maybe a different muffler would help.

Camshaft profile is the greatest bottleneck. A lot of peeps add an after market exhaust and never notice that stepping on the gas is now a kin to stepping on a wet sponge. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, It's Tim said:

Camshaft profile is the greatest bottleneck. A lot of peeps add an after market exhaust and never notice that stepping on the gas is now a kin to stepping on a wet sponge. 

Definitely true to an extent. More duration, usually, is just going to decrease dynamic compression ratio which even further softens the low-mid range. This is where the relationship between LSA/ICL/Duration becomes important. Does anyone even know what the specs are for an L83? I've never seen published figures. Can't imagine it's much better than Gen III/IV 5.3's. 

 

56 minutes ago, Christian Olguin said:

mid range is ehhh to me now

I'm trying to see if this is something you can fix via tuning...mid range while wide open? Or as we still talking part throttle? more clarification: on tip-in transition from cruising? or it feels soft from a dig? if you want to make the tip in more snappy and build more torque in the low-mid load ranges you could dabble with the VVT settings. This will increase torque in a noticeable way at the expense of pumping losses (hurts MPG a bit) AND it won't take near as much timing before hitting KR. 

 

1 hour ago, Christian Olguin said:

possibly a retune would help clear this up

did BB tune before or after headers? 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, lucas287 said:

Definitely true to an extent. More duration, usually, is just going to decrease dynamic compression ratio which even further softens the low-mid range. This is where the relationship between LSA/ICL/Duration becomes important. Does anyone even know what the specs are for an L83? I've never seen published figures. Can't imagine it's much better than Gen III/IV 5.3's. 

 

I'm trying to see if this is something you can fix via tuning...mid range while wide open? Or as we still talking part throttle? more clarification: on tip-in transition from cruising? or it feels soft from a dig? if you want to make the tip in more snappy and build more torque in the low-mid load ranges you could dabble with the VVT settings. This will increase torque in a noticeable way at the expense of pumping losses (hurts MPG a bit) AND it won't take near as much timing before hitting KR. 

 

did BB tune before or after headers? 

Feels like off the hit and once it gets to the top end it feels good. I’d say from a dig or low rpm range is where I feel it’s a little sluggish.

 

I haven’t gotten a retune after the headers. Probably what is causing it to be like this. I know I should have done a retune but I’ve been to busy with stuff. Do you think a retune for headers with the muffler will clear things up? Mind you I do have the 2018 Silverado e assist with the 8 speed auto so I think they do it through efi live instead of hp tuners

Edited by Christian Olguin
Posted
4 minutes ago, Christian Olguin said:

Do you think a retune for headers with the muffler will clear things up? 

Maybe? 🤷‍♂️ it's hard to tell. It might make it better, but not entirely negate the problem. 

 

The low rpm-high load on the low octane table has barely any timing advance. If you're looking for a way to pick up throttle response and torque everywhere, it doesn't get any easier than e85 conversion. Do that first, then let BB retune to activate the flex fuel parts of the stock programming. 

 

The gains from ethanol are quite dramatic once tuned. Basically anywhere that knock was limiting before can be added back in - and then some. It's more nuanced than that, but long and the short of it is my L86 has very good throttle response and low speed torque on ethanol. Gas is good and all, but ethanol makes this truck feel a lot different and I'd bet it would help your combination too. 

Posted
Just now, lucas287 said:

Maybe? 🤷‍♂️ it's hard to tell. It might make it better, but not entirely negate the problem. 

 

The low rpm-high load on the low octane table has barely any timing advance. If you're looking for a way to pick up throttle response and torque everywhere, it doesn't get any easier than e85 conversion. Do that first, then let BB retune to activate the flex fuel parts of the stock programming. 

 

The gains from ethanol are quite dramatic once tuned. Basically anywhere that knock was limiting before can be added back in - and then some. It's more nuanced than that, but long and the short of it is my L86 has very good throttle response and low speed torque on ethanol. Gas is good and all, but ethanol makes this truck feel a lot different and I'd bet it would help your combination too. 

I’m tuned on e85 right now. Honestly the power loss isn’t anything crazy at all but my butt dyno notices a little bit of loss so I think lol I agree on the e85 part the gains are nice and I’m on the first revision so hopefully the second revision will open it up

Posted
Just now, Christian Olguin said:

I’m tuned on e85 right now. Honestly the power loss isn’t anything crazy at all but my butt dyno notices a little bit of loss so I think lol I agree on the e85 part the gains are nice and I’m on the first revision so hopefully the second revision will open it up

duh - now I remember reading that. something BB should be able to do is manipulate when all the timing gets added in. I've never had a single tank of e85 than was over than 80% alcohol. (maybe it's my sensor) Basically it blends the gas timing table with the flex fuel modifier based on alcohol composition. on the stock table it requires over 80% ethanol to hit that last modifier zone, I rescaled mine and it helps a lot. Look at the difference...

