Favorite driver's magazines

"GM High Tech", March 1, 2013

OFF THE WIRE

MAIL

SWAPPER

I’d like to see a project ‘97 Camaro LT1 engine swap to LS1 or LSX. I’m thinking of doing this conversion on one or both of my Camaros (‘95 auto, ‘97 stick). Thanks for reading my request!

GENE MARSHALL

PEARL CITY, HAWAII

We just went through a similar swap last month with a V-6, but we’ll see if we can find an LT1 to swap out next.

SPACE CADET

Scott,

That was a nice article by Rick Jensen on the GT500 Killers. I used to have a ‘96 Firebird with the LT1 engine in it and wondered what it would have taken to get that engine up to making some real power, like 700 or 800 hp.

The only puzzle in the article was when I go to the part where Rick was talking about the LC2 Turbo Buick and he said “... remember that GT500’s 5.8 liter, supercharged V-8 is light years ahead in engine design and heat dissipation technology.” So of course I have to look up the distance of a light year and get 5.88 trillion miles, but since Rick says light years, plural, then I figure to at least double that to 11.76 trillion miles. So Rick is saying that the GT500’s 5.8 liter, supercharged V-8 is 11.76 trillion miles ahead in engine design and heat dissipation technology. But since the other engines Rick talks about are older engines it looks like they would have more mileage on them then the GT500, so the question is how did the GT500 engine get 11.76 trillion miles ahead of the other engines. Looks like for mileage like that you would need a lot of speed and a very strong, tireless driver!! Was that mileage done on a track and if so which track?

BIL GREENE

METH OR ETH?

Hey Scott,

Long time reader and subscriber. I just started up my twin turbo LQ4/L92 ‘79 Trans Am for the first time and it runs well, I’m just waiting to get it dyno tuned. My next purchase will be a boost controller, which can also control meth among other features. My question is whether meth injection or E85 will make more power, be cost efficient, and ease of use. I know both will allow me a higher octane value, but E85 has less energy output, and meth raises octane to 116 and can be controlled with a Hobbs switch or a controller, so it isn’t running all the time. I have to buy new injectors for my car (95 lb/hr), but E85 would require larger injectors and possibly a larger pump, but the meth kit has its own price. E85 can run just fine on one tune, but meth you can play around with after the car has been tuned. You can see where this is hard to pick a winner or just a better option. I live in Minnesota, so E85 is easy to get ahold of, but where I work I can get methanol for free. Please do an article or reply with a break down. But keep up the good work! I love the girls on the back page!

JOHN KOESTLER

If you were to pour straight methanol in your tank, you would be running the equivalent of 110+ octane, but injected into the air stream (single or dual nozzle) as supplemental fuel to 93-octane pump gas it would be significantly lower. Cost would be highly dependent on your current setup, power, etc. However, E85 should (in theory) offer more power potential and be easier to use if the fuel system is done properly using a Flex Fuel sensor. But you would want to be sure to drain the tank before leaving the car sit for any extended period of time.

PLEASE SEND ALL LETTERS TO: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , OR MAIL TO: GM HIGH-TECH PERFORMANCE, 9036 BRITTANY WAY, TAMPA, FL 33619. ALL LETTERS ARE PRESUMED FOR PUBLICATION AND GMHTP RESERVES THE RIGHT TO EDIT ALL LETTERS.

Welcome to BrowseMags.com

Welcome to browsemags.com, a place where you can find a great selection of most popular driver’s magazines.

The website is dedicated to those who love driving fast cars and bikes.

All the content is submitted by our readers. Feel free to send us your favorite magazines.