niphilli

Hey guys, Cal posted this link yesterday in a thread:

http://www.compcams.com/information/...003/Page-3.pdf

Some of these look very interesting to me.

I especially like the looks of the 220/224 .530/.534 on 112, would love to see this cam on stock heads. Should work well with the Zo6 valvesprings and be a good Street/ Strip cam for mostly street drivers. If you want more later you could upgrade the rockers and have cam specs similar to the next cam (down).

I also like the looks of the 222/224 .566/568 on 112. Similar to the TR 224 and should be a great street/strip cam with a little more strip emphasis.

Another cool sleeper that would be great for those considering the Z-06 cam is the 212/218 .558/.563 on 115. This cam should kick *** for the street on stock LS-6 headed cars. I think Abdulla ran an early version of this cam with less lift and 114 LSA, worked well for him <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" /> .

What do you guys think? Does anyone here do any testing for Comps LS-1 program?? Are there any preliminary results. I am especially interested in stock head numbers from the first cam!

-Nick

Cal

iTrader: (1)

Yeah I think I might get the 220/224 .530/.534 on 112. Like you were saying, you could always install high ratio rockers later on to get more lift, but you have that flexibilty if you want to be easy on valve springs. The SAM school built a '99 SS that performs very well on a 224/224 .533/.533 113 custom Comp cam. I really think the power is more in the duration than it is in the lift, especially with stock heads.

niphilli

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Cal:
<strong> Yeah I think I might get the 220/224 .530/.534 on 112. Like you were saying, you could always install high ratio rockers later on to get more lift, but you have that flexibilty if you want to be easy on valve springs. The SAM school built a '99 SS that performs very well on a 224/224 .533/.533 113 custom Comp cam. I really think the power is more in the duration than it is in the lift, especially with stock heads. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Exactly what I was thinking. let me know your results if you decide to go with this cam. Seems to me like this cam should make similar power to the B1/T1/TR220/TR224 cams with less valvetrain stress.

Ackattack

These cams are what I've been waiting for. I asked questions before about higher duration lower lift cams. I was thinking of the ASA cam, but now I think the 224/228 .534/.537 112 is looking a lot better. I think this cam would be awesome on stock heads and you wouldn't have to worry about the valve springs like you would on the higher lift cams.

Too bad a cam is still a ways off for me. Have to get some other stuff first.

Cal

iTrader: (1)

Back in the early '80s I ran a Crane .530/.530 270/270 in a 389 cube Pontiac. That thing was an animal! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> Idle speed was 1200-1300 rpm.

humanoidZ06

I would imagine that a low lift/long duration cam would work very well with either stock heads, or heads ported for street duty (smaller runners and maximized low lift #'s). This is a trick that is frequently used in "stocker" classes that mandate stock heads and stock camshaft lift.

I used a .525"/.525" 260/260 in a Pontiac 400 many years ago.....and it was also an animal <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />

<small>[ April 03, 2003, 12:03 PM: Message edited by: humanoidZ06 ]</small>