Alcohol 1.JPG

Alcohol 2.JPG

  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, lucas287 said:

duh - now I remember reading that. something BB should be able to do is manipulate when all the timing gets added in. I've never had a single tank of e85 than was over than 80% alcohol. (maybe it's my sensor) Basically it blends the gas timing table with the flex fuel modifier based on alcohol composition. on the stock table it requires over 80% ethanol to hit that last modifier zone, I rescaled mine and it helps a lot. Look at the difference...

Alcohol 1.JPG

Alcohol 2.JPG

I’ll definitely look into that. The highest I’ve seen is 81% at the station down the street from me but I’ve been curious about throwing c85 in the mix for the fun of it. It wouldn’t be a regular thing but just curiosity I guess. Honestly you’ve been a lot of help with all this. Now tomorrow I need to do some data logging and see what a revision will do on e85 and headers

Posted

Also, Have you thought about a lower temp. Tstat?, that helps if your just looking for performance.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

I wanted to add to this.  When I first started running E85 after adding my headers.  There was a flat spot in the crusing area when running E85.  The truck would down shift on hills that with 93 it would just hold that gear up the hill.

 

How I fixed it was to add 1 to 1.5 degrees of spark to those area's in the main spark table.  Then E85 table will add or subtrack from that number as they need to.  This little adjustment didn't give me any Knock on 93 but made the dead spot completely go away.  I think dailing in the rest of my tune really helped too, like lucas287 said!!!

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I am new to this… but I saw some of your replies to another person doing the same as me… trying to replace the temp control actuator in my 05 GMC SIERRA, And can NOT get to it… how do I get the center console panels off, do I have to take ALL of them off to get to it? 80481681120__F97CE005-C5E5-4FBF-9589-1388214E3586.MOV
    • I will be one of those "blinded". One, I like new shiny things. Two, I've never kept any of them beyond the 3/36. Three, I don't finance anything. Four, yep, it's a waste of money....so,what? I'm doing my part of keeping automotive industry going and keeping my neighbors, most of whom are in it, employed. 😉      By the way this is the "signature... ¬  
    • Although there is a "recommended" weight by those who sell trailers, my experience has been that they are way too aggressive in their information, for me at least. My '22 with 6.6 Gas, has a payload of about 3400 lbs and depending on your specs (I don't have 4WD so it has a bit higher Payload than others) yours will likely be different. Payload is one of the most important numbers for towing. Although you "could" tow the max trailer weight for your truck, I, personally, would not go close to that number. Having said that, a lot depends on how/where you will be towing. I live in the LMD of BC and often tow to Denver, Co, along interstates (flat and mountains) and I find I need to keep it in 5th (6spd) for the trip and travel at around 65mph. This is for a trailer dry weight of just under 3500lbs. If you are only doing local, short trips, it would not be that big an issue if you had a heavier unit. You will be surprised how much stuff you load the trailer with, so I would only recognize the trailers "full" GVWR weight rating, then decide on the appropriate trailer from that number. If you are worrying about how much stuff you should be putting in a trailer, you might have too large a rig from the get-go. Once again, depending on what terrain/distance in which you will be pulling. Marv
    • davester, Thanks for the response, how ever, I think I am now a bit more confused than I was before I posted - - After I posted, I actually found a YT video of a guy who replaced his Module (above tire) and he only disconnected the ground cable of the battery, but you describe rubbing the two cables together after disconnecting. I presume that is to do as you describe and eliminate any residual energy? - When I picked up the Module (between my posting and reading your response) from the dealer, I specifically asked about any re-programming and he stated it was not necessary as it was simply plug and play. Don't know how knowledgeable he is, though. - The video I watched also showed the Module plug to be difficult to "unlock" and remove, but there was no mention of silicone, although the video did show a bunch of dust/dirt in and around the plug (old truck) during removal. Are you talking about silicone that was applied by the factory, or silicone that you applied prior to plugging in? Thanks again, Marv
    • Looking for a clean, factory-style lighting upgrade for your 2022+ GMC Hummer EV? M&R Automotive's 40" Bumper Light Bar PRO features a vehicle-specific, bolt-on design with no drilling or cutting required. Choose a bright white or yellow main beam, both paired with an amber DRL backlight for a sleek OEM-inspired look. The kit includes a curved LED light bar, powder-coated brackets, and all necessary mounting hardware.    Learn more or order yours See how it installs and looks on the vehicle:    
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...