Generation III Internal Engine 1997-2006 LS1 | LS6
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

TSP 228R right for me?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-05-2006, 01:59 PM
  #1  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
 
jlashley2001ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: graham nc
Posts: 1,377
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default TSP 228R right for me?

just wondering if you guys think this cam would be a good one for my setup? What LSA would i benefit the most? thanks guys
Old 02-05-2006, 03:01 PM
  #2  
TECH Enthusiast
 
T-maxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: CT
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

What are the specs?
Old 02-05-2006, 03:08 PM
  #3  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
 
jlashley2001ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: graham nc
Posts: 1,377
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

228/228, .588"/.588"
Old 02-05-2006, 03:17 PM
  #4  
TECH Enthusiast
 
T-maxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: CT
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm an M6 guy but I'll take a stab at this. 114 lsa and go a bit bigger on the cam. The 323's and stall will be a big factor in your cam choice. I'm sure an A4 guy will chime and help you out. ttt
Old 02-05-2006, 03:24 PM
  #5  
ЯєŧąяĐ Єl¡m¡иąŧøя ™
iTrader: (18)
 
orangeapeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Justin, TX
Posts: 16,083
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts

Default

It is a good thing that you already have the converter portion out of the way. Are you planning on heads in the future as well? You could probably get away with a tighter LSA like a 112 but I think that you would like having a more broad powerband throughout with the 114. Cam looks like it will be a good midrange performer with still some good low end power. Which is also somewhat dependant on your LSA choice as well.
Old 02-05-2006, 03:26 PM
  #6  
ЯєŧąяĐ Єl¡m¡иąŧøя ™
iTrader: (18)
 
orangeapeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Justin, TX
Posts: 16,083
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts

Default

also an M6 guy.
Old 02-05-2006, 03:55 PM
  #7  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
 
jlashley2001ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: graham nc
Posts: 1,377
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

naw im probably going to stick with the stock heads. maybe port them in the future. its a daily driver btw guys
Old 02-05-2006, 04:26 PM
  #8  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
luv2spd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Newton, KS
Posts: 1,152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I'd say that the 228 would be right for ya seeing that its a dd. Any bigger and you'll notice some low end loss around town.
Old 02-05-2006, 04:30 PM
  #9  
Launching!
 
rosm187's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: brandon
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

anyone know how it might compare to the tsp torquer v2? its a 232/234 .595/.598

not to rob thread but its just a step up, and thaught it might be interesting
Old 02-05-2006, 09:44 PM
  #10  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
 
jlashley2001ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: graham nc
Posts: 1,377
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

well im just going to go with the comp 918 springs so i think the torquer 2 would be pushin those springs too much.
Old 02-06-2006, 12:06 AM
  #11  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
TXZ28LS1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Classified
Posts: 6,164
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

i talked to jason from tsp about that cam. he was telling me there was a car it was an A4 with regular bolt ons. im sure it had a stall. unsure of the size. that cam with the prc 5.3 heads put down 408rwhp...thats not bad for an auto with a small cam too..
Old 02-06-2006, 01:03 AM
  #12  
ЯєŧąяĐ Єl¡m¡иąŧøя ™
iTrader: (18)
 
orangeapeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Justin, TX
Posts: 16,083
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by jlashley2001ss
well im just going to go with the comp 918 springs so i think the torquer 2 would be pushin those springs too much.
I run 918's with my cam. they are actually rated to .610 You would be fine.
Old 02-06-2006, 08:15 AM
  #13  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
 
slow trap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: tennessee
Posts: 2,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

that is the cam i'm running with a m6.it drives well now that it is tuned alittle better than when i was cam only but tuned properly it will be a great dd cam.mine is on a 112 though but it topped out around 6100-6200 rpms.
Old 02-06-2006, 08:29 AM
  #14  
Launching!
iTrader: (18)
 
LPTXZ28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Pasadena, Texas
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I have this cam on 112 with M6. Mine pulls strong to shift point @ 6600 rpm. See dyno #'s. This is with stock pulley and intake/tb. It has ran 11.8's @120 full weight car eith 4:11's. I would say get it and don't look back. Dyno #'s don't win races.
Old 02-06-2006, 08:55 AM
  #15  
TECH Senior Member
 
PREDATOR-Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

Get the 112 and for 150 extra you can get a mail tune from TSP.
It is a no split cam, on XE-R lobes, easy for tuning and idle (even) 112.
I would run 7.425 pushrods with that cam, 918's will be fine.
Old 02-06-2006, 05:30 PM
  #16  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
 
jlashley2001ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: graham nc
Posts: 1,377
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
Get the 112 and for 150 extra you can get a mail tune from TSP.
It is a no split cam, on XE-R lobes, easy for tuning and idle (even) 112.
I would run 7.425 pushrods with that cam, 918's will be fine.

Why 7.425 pushrods ??
Old 02-06-2006, 06:33 PM
  #17  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
 
slow trap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: tennessee
Posts: 2,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by jlashley2001ss
Why 7.425 pushrods ??
i'm wondering that also. my 5.3s have had a .030 haircut so i used 7.350 pushrods and am now wondering if i might should have used the 7.400 i allready had.i might should have checked preload
Old 02-06-2006, 08:52 PM
  #18  
TECH Enthusiast
 
1ORANGEWS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chattanooga,TN
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

I have the same cam and I used the stock pushrods. I was thinking of using 7.35s as well.
Old 02-07-2006, 06:06 AM
  #19  
TECH Senior Member
 
PREDATOR-Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 16 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by jlashley2001ss
Why 7.425 pushrods ??
Because the XE-R lobes with .588 lifts will have a smaller base circle.
My .581 XE-R was .09x smaller which translates in .045 longer p-rods needed (7.445).
The closest without going over is the 7.425

7.40 will be noisy and too light on the preload.

Basicaly when doing a cam swap (stock gasket and stock unmilled heads), you should increase the p-rod length by the amount of the difference in radius of the new cam base circle:
Stock base circle 1.55
Stock radius .775
so extra p-rod length = .775 - (new cam base circle/2)

I hope this makes sense.
Old 02-07-2006, 06:47 AM
  #20  
ЯєŧąяĐ Єl¡m¡иąŧøя ™
iTrader: (18)
 
orangeapeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Justin, TX
Posts: 16,083
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
Because the XE-R lobes with .588 lifts will have a smaller base circle.
My .581 XE-R was .09x smaller which translates in .045 longer p-rods needed (7.445).
The closest without going over is the 7.425

7.40 will be noisy and too light on the preload.

Basicaly when doing a cam swap (stock gasket and stock unmilled heads), you should increase the p-rod length by the amount of the difference in radius of the new cam base circle:
Stock base circle 1.55
Stock radius .775
so extra p-rod length = .775 - (new cam base circle/2)

I hope this makes sense.
LSX Mathematician!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:01 AM.