soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

I am looking into getting a custom grind camshaft...
it'll sound kinda screwy...but I have some confidence for what I am trying to do....
Its kind of an experiment...
218/232 .591/.571 112lsa

IVO -3*
IVC 41*
EVO 48*
EVC 4*
ECL 112*
overlap 1*

anybody got something close?? to grind it to this??? I'm trying not to spend 2k on this....

any sponsors interested in my litle experiment.....and wanna know why???
It'll be on my website soon...under car stuff...

SSactionLs1

err.......huh? lol

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

Heres the link to the experiment

http://www.audiohelix.com/experiment.htm

only other question is P-V clearance

foff667

iTrader: (2)

what was the average hp & tq gain at the top and bottome end...it looks like you only gained like 5 or so ft lbs on the avg down low and very little up high. For the $500 its gonna cost you to get a new cam groud dont you think there are other things you can do to maximize your combo?

lata
Bill

Phil99vette

iTrader: (11)

With the way that LS1 intakes flow, I think your going in the wrong direction. Good Luck.
Phillip

CHRISPY

Just call comp and get them to grind it for you on XE-R lobes. 400 bucks I think

Cheers,
Chris

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

I just realized that I had posted the wrong software dyno picture for my x1....
so it is corrected now.....
and you will see a good jump throughout the entire rpm range....
and $400 for a custom?? Right on...
Its worth atleast thet for my experiment....

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

My thoughts are a little outside the box....If a blower guy goes with a smaller cam to lessen the blowby effect.....and a street only guy goes with a smaller cam to maximze low torque....the track guy goes big to get the upper rpm horsepower.....and I want the best of both...
bracket racers who have a limited lift class...just increae the duration to get the power....so I went with what I found would get me the most power down low....and what would get me the most up high...(or atleast what I have seen in a streetable car)and did my own calculations....and voila' ....custom cam....
It should make a nicee experiment.

the only thing I am not sure of is how the BIG split will affect other things...idle....P-V clearance...
I just wanna know if my idea will be engine safe...so it doesnt F*ck anything up....

JimMueller

iTrader: (9)

Which build of DesktopDyno2003 are you using? Doesn't look like it's the version with the LS1/LS6 manifold selections. What's up with the odd window colors & font sizes?

Looks like you have stock heads. I think it'd fit w/o PVC issues. Heck, the G5X2 with a 240 duration fits with stock heads on a 112LSA. What's the ICL?

I thought about going with a wide split also, but I don't feel that wide split would make it very driveable. The modeling I've done doesn't result in accurate torque numbers, but the peaks are exactly where they should be.

Very interested in your results, as well as the components in your .dyn.

Trojan T/A

iTrader: (1)

SoundEngineer - Can you try test on your program a cam for me? I was thinking around a 228/234 .550/.540 on a 116 with 6* advance to lower the peak? also maybe a variant with higher lift around .595/.595? I'm curious to see how it would do compared to those cams. Thanks

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

desktop dyno 2003
version 4.05

heres the .dyn files for my current x1 and the experimental one

http://www.audiohelix.com/dyno/

I just used a 300 cfm single plane cause I didnt have an ls1/ls6 option
I need to go get one for that program....

I might have done something wrong in my figuring???but I dont know......I'm just a guy...doing research...and trying to undersatnd these dam things...and Thinking about learning from hands on trial and probably error....

also I am still looking for somebody who would like to help me in this cam project...maybe turn it into somebody's custom cam....if it work out....
I would like to see somebody elses results in another couple of software dyno's.... and I definately would like some real expert opinions and thoughts....specificy on my Idea....good or bad...I will listen...as long as somebody doesnt just try to harp on me for giving it a semi blind shot with the little knowledge I have...

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

just curious.....why 116??
with 6 ground in???
or installed at TDC+6

aqe you shooting for valve events....
my #'s were shot for valve events....and just happened to come out at 218/232....

I'll run it...butu I need to know installed at or ground in...

and mine also dont take into account odd lobe shapes....mine are a symetrical lobe shape...with a medium/agressive ramp rate....

If I figure 116 lsa...and 6* ground in...then I get a 110 centerline of intake lobe....and about -1* overlap...which will help flatten out the torque a little(I think)...but will also make less torque than if you went with a 115lsa with 5* grond in...still 110 ICL ...or 114lsa +4 ground also makes it 110 ICL...

Bowtieman4life

iTrader: (1)

Are you running a lot of N20? Too much ex duration. Did you mean 228/232. I don't think they make a lobe that is 218 .591 lift. I think you were going with a 228 Comp XE-R lobe. If that's the case it looks good. Just my opinion! Good luck Oh! XE-R lobes start at 220 dur .581 lift.

soundengineer

iTrader: (16)

I am looking for exactly what I said....again...thinking outside the box...and I think I'm leaning towards Lunati.....might be able to grind it....If not...I get as much lift as I can on a 218....

SStrokerAce

iTrader: (2)

Scott,

The problem is there is not the 218* lobe you are looking for, there are some but more rocker arm is needed and they lack .200 duration. So you are trading off a certain duration for a better lobe which will make more power. The IVC point is the important one so work with that instead to get close.

I've got some ideas on this deal. Comp has close to what you are looking for, Lunati isn't close.

Bret