Anything better than LPE's GT2-3 for baby cam w/ NO lope?
02-27-2006, 12:14 AM
#1
Anything better than LPE's GT2-3 for baby cam w/ NO lope? The two biggest concerns are keeping the completely stock-like idle and running well on motor only.....I know the GT2-3 has the idle, but is there another off the shelf or custom spec'd cam that would put out better numbers NA? I'm not looking for a huge gain in power, I'll take whatever it gives as long as it's quiet thru LTs w/o cats and an SLP dual/dual.
02-27-2006, 12:29 AM
#2
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Midland, Tx
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My LS6 cam works great, and with getting one used I got the cam, springs, gaskets and pushrods for LESS than the cost of an aftermarket "off the shelf grind" cam alone.
02-27-2006, 12:49 AM
#4
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
Thunder CheaTR cam 215/230
Stealth II 224/220
Stealth II 224/220
02-27-2006, 01:11 AM
#6
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by Pimpium57
You mentioned something in an earlier thread about idle tuning being able to silence the cam....which of the two would be able to run like stock at a lower idle?
Sound is also relative to exhaust used. Headers, catted, non catted (ORY), catbacks all sound different and contribute to lope sound.
A tuning trick is to raise idle timing and speed
02-27-2006, 01:17 AM
#7
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
Both...
Sound is also relative to exhaust used. Headers, catted, non catted (ORY), catbacks all sound different and contribute to lope sound.
A tuning trick is to raise idle timing and speed
Sound is also relative to exhaust used. Headers, catted, non catted (ORY), catbacks all sound different and contribute to lope sound.
A tuning trick is to raise idle timing and speed
Last edited by Pimpium57; 02-27-2006 at 01:33 AM. Reason: Spelling...
Trending Topics
02-27-2006, 09:26 AM
#8
TECH Senior Member
I've used the Stealth II, I hashed it on different setups. I found that it is capable of 11.2 sec 1/4. It likes high compression, 11.0:1 >11.3:1, free flow exhaust, tight quench and to rev to 6600 shifts.
Patrck G will speak for the CheaTR, he has done xtensive testing on it.
Patrck G will speak for the CheaTR, he has done xtensive testing on it.
02-27-2006, 09:42 AM
#9
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lake Anna, VA/ Fairmont, WV
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard a TR224 114 w a 915rpm idle and there was virtually no lope whatsoever. Hell my 112 below with a 875rpm idle does not really lope a whole lot.
02-27-2006, 10:15 AM
#10
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
I've used the Stealth II, I hashed it on different setups. I found that it is capable of 11.2 sec 1/4. It likes high compression, 11.0:1 >11.3:1, free flow exhaust, tight quench and to rev to 6600 shifts.
Patrck G will speak for the CheaTR, he has done xtensive testing on it.
Patrck G will speak for the CheaTR, he has done xtensive testing on it.
If I were to stay that the car will see larger amount of spray down the road, I'm assuming the Stealths would be better suited than the CheaTR, correct?
02-27-2006, 10:23 AM
#11
TECH Senior Member
It likes a thinner gasket to improve combustion efficiency (quench is piston to head deck distance)
I've sprayed it to 180 rwhp shots with no issues, but for "larger" 200 + shots the CheaTR would be more beneficial because of its forward split (exhaust biased)
I've sprayed it to 180 rwhp shots with no issues, but for "larger" 200 + shots the CheaTR would be more beneficial because of its forward split (exhaust biased)
02-27-2006, 10:30 AM
#12
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
It likes a thinner gasket to improve combustion efficiency (quench is piston to head deck distance)
I've sprayed it to 180 rwhp shots with no issues, but for "larger" 200 + shots the CheaTR would be more beneficial because of its forward split (exhaust biased)
I've sprayed it to 180 rwhp shots with no issues, but for "larger" 200 + shots the CheaTR would be more beneficial because of its forward split (exhaust biased)
I'm still torn between the two and am trying to find something to sway my decison.....
02-27-2006, 10:36 AM
#13
TECH Senior Member
To get to 11:1 while satisfying quench as well would take a .045 Cometic and a 63 cc chamber.
Stealth will make more trq down low, CheaTR will rev higher (200 rpm), both are in the same range of HP making.
Stealth will make more trq down low, CheaTR will rev higher (200 rpm), both are in the same range of HP making.
02-27-2006, 10:46 AM
#14
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
To get to 11:1 while satisfying quench as well would take a .045 Cometic and a 63 cc chamber.
Stealth will make more trq down low, CheaTR will rev higher (200 rpm), both are in the same range of HP making.
Stealth will make more trq down low, CheaTR will rev higher (200 rpm), both are in the same range of HP making.
02-27-2006, 11:48 AM
#15
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by Pimpium57
Because of the torque, do you think the SII would give greater real world results if used in a street-raced, occasional track car A4? My thinking is the the greater low-mid range would work better with the auto.
02-27-2006, 11:55 AM
#16
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
That question is relative to final combo power range. I ran mine on 3.73 rear and anything from a dig on the street was futile with higher stall.
I do have a set of PRC Stg 2.5 "R" 5.3L's sitting here, new in box, but was thinking about selling them and keeping ported/milled 853's.
02-27-2006, 12:11 PM
#17
TECH Senior Member
LOL that is the exact set of heads I used.
I cannot comment on CheaTR, but just the fact that the Stealth is a 224 intake duration (higher than CheaTR), implies that it can make more power since it can injest bigger amount of fuel.
Just keep in mind, COMBO, if you choose Stealth II, minimum 11.0 :1 SCR (11.2 even better), and a tight quench is the best for it. Actually if I had to do it again, I would use a minimum 4000 stall for best results (I used VIG 3200). Basically it likes high cylinder pressures.
I cannot comment on CheaTR, but just the fact that the Stealth is a 224 intake duration (higher than CheaTR), implies that it can make more power since it can injest bigger amount of fuel.
Just keep in mind, COMBO, if you choose Stealth II, minimum 11.0 :1 SCR (11.2 even better), and a tight quench is the best for it. Actually if I had to do it again, I would use a minimum 4000 stall for best results (I used VIG 3200). Basically it likes high cylinder pressures.
02-27-2006, 12:18 PM
#18
Will it run safely on pump gas (93 oct. here)? How about P/V clearance? Mine are already milled for 11:1 SCR and I have a new set of GM head gaskets to use......J/W if it's worth having them recut for 11:2.
Would there be a night and day difference, power-wise, between the SII and the GT2-3?
Would there be a night and day difference, power-wise, between the SII and the GT2-3?
02-27-2006, 11:10 PM
#19
TECH Senior Member
Yes 93 will be good. No PV clearance installed dot to dot at 116+0
Exactly what CC are your heads now? How much was milled?
There is a good difference in the 2 cams, Stealth being XE-R lobed with .581 lifts is a pure sheep in wolf disguise.
Think of the Stealth II being an "agressive Stealth" Vs the GT2-3
Exactly what CC are your heads now? How much was milled?
There is a good difference in the 2 cams, Stealth being XE-R lobed with .581 lifts is a pure sheep in wolf disguise.
Think of the Stealth II being an "agressive Stealth" Vs the GT2-3
02-28-2006, 12:04 AM
#20
Originally Posted by PREDATOR-Z
Yes 93 will be good. No PV clearance installed dot to dot at 116+0
Exactly what CC are your heads now? How much was milled?
Exactly what CC are your heads now? How much was milled?
Is it worth having them milled even further from 11.0 to 11.2?
Any idea what lobes the GT2-3 uses?