kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

heres my MS3 dyno. The car is my DD. I actually just drove it down to Myrtle beach and back a few weeks ago for a vacation...850 mile trip one way. Not a single problem....

all you people complaining about the ms3 being a bad street car cam because its "too big" dont have any experience with them and are just hating for no reason...

stock 241 heads, stock 3.42 10 bolt, stock ls6 intake manifold. ms3 on 112 lsa, hooker long tubes, ORY, texas speed rumbler and ported TB...ram HD clutch




411.5 rwhp, 381rwtq.

315rwtq by 2800rpms...

360rwhp by 4900rpms.....

and heres my dyno sheet from when I was just ported TB, and full exhaust. 351rwhp, 355rwtq.....



so wait, am I seeing this correctly??? Look and learn MS3 haters. Look at my dyno sheets. Stock cam vs MS3. My hp/tq cross a little over 5200rpms and look at the MS3....HP/tq cross at 5300rpms. The difference from the stock cam crossing at 5200rpms is 350rwtq/rwhp and the MS3 at 5300rpms is 370rwtq/rwhp....now figure that out.

3500rpms....340rwtq for bolt on car, 360rwtq for MS3 car. 240rwtq for bolt on car, 240rwtq for MS3.

also, at 2800rpms, BOTH cams have the same amount of HP and TQ. 315rwtq and about 170rwhp. Now what? The MS3 is too big and has no down low power??? well from what Im seeing with both cam's in my car....the down low power is the same with any bolt on stock cam car and the MS3 just pulls like a rapped ape up top......

The ms3 gains tq everywhere over a stock cam/ full bolt on car and HP is nearly the same until 4800rpms+. So, my question is this...

if you can DD a full bolt on car, why cant you DD a MS3 car when the power is nearly the same down low and on crack up top??

Slowhawk

iTrader: (12)

Wow,you have alot of hate...LOL

NHRAFORMULA00

iTrader: (2)

nice results.

Johnnystock

iTrader: (6)

Sounds like it, but theres a lot of haters about big cam and MS3 outhere, I just think it proves that with a good tune, you can get away with a big DD cam..

How is it under 2K rpm for drivability? (it may sound weird, but I cruise a lot around town under 2k..)

Nice numbers by the way for cam only/boltons!

kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

I can cruise at 1500rpms with NO surge....around 1700rpms, I will get a little surging here and there but nothing not tolerable....and at 2k its smooth as silk.


also, I have stock 3.42's. It will only get better with 3.73's or 4.10's.

kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

No hate...just correcting people in this thread...

https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamomet...od-street.html

dragonrage

FYI, HP and torque ALWAYS cross at 5252 rpm.

HP = Torque * RPM/5252

That is certainly not a factor in whether a cam is good for a DD. Factors for that are more like low RPM performance and such I think. I have no idea about that cam, not saying anything either way.

Slowhawk

iTrader: (12)

This is what some people hate.That little surge.Some people even hate a surge at 1200rpm in first gear cruising a parking lot.

Comes down to personal preference.Some people never notice the surge,we've done high 240 Cams in Cam only 346's that surge like a ***** under 2k but the owners DD them and love it.Some people run a mild 224 Cam and complain if it surges once doing 1000 rpm in first gear.

See the point?

In my eye's your Cam can easilly be a daily driver Cam for about 80% of the people camming there cars.For my personal Car I run a 228 Cam that drives perfect from 1200 rpm up because I can't stand a surge at 1600-2000.drives me nut's DD it.

kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

I see exactly what your saying and I understand it to 100%. The surging does drive me nuts, but its not bad enough to the point where I want to change cam's or not even drive it. It seem's to surge a little more on real hot days, then cold.

HWI

iTrader: (2)

That's cool that you like it, but you know you can get that much hp out of a mild cam too? I don't see the point in using such a big cam when you are still using stock heads and intake manifold. To each their own though.

bballr4567

iTrader: (5)

Exactly. Its not the cam but its the whole package. If you are mostly stock than why not go with a smaller cam that will make VERY close to that HP but have way better drivability??

Anyways, still great numbers.

Ironxcross

iTrader: (8)

it may seem rediculous to ask but.. hows your mileage?

WeathermanShawn

iTrader: (1)

Hey KidCamaro.

Slowhawk said it best. Personal preference is a really subjective topic.

On the technical side, it is not that unusual to have a cam with such a high IVC to still beat out the stock cam in the lower rpm's. And in your case 380 ft/lbs TQ is pretty decent.

See it is all in what you want. Personally I like the 'table-top' dyno curve of your bolt-on example. What is really fun is when you can lift the entire curve up in the same proportions. It really is an amazing feeling.

If you take a look at Patrick G's thread from a few years ago on building substantial TQ throughout the entire curve, it might give you some differing views on making the same power with less duration.

While I think your dyno curve is pretty stout for your modifications, I would always keep an open mind for the future. I am curious whether you have ran differing cams, or is this your first one? In any case sounds like you are pleased and that is the bottom line.

Enjoy your car.

..WeathermanShawn..

kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

because I PLAN on adding heads/intake manifold this winter.

kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

This is the first cam that has been in my car....and Im very happy with it. Not sure I would change it since like I said above, im going to be adding heads and a Fast 90/90.

Gatsby

iTrader: (7)

I understand where people are coming from with saying that you could max out a smaller cam to make the same power; however, I'm with the OP on this topic. By that I mean, not all of us can afford to purchase all of our parts at the same time and sometimes the car is not in equilibrium. For instance, lets say I get a 4000stall TC which is too big for my setup, but will be perfect when I do H/C, is that stupid?

This cam may not be the best for his combo, but it may be (relatively speaking) perfect for him when he finishes the mods he plans to do (Intake, heads, etc).

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

ive always thought the MS3 was a pretty good DD big cam. probably the biggest id go. and it makes perfect sense for your setup, since you said you are going H/I later on.

kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

exactly what im doing...

this winter im going to try to get some gears in it (prolly 3.73's) and some nice trick flow heads and the fast 90/90.....then it should run great.

blu1

Are you really getting all strung out on your dyno numbers considering they are two different types of dynos in question? Kind of hard to accurately compare the two graphs when its not even the same brand of dyno.

What was the correction factor number on the dyno dynamics? 1.xxx? I'd like to see that as well.

I went from the MS3 to a 230/236 cam and didn't lose any up top and gained a ton down low. The car also ran quicker and faster at the track. Its all about combination

Also dynos always cross at 5252 when scaled the same on hp and tq, research a little more before posting like you know what you are talking about. As for bragging about gaining nothing down low from a cam swap, didn't you just make your intelligence shine. Congrats on liking your car however.

kidcamaro98

iTrader: (8)

I created this thread, in response to this one....

https://ls1tech.com/forums/dynamomet...od-street.html

Basically I made it to show that the ms3 can be a decent DD cam and to help people purchase a ms3 cam and not be scared of the DD factor.

The SAE on both of those dynos was 5. (the bolt on one was a Dyna pack, and the cammed one is a Dyno Dynamics) The SAE is on the bolt on dyno pack sheet, but the SAE doesnt print out on the Dyno Dynamics. I asked him what the correction factor was, and he said 3. So, your just going to hafto take my word on that I guess.

Im not bragging about **** as far as not gaining anything down low. Your obviously taking this whole thread the wrong way. I was showing that a BIG cam, compared to the stock cam didnt suffer any down low when I have found alot of people say you loose power down low with a big cam, which is what makes it a bad DD cam.....just giving examples bud, not bragging about **** but thanks